ShareThis Page

Strike in Chicago: Ignorance & arrogance

| Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, 8:56 p.m.

Just when you thought organized labor couldn't get any more ignorant or arrogant, Chicago's 29,000 unionized teachers went on strike Monday.

The first strike in the nation's third-largest school district in 25 years kept nearly 400,000 students home — or roaming the streets. Rallying teachers blocked some of those Windy City streets.

Chicago teachers, already with the highest average salary of any city at $76,000 (not including benefits), walked off the job after rejecting a 16 percent pay raise over four years that would cost taxpayers an estimated $400 million.

And that was offered by a district facing a $1 billion deficit by year's end.

But the major sticking point is said to be changes to the teacher-evaluation system. The union says it places too much emphasis on student performance. In a district in which just more than half of students who make it to their freshman year of high school actually graduate. In a district in which a mere 15 percent of fourth-graders are proficient in reading.

Jake Haulk, president of the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy, says the Chicago strike should be a wake-up call for fleeced taxpayers nationwide. “Demands of public-sector unions are the primary force in the rapidly growing number of state and local governments facing financial chaos,” he says.

And it won't stop until taxpayers “grow a backbone strong enough to vote out the legislators who insist on protecting public-sector unions.”

November presents the perfect opportunity to heed the clarion call.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.