By: Mark Glennon*
If approved by Illinois voters in November, Amendment 1 will give government teachers’ unions an unfettered constitutional right to demand not just anything in their interests, but in what they see as the interests of every Illinoisan. The amendment is not limited to employee matters at the workplace.
Don’t take my word for that. Look at the first sentence of the argument in favor of it as written in the official summary as published by the Illinois Secretary of State: “This amendment will protect workers’ and others’ safety.” [Emphasis added.]
That particular sentence is just about safety, but it shows the broad interpretation of the amendment beyond the workplace that government unions will assert. The language of the amendment itself supports that broad interpretation, and will extend to anybody’s “economic welfare,” which is pretty much everything. **
What will government unions, especially radical teachers’ unions, demand with that new constitutional right?
The Chicago Teachers Union has never really been quite open about its purpose in recent years. It sees itself as the vanguard of a national movement, led by unions like itself, that is textbook Marxism.
That purpose is well documented. It goes beyond the radical curriculum they teach in schools and encompasses an entire rearrangement of how America works.
Among the first things we wrote about on this site, ten years ago, was the role of the CTU and other teachers’ unions at a Marxism conference held that year:
The event was teeming with teachers who spoke about the new found bond” between Socialism and teachers’ unions according to reports, and Chicago teachers were on the stage. Chicago Teachers Union [then] VP Jesse Sharkey spoke at one breakout session. Becca Barnes, a Chicago Teachers Union teacher and organizer with Chicago Socialists, proclaimed at the beginning of the conference that “the struggle here in the United States has entered a new phase. Nowhere have we pointed the way forward more clearly than here in Chicago with the teachers union strike….”
Since then, militant radicalism has become still more firmly embedded in the CTU. That history is well documented – quite proudly by radicals themselves. The International Socialist Review, for example, lays out a good history of the CTU, saying the CTU “transcended a simple labor dispute and was transformed into a social movement, with the teachers fusing their struggle with that of the community they serve…joining in the Occupy Chicago movement that pointed out the root of societal problems—social and economic inequality.” The CTU has long proudly embraced what it calls its “militancy,” which goes far beyond socialism — like most of the modern left.
A Chicago Magazine column this year also described the “radical transformation” of the CTU beyond schools, citing a recent book on the subject:
“From milquetoast to militant” is how Jane F. McAlevey described the union’s evolution in her 2016 book, No Shortcuts: Organizing for Power in the New Gilded Age. “If the labor movement’s instinct has been to reduce demands in order to sound reasonable, the new CTU took the opposite approach,” McAlevey wrote. “They led every meeting with school-based discussions of billionaires, banks and racism.”
It cites current CTU president Stacy Davis Gates saying, “There was a movement afoot to say our union has to be more than a place that bargains a contract for a finite amount of time…. Our union couldn’t be silent on what was happening to the children in the city, the families in the city.”
And there was the solidarity mission of a delegation of CTU members to Nicolás Maduro’s communist Venezuela two years ago.
Today, the majority faction in the CTU is CORE, the Caucus of Rank and File Educators. It’s “engaged in direct action such as protests and shouting down speakers at hearings, and developed a critique of education reform that connected school closings to other issues in Chicago, like the underdevelopment of Black and brown neighborhoods, gentrification, and financialization, as described here.
The CTU is not alone. It’s the Chicago affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, which is equally radical and militant. It recently pledged $1 million to support the election to Chicago Mayor of Brandon Johnson, a CTU organizer who is already a member of the Cook County Board of Commissioners.
Though the CTU today is technically limited to bargaining for workplace demands, it has already advocated for things like universal basic income, rent control and housing assistance.
If amendment 1 passes, however, all those matters and more will be constitutionally guaranteed as legitimate demands in contract negotiations. Rest assured that the CTU and other teachers unions will be making those demands.
Among those demands will be an end to parental control over schools. Parents across the nation have risen up against political indoctrination and sexually explicit “gender affirmation “in schools. Teachers unions aren’t happy with that and want control over curriculum to the exclusion of parents. Amendment 1 will give them a constitutional right to restrict or eliminate parental control.
Another absurdity of Amendment 1 is that teachers anywhere in Illinois who share the CTU’s vision could choose to have the CTU represent them in the bargaining process. That’s because workers anywhere, under the amendment, would have the right to bargain through representatives of their own choosing. In other words, the more radical teachers could opt out of having a different union represent them and choose the CTU or any other representative.
Militant radicals are chomping at the bit for the constitutional right Amendment 1 will give them: the right to include their vision of a national, Marxist workers’ revolution in their contract demands.
*Mark Glennon is founder of Wirepoints.
** The pertinent part of the amendment itself reads as follows: “Employees shall have the fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of negotiating wages, hours, and working conditions, and to protect their economic welfare and safety at work.” The “at work” qualification seems best read to apply only to safety matters. At best, the wording is unclear, which is no doubt deliberate, being designed to allow for a broad interpretation that will allow courts to broadly interpret “economic welfare” beyond the workplace.
This column was updated to include the point that teachers anywhere could choose to have the CTU represent them
Wirepoints is collecting all arguments and significant opinion pieces on Amendment 1, pro and con, linked here. Among our own earlier articles on the amendment:
- Wirepoints’ Amendment 1 homepage
- Tier 2 Illinois Pensioners Could Use Amendment 1 To Revolt For A Fair Deal
- The Silliest Argument Yet In Favor Of Amendment 1 — The ‘Workers Rights Amendment’
- Wall Street Journal Calls Out The Whopping Lie Behind The Pending Constitutional Amendment Illinois Is Ignoring
- Amendment 1 has two objectives: To give massive new powers to government unions and to stop Illinois’ private sector from going Right to Work – Sp. Presentation
- Illinois’ biggest fraud on its voters yet is coming in its official description of proposed constitutional amendment
- Are Workers’ Rights Amendment Supporters Lying In Their Ad, Did They Lie To Legislators Or Lie To The Court?
- Scope Of Pending Illinois Constitutional Amendment Goes Far Beyond Appearances. It’s A Monstrous Giveaway To Public Unions
- Illinois lawmakers want to cement union powers into the state constitution
- Want to Fix Illinois Teacher Shortage? End the Tier 2 Pension Rip-Off
Audio and summary 
If this bill passes, say goodbye to local control over all Illinois parks and expect to see open drug and alcohol use, needles, no sanitation and fire hazards, but no ordinary park users.
Voters need to be educated on the effects of passing Amendment 1. They need to know AMENDMENT 1 WILL BE A HUGE TAX INCREASE ON EVERY RESIDENT. It’s the first item on the ballot and it’s worded dishonestly. Many people will vote for it not knowing the consequences. I hope many of those voting in favor can afford to move out of state because they’ll never be able to afford anything in Illinois again. It’s bad now, IF THIS PASSES, YOU AIN’T SEEN NOTHING YET. GOVERNMENT UNIONS WILL OWN US.
The incredible amount of power Amendment 1 gives to the CTU is a threat to democracy
If the low info Illinois voters pass this absurdity, watch the one way U Haul parade pick up even more steam. A disaster waiting to happen.
As PPF astutely pointed out, this is a done deal. The relevant question is, what should be the response of the rational Illinois resident? There are choices. One is to get a public-benefits-guaranteed public-sector job. Whether or not this requires Jenny-Thornley-esque behavior is something that honorable people will need to discover on their own.
The only other choice, now evident, is to flee with the shreds of remaining personal asset value. Better to be poor in a neighboring-State rural community of humans than remain amongst those who not only exploit at will, but delight in the misery of the exploited.
Collective bargaining has been known for overreacting and biting off more than it can chew in many cases over the last 125 years. This could be one of those cases. The timing of this could not be worse. Doubling down on Marxist nonsense will not help their cause. This is a case of yet another “Illinois and Chicago need to get worse before they get better”. If the state and the city declared bankruptcy it would be the largest public government financial failure of all time. At that point, everything could be rewritten or restructured. Even California has AAA rated… Read more »
Crazy. IL politicians allow this on the ballot, but no public pension reform? Another slap in the face to honest non-public union IL taxpayers. Any IL politician (Rep or Dem) that voted for this should be voted out on Nov. 8. How approving these constitutional ballot amendments IL General Assembly: term limits; public pension reform; reform of criminal justice laws so that if “you do the crime, you do LOTS of time; require strict political corruption laws; repeal the Un-SafeT Act; constitutional amendment to limit bargaining rights of public unions given that IL politicians have no substantive incentives not to… Read more »
What about the provision that the amendment can never be changed or revoked? WTF!
Anyone have any idea how Amendment 1 is polling? I haven’t been able to find much.
Most recent polling showed that 54% supported it, 30% opposed, and 16% undecided. You need over 60% of those voting on the issue or over 50% of those voting in the election. If polling is correct, and those undecideds sit out the vote, then it will pass with around 64% of those voting on the issue and 54% overall. It would meet either requirement. The undecideds need to break hard for the “No” group for this to be shot down. That’s fairly realistic considering that undecideds most likely don’t have a vested interest in this passing or they would already… Read more »
It will most definitely be close. How can you not vote for workers?! Just like the lockbox amendment: Should gas taxes only fund transportation? Absolutely! Makes total sense. Of course no one considers the additional pressure that puts on all other tax sources.
I’m going to stick by my prediction of it needing 55% to pass. I still think more folks are going to skip this question than the fair tax. I remember fair tax was polling as if it would pass too. Someone knew otherwise.
We need to be careful. If it’s close, there will definitely be a problem with the ballots and it will turn in Amendment 1’s favor. After all this is also the state of pensions in perpetuity.
The Amendment language published by the IL Secy of State is VERY deceptive. Just like with the tax hike amendment attempt: Go ahead and lie to the voters. Typical Illinois Public Sector Union scum procedures. This time though the State of IL screwed up with the online link to the deceptive amendment language in lieu of the state’s constitutionally required hard copy mailed to every voter. They must have reasoned “Why not just bamboozle and lie to the voters? Why not hide the information from the voters too?” If this abomination passes then the next step to save Illinois witl… Read more »
https://www.wcia.com/news/where-do-voters-stand-on-the-workers-rights-amendment/
Tried to provide link but I was put into awaiting for approval. It’s a WCIA/The Hill/Emerson College poll.
i have read many an article that labels the CTU movement as “Marxists.” Assuming this is true it is quite puzzling since it seems that one of the usual moves in a Marxist uprising to purge the educators out of the system almost as if their usefulness has disappeared to the new powers that be. SMH here at the whole situation.
Purging educators out of the system is exactly what they did. They were quite smart to take over schools as an early move, and they have largely succeeded in many places beyond Chicago. Opponents were asleep at the switch.
CTU doesn’t focus on education. It’s an atrocity that taxpayers have to support what they do.
A flash thought of Lightfoot and Brandon Johnson in a mayoral run-off is a nightmare. Johnson doesn’t have the recognition that Preckwinkle had. But, he’s a CC commissioner and these people stick together.
Pertinent to the last mayoral election, Preckwinkle’s activist campaign calls were bad enough to think they could have lost her some votes. The CTU activists or any other loose-cannon types, by definition, wouldn’t improve their candidates’ chances of winning a citywide election.
Wilson will get more votes than Johnson. Johnson’s platform is nothing more than Kam Buckner with union cash. Every new Black candidate that enters the race benefits Vallas.
Will FOIA rights of taxpayers to obtain disclosure of public financial records ( like school budget line item spending, contract awards procedures, hiring practices, etc.) be considered a threat to the economic welfare of public workers? Will this new Constitutional right to secrecy supercede Freedom of Information Act?
Susan, since essentially anything can be included among contract demands under Amendment 1, your question is entirely reasonable. They could demand, in their contract negotiations, secrecy over X, Y, Z — whatever– and their constitutional right to make that demand would be secure.
Amendment 1 will be interpreted anyway they want it to be.
CTU is not a union. It is a racist terrorist organization.
How is CTU a terrorist organization? Do you have any type of facts to back up your ridiculous lie? What did they negotiate for that qualifies? Some demented logic to think that negotiating a contract equals terrorism? Is your goal to render the term “terrorist” meaningless?
You’re in good company with the other low IQ individuals that provided you upvotes. So you got that going for you.
PPF, I agree with you. It’s wrong employ the common tactic of the modern left, which routinely labels its opposition with over-the-top like fascist, racist, insurrectionist, etc. No exaggeration is needed to properly criticize the CTU and the modern left.
Mark-Here is the definition of terrorist. #2 (terrorizing methods) could mean when someone or some organization withholds something from someone to get a certain demand. Terrorist does not have to mean some act of violence like bombings which is what we associate the meaning to. terrorist tĕr′ər-ĭst noun A person who engages in terrorism. One who favors or uses terrorizing methods for the accomplishment of some object, as for coercing a government or a community into the adoption of or submission to a certain course; one who practices terrorism. In Russia, a member of a political party whose purpose is… Read more »
Come to think of it, my son was a terrorist at age two.
“could mean when someone or some organization withholds something from someone to get a certain demand.” That’s absurd. Withholding ones labor is not terrorism nor does it qualify as hostage taking. Under your definition, an employer withholding a raise or better working conditions is also guilty of terrorism and hostage taking. The truth of the matter is you are not entitled to someone else’s labor at your pre-determined price and they are not allowed your money just because they ask for it. Just normal negotiating process. Under your definition, anybody that doesn’t agree to the terms of a contract negotiation… Read more »
None of these negotiations have all parties at the bargaining table. These deals are all made behind closed doors. No transparency whatsoever until the contract is ratified. Then they come out and say this is what you owe us. The contracts covers everyone in their respective union regardless of performance. I don’t see any of this going on in private K-12 schools. I have never heard of a strike in my area for private schools. The parents are involved in all aspects unlike the public schools where taxpayers and parents have little say. Seems like negotiations are terrorist type tactics.… Read more »
You do not need to be present at the bargaining table in a representative government. You vote for your school board and they decide what they will agree to in a contract. Choose those people carefully as you won’t be in the room when the negotiations go down. You could always choose to run for the school board yourself. Withholding your labor in a labor negotiation is standard. If someone offers you a job for less money than you desire, you are not obligated to trade your labor for the reduced amount. You are not entitled to their labor at… Read more »
Anyone and everyone who was downtown in 2016 and 2017 during one of CTU’s “Red For Ed” Black Friday assaults on stores and shoppers would accurately call CTU terrorists. Their behavior was appalling, disgusting, uncivilized mob action bordering on a riot. I guess it was practice for their participation in real looting and riots in 2020 and 2021.
Labeling CTU as terrorists or radicals plays right into their hands. They want that rep. Better to portray them as what they really are: a corporation.
nixit— as former CPS parent I agree, your average +$100k CTU member is happy to go along with all the sudo-sociallist bs as long as comrade gates and the crew keep bringing home the bacon in $pay$ & benies. and what’s not to like–highest paid big city teacher in country an amazingly adding members while CPS student pop declines. And most importantly THE PRESS LOVES THEM. they’re not socialist Marxist. They’re taxpayer guaranteed upper income equity hustlers. Amendment 1 will put em on steroids….and amazingly the few chicagan lib-tards that vote go along with it (that’s the mystery)?
That kind of greed is also a feature of textbook Marxism in action (Communism). The apparatchiks loot they system. BLM’s founder Patrisse Cullors is another example. She says she’s a trained Marxist. Is that rendered untrue because she turns out to be a thief — using BLM money to buy houses? No, it’s more evidence of textbook Marxism.
If this passes, CTU will be allowed to represent teachers in ANY school district. A group of teachers in Elmhurst not satisfied with their current representation could disaffiliate from IEA and give Stacy a call.
Exactly right, nixit, and hugely important. I am updating this piece to include that.
For a while, I just thought CTU members outside the CORE faction would leave CTU (and they probably will). It only recently occurred to me CTU’s message appeals to tankie teachers in every Chicagoland school district. If you value activism above all else, why stick with your boring contract-focused union when there’s a shiny, loud object in the big city that reflects your wacko ideals?
We might get a nice civil war going between IEA and IFT as they begin to cannibalize each other’s membership. IEA, who represents majority K-12 schools across the state, has more to lose here.
School district could be forced to negotiate with numerous different teachers unions. A legal mess on the taxpayers dime. A big win for lawyers associations who I believe are also big backers of Amendment 1. Same mess would apply to all the other crazy 9,000 units of gov…i believe in past comments even ppf agrees. legally I don’t think anyone in springfield has a clue how Amendment 1 will work….but who cares because it will all be figured out on the taxpayers dime (not the workers-HA, HA!!)
Good. Teachers should have the right to choose representation. Everyone should have that right.
Vote 4 workers rights not for corporate fat cats. Vote Yes on Amendment 1.
CTU should be busted. Their evil greedy incompetent members teaching credentials removed and the vermin tossed onto the street. The nations highest paid big city teachers produce the dumbest kids in the country. CTU is the poster child for the need to destroy public sector unions and offer school choice for all parents.
Vote Yes, don’t you think it would get rather messy when exclusive representation ends under Amendment 1, which it will? Any number of groups may be bargaining for all kinds of conflicting demands, no?
Taxpayer employees should never have the right to unionize and collective bargaining.
I wonder how many plumbers-n-electricians-n-carpenters-n-operating engineers-n-machinists are going to vote in favor of having to take time off from work to baby-sit their kids, so that little Bobby and Muffy’s “teachers” can go on strike because the teacher’s unions want boys in the girl’s locker rooms, and “victims of institutional racism” criminals out on their streets.
Considering union laborers, carpenters and operating engineers each gave over $1 million to support the amendment, I would say they support the issue. Even if all of them don’t vote for it, they paid to support it.
Well, actually, in the context of my original comment, which suggested that private-sector union members personally may not support the amendment, I’d say that your observation that since their union donated money, they financially support the issue, even though they don’t agree with it, is correct. And exactly the point I originally made, as my comment posited that these folks may not vote for the amendment, even though they’re in a private sector union that supports it, because they don’t agree with the amendment personally. During the years I was compelled to pay AFSCME dues as a condition of my… Read more »
If private sector union members don’t vote for this amendment then you have nothing to worry about. My point is that those unions are financially supporting this amendment which means as a whole they support it.
The woke unions have long supported Democrat political issues contrary to the interests and desires of the rank and file members. This is a result of a century of marriage between the Democrat Party and Unions. The Democrat Party went trans and the unions fear becoming a transwidow, so they continue supporting the Democrat Party even though many union rank and file actually vote republican.
Again, if the rank and file don’t support this amendment then it won’t pass. You have nothing to worry about.
Also, if rank and file don’t support this spending then surely they will replace their leaders at the next available election? No? Then they support the spending. Votes have consequences.
Tell me you’re not familiar with how union leadership workers without telling me how union leaders works…