The Chicago Teachers Union voted to strike because their egregious contract demands were not met.

One of the main sticking points in the negotiation is that the union is refusing to increase the amount their members contribute to their own pensions. Teachers should be paying 9 percent of their salaries to fund their exorbitant retirement benefits. They currently only pay 2 percent. What’s best for children has never been the priority of CTU and its members.

5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
nixit71
4 years ago

The problem resides in perception. One thing both CTU and CPS agree on is a perceived “revenue problem”. Claypool keeps complaining about his 20% for 20% plan, where he claims Chicago represents 20% of the student population but only gets 15% of the state education funding. But the Senate Republicans already analyzed how much extra funding CPS gets over its downstate equivalents here: http://www.senategop.state.il.us/Portals/0/Docs/Cost-Shift-FINAL.pdf?timestamp=1409174250732. Hint: It’s A LOT. Why they don’t counter Claypool’s claim is anybody’s guess. CPS enrollment is down 7% since its recent peak in 2002. Over the past 12 years, it has steadily declined. Shouldn’t less consumers… Read more »

PGMJR
4 years ago

Reluctantly, I am going to have to side with the CTU on this one. Forrest Claypool said yesterday, regarding the CTU contract offer, “though this is a four-year contract proposal, it’s all part of a short-term fix. The long-term fix, he says, will have to come from Springfield”. Why offer a four-year, short -term contract to CTU and no long-term fix? I would summarize that the Rahm knows that his days are numbered as Mayor and he is bargaining from a position of weakness. Therefore, with this contract offer, he’ll just ” kick the can” down the road till he’s… Read more »

nixit71
4 years ago
Reply to  PGMJR

Springfield “fixing” CPS basically means even more downstate taxpayer dollars going towards a specific school district that already gets more than their fair share in funding and continually under-performs (to put it mildly). Why should taxpayers throw more good money after bad?

Rauner has a “Turnaround Agenda” for the state. Why not have a similar one for Chicago? For example, make additional CPS funding contingent on eliminating 20 wards. Less wards… = less admin overhead = more revenue to redistribute to other depts. I bet both CPS and CTU would support that. Some aldermen would as well.

mark glennon
4 years ago

Jim, you are exactly right. You’d think younger teachers would wake up to the math and demand that their contributions as well as the taxpayers’ start going into a new system that’s not a hopeless sinkhole.

Jim Palermo
4 years ago

Is it any wonder current teachers aren’t interested in making larger contributions to their pension fund? Aside from the extra 7% that comes out of their paychecks, they realize that the larger contribution does nothing to improve the security of their own pensions. According to the most recent actuarial valuation available on the plan’s website http://www.ctpf.org/AnnualReports/Actuarial2014.pdf p.29, the plan has assets of $10 billion and liabilities of $19.5 billion for a funded ratio of 51.5%. If the plans weren’t using an overly generous 7.75% expected investment return, the liabilities would be considerably higher. Of the $19.5 billion of liabilities, $14.6… Read more »