If language used Monday by the leaders of the Chicago Teachers Union and Chicago Public Schools to explain their positions on a looming teachers strike is any indication of a deal getting done soon, well, perhaps best not to hold your breath.
“They want to stand on us, put their boots on our necks and then tell us we have to like it,” CTU President Karen Lewis said at a news conference on Monday.
Minutes later, CPS CEO Forrest Claypool stepped to a lectern at the CPS central office in the Loop and denounced such rhetoric before offering some of his own to slam the logic used by the labor union’s leaders: “It’s sort of an Alice in Wonderland world within the CTU these days.”
The earliest the teachers can strike is May 16, about a month before the end of the school year. The two sides are in a 28-day “cool off” period before the CTU could file a 10-day notice of its intention to strike before doing it, Lewis said.
Lewis wouldn’t tip her hand on whether teachers would prefer to strike at the end of this school year or the beginning of the next one. She offered this advice to parents: “Be prepared.”
Asked to offer up the percentage odds of a strike, Lewis said: “Today 100. Tomorrow, maybe 95. Maybe 85.”
She then turned to a group of CTU members flanking her. “I don’t know, what do you all think?” she asked.
Lewis also said the last-resort maneuver is not imminent. Negotiators for both sides will meet again Thursday, she said.
“There’s still steps. They still have an opportunity to come up with something that is addressing the issues we have,” Lewis said.
Asked about the plan to meet Thursday, Claypool said he was unaware of the sit down, but welcomed it — noting that he was willing to meet any time, day or night, to get a deal hammered out.
Lewis said CTU would not partake in the 24/7 model of negotiations. “We’re too old for that,” she said. “People have to go home and go to bed.”
The latest proposal served up by an independent third-party arbitrator over the weekend largely mirrors the one offered in January by CPS which Lewis once characterized as a “serious offer” before turning turning her back on it. The latest incarnation of the offer was “dead on arrival” she said.
The offer proposes net raises over four years, the phasing out of over two years of a 7 percent pension contribution CPS has been making for members, and a return to raises for continuing education and experience for teachers as soon as next school year.
“We’ve made several counter proposals. We’ve been told ‘No. No. No. No. No.’ The problem is, these people want their cake and eat it, too,” Lewis said.
“We’re far apart on the money and we’re far apart on the loopholes that guarantee us that we don’t lose more people,” she said, referring to layoffs. “They claim their going to say yes to that, but we still need some guarantees because they’ve always been able to get around that with other language. We want to make sure that we close those loopholes.”
Claypool, who said the school district is in a financial battle to remain solvent, noted that the arbitrator called it a “fair deal.”
Mayor Rahm Emanuel urged the Chicago Teachers Union to vote on a new contract that’s virtually identical to the one rejected earlier this year by the union’s 40-person bargaining team.
“Now you have a third-party with a (fresh) set of eyes who also looked at it and said, ‘This is a fair contract for everyone involved: teachers, Chicago Public Schools and taxpayers,’ ” the mayor said.
“It gives teachers a raise and also makes investments in things like community schools they have advocated and provides the taxpayers with stability we want to see for multiple years.”
Emanuel was asked what, if anything, he was prepared to do to “sweeten” the deal to avert Chicago’s second teachers strike in four years.
“You’re already talking about sweetening … I would hope, ultimately, that this agreement would be taken to the House of Delegates and to the members when they know all the facts,” he said.
“If we came together — meaning CTU and CPS— it would be a wake-up call for Springfield to get their act together” and revise a school aid formula that penalizes school districts dominated by students from impoverished families.
Contributing: Fran Spielman
