CCSD 46 Approve Intent to Strike
Yesterday, the Grayslake Teachers Union voted to approve an intent to strike. They cannot strike however until Nov. 6 at the earliest. I am not surprised by this move in the least. A strike threat is just the beginning salvo for the teachers intent to use the children they teach as negotiating pawns.
From the Daily Herald:
A union statement read: “The district chose to ignore the federal mediator’s warning that it was not abiding to ‘generally accepted bargaining principles’ regarding the calculation of its salary schedules.”
————————————
The union contends the district has more than enough money in its education fund to grant the teachers pay increases. Since June 2005, the education fund balance has grown from $6.3 million to $10.5 million in June 2008, a union statement read.“The raise these teachers are asking for is very fair and will not erode the surplus in the educational fund,” Mistry-Mujthaba said.
Linder said those fund balance numbers are inaccurate, though he did not know the actual amount of the surplus.
From the News-Sun:
In a union statement issued following Monday’s meeting, officials said “teachers overwhelmingly voted” for the strike authorization.
The statement added that “at the most recent mediation session on Oct. 22, talks broke down over the salary schedule when the district was unable to provide salary schedules (that) were accurately calculated.”
Here is some background information on the raises Grayslake District 46 teachers have received on average since 1999. This was calculated using the TRS compensation data from the Champion
1998/99-1999/00 - 6.89%
1999/00-2000/01 - 7.63%
2000/01-2001/02 - 7.41%
2001/02-2002/03 - 7.83%
2002/03-2003/04 - 8.17%
2003/04-2004/05 - 6.10%
2004/05-2005/06 - 6.95%
2005/06-2006/07 - 3.67%
*UPDATE: I inadvertently used the year of the data as the start of the school year instead of the end of the school year. Years above reflect this Fiscal Year change. This does not affect the average increase percentage in TRS Compensation
Methodology:
- Match on teacher name between years
- Only full time teachers included
- Averaged: (current year compensation – previous year compensation) / previous year compensation
- Issues: Teacher names changed sometimes in the yearly records. These were excluded for now. Only used exact matches.
An interesting note to this, during the 2003/04 – 2004/05, it has been claimed by some that teachers did not get a raise (See comments at original Daily Herald Story). It was then changed to “they kept the same salary schedule”. Either way, from the numbers above, the teachers were still getting very nice raises during that time. If you remember, this was the time when the district was cutting programs like music, art and gym among other things while crying poor to the public and trying to pass a referendum. When a new board was elected in spring 2005, they turned the district around financially without a referendum.
These are some of the benefits the 2005 – 2008 contract provides the teachers (More later):
- 16 days sicktime which can be accrued to a max of 200 days
- 7.5 hour workdays including lunch period
- Extra duty pay for working lunch
Related to teachers unions are the following past articles:
Excellent article! I love the reasoning… because they have money in the bank… they want it. Sounds like government to me! Teacher’s overwhelmingly voted for it, huh? For the children’s sake, huh?
Personally I think that is quite a nice comphensation package. The average salary increase of employees in the private sector is about 3% per year. This is showing 3.67% plus only required 7.5 hours a day (which includes lunch time), extra $$ if they work during lunch, 16 sick days which they can accrue up to 200. 200!! Are you kidding me?! Then let’s not forget 2 weeks off during the winter, 1 week in the spring, plus teacher institute days, roughly the 1 day off every month, and off during the summer. I fail to see what the teachers uninion is complaining about here.
I’m sorry to sound unsympathetic, but try working in the private sector. Average 10 – 12 hour days along with some weekends, 5 sick days, 2 weeks vataction, and the usual 3% raise every year. If you work through lunch, too bad. That’s it. That’s all there is too it! No spring vacations, no long summer vacations, no possibility of having 200 sick days, or institute days etc.
Okay so looking at the 2008 – 2009 Calendar, here’s roughly how it breaks down:
7 days no kids (no student attendance)
4 half days ( = 2 days off)
6 Legal hollidays (columbus day, etc – which the private sector ususally does not take)
18 days school shut down (winter break, spring break, etc)
Totals:
23 days off (non summer)
7 days less workload due to no student attendance
74 days of summer
104 days total (not including sick days or personal days)
Add the 3.67% raise (which is the LOWEST it’s been in years) on top of that, and this is not acceptable?!?! Here’s what’s not acceptable… Paying the highest property tax percentage in Lake County IL (more than Lake Forest, Highland Park, or Libertyville) and then having my intelegence insulted by people who work nearly 1/3 less the entire year that we do telling us that this salary schedule is not acceptable. And this is based solely upon only the benefits that is listed in this article might I add, not to mention that the teachers want to strike. I think the teachers need to take a good look – especially in todays economy, and realize that they have it really good.
I am absolutely and thoroughly disgusted with the Grayslake teachers. I pay the highest tax rate in Lake County, and yet my kids won’t be going to school because they aren’t getting a large enough slice of the pie! What I would like to see is the median salary for a Grayslake teacher, and how does that compare to the rest of the suburbs.
Not to sound like I do not appreciate them ‘teaching’, but that is their JOB!, why should they get special perks that the private sector does not get?
Perhaps what is fair is their “perks” should be placed into a referendum. I would love see how many remain after the public is through with them. I surely would not allow 200+ accruable sick days, nor would I allow all the institute days the teachers like to take. Use it or lose it, is how the world works for the rest of us.
Let’s put this into perspective, when was the last time a teacher had to work on a holiday, or at midnight and still have the expectation to work the next day placed upon them? When was the last time a teacher was interrupted on their kids’ weekend birthday party to take care of work issues? Realistically speaking here, this is what folks in the private sector do day in and day out. We don’t get summers off; we don’t get spring break or winter break. We do this every single day for the paycheck we signed up for. This is an employer’s expectation.
As a Grayslake Taxpayer, I am the employer of the teachers. The last time I checked, the teachers KNEW their jobs and what they were getting paid for. I find it hard to believe that their jobs have changed so dramatically that they DESERVE a large annual increase. Face it folks, most people don’t even get cost of living increases every year. Most folks are lucky to get 3%, where average is 1.75%- 2%.
I would make a motion that if they don’t teach, I don’t pay school taxes. To me that sounds fair. Why should I pay school taxes for a service my kids aren’t going to be receiving? Perhaps that should be on the next ballot.
I know a lot of people out of work or not happy at work that would jump at these teaching jobs. Be careful teachers you can be replaced with very qualified people. Many people would be happy just to have a stable decent paying job these days! The kids have heard of the strike and many are very sad that the teachers would do this to them. I think they should remember why they got into teaching…. for the kids.
Now here’s the real facts. Lennie has the years all wrong. Champion doesn’t have data for 07-08 yet; and he knows it. All his comments relative to chronology are wrong; and he has the data to confirm, but it won’t support this report or his POV that way. Here’s just 2 examples:
1.) Mr. Joseph, a PE teacher at Park, started in ’06/’07. The data Lennie reports as ’07/’08 shows his years of service at 1 and his salary at 33,442; the starting salary in CCSD46 on the ’06/’07 salary shedule Lennie had before he reported this myth.
2.) Ms. Johnson, an ESL teacher at Avon, started at Prairieview in ’05/’06. She went to Avon in ’06/’07. The data Lennie reports as ’07/’08 shows her with 2 years of service when in fact, ’07/’08 was her 3rd.
Now that’s just to prove the inaccuracy of this interpretation and his inability to properly collect data. The real problem is his rediculous notion that taking on extra duty should somehow be sematically phrased as a “raise”.