My point was that the City is not going to take the risk of losing in order to score a point by declaring that this is a strike. This is more likely than not a subject of mandatory bargaining. Which means that if the City declares an impasse without bargaining in good faith, it’s an unfair labor practice, which they are also not going to risk. Let’s remember we are in Chicago, one of the great remaining bastions of organized labor. A Democratic Mayor is not going to be very popular if she takes too hard a line on this or gets dinged with ULP decisions.
There are more parents and grandparents that union members, even in Chicago. The center of power of this situation is the children, not the school district, the teachers, or their union. Children’s best interest crosses all other lanes and that will be the most powerful influence in the fallout from this situation.
I think that that is very naive. A Democratic mayor in Chicago is not going to last without union support. Those parents likely include union members, and they are not going to want to see the City trample collective bargaining rights. The right approach is one that balances all of the interests. An all in person mandate that does not have the support of the teachers does not do that. The City is in a bad position, because they will be able to any instruction without the teachers, and it is unlikely that they will be able staff schools with a small pool of subs.
It is naive to think that families will put party and union before their children and grandchildren. A parent, if necessary, will kill, or die, to protect the interest of their children. They only have to pull a voting lever, nothing more extreme, to accomplish that here. But personally I welcome progressives in politics and labor to find out for themselves.
So it seems kind of wise to go to a remote learning situation… which everyone hates but it helps to alleviate the chaos that would come with not having enough staff who are not sick.
1 Like
Perhaps so.
And it’s the school district’s call to decide that.
Seems like this all could have been handled better.
Perhaps they could have.
I am also an advocate for labor being able to determine the safety of the workplace.
Safety?
If teachers were to contract tuberculosis, test negative for COVID-19–a virus that has killed less than 2% of its sufferers—would they still be safe?
With many vaccinated, the likelihood of this virus being fatal is miniscule. The likelihood of contracting it should not be grounds for remote education.
It never should have been. Cutting off kids from normal social interactions to protect neurotic adults has proved disastrous for them and never should have been permitted.
Teachers refusing to return to work in class should have their employment terminated with $0.00 compensation.
Are we leaving out that people still get sick?
Isn’t that a safety issue?
So they’re getting sick.
And, for the most part surviving?
Just.
No.
If it was we’d all just stay home. Wouldn’t want anyone getting a cold or the flu from going to work.
Is this where we argue whether getting sick is okay as long as someone doesn’t die?
What job do you know where someone doesn’t catch a cold or the flu from a colleague or patient/client/student?
By that rationale all health care visits would be virtual. Most COVID-19 patients are recovering at home, especially with vaccinations available.
Chicago teachers want to opt out of teaching in person, they should be canned and not be compensated.
If someone gets sick with Covid, should they still go to work?
They should take the five day quarantine prescribed then head back.
Should they voluntarily opt out of returning, that’s a voluntary termination and should not be compensated.
What happens if there are so many people who are sick that there are not enough to make to make the school operate at all?
Since at no point has even 5% of the population been infected with COVID at the same time, this is a false argument, but you have tried to make it before. And since the illness period is even shorter than the original infection it will have less of an impact than the annual flu. And we have a higher density of COVID Vaccination that we ever get for flu vaccination. We don’t shut down for the flu, we shouldn’t shut down for COVID.
2 Likes
Currently schools across the country are shutting down because of staffing shortages due to Covid.
This is happening right now… in this country…. In this reality.
No one likes remote learning.
The other option is staffing shortages.
They are shutting down because teachers are not reporting to work.
Because people are getting sick.
With a virus that for many has mild symptoms. My daughter felt worse with the cold she had when she tested negative than with coronavirus as a fully vaccinated individual.
Even the diabetic other half had fairly mild symptoms. These teachers need to shove remote learning where the sun never shines, or be canned and not compensated.
