How Rauner Would Change Collective Bargaining for Chicago Schools

Included in Governor Bruce Rauner’s legislative agenda are changes in the way collective bargaining works in the Chicago School system.

Forbidden from collective bargaining would be

  1. the decision of the educational employer to contract with a third party for any services, the process for bidding on such a contract, the identity of the provider of such services, or the effect of any such contract on bargaining unit members, provided that this subsection does not limit the ability of educational employees or a labor organization to bid on any such contract;
  2. any pay increase, either through changes to the pay schedule or as a result of accumulated years of service, in excess of the amount specified by resolution of the governing body of the public school district;
  3. the provision of any health insurance, including the payment of premiums, the extent of coverage, or the identity of the insurer;
  4. the use of educational employee time for business of the labor organization, other than reasonable time provided to an educational employee to attend a grievance hearing when his or her rights are substantially affected by the hearing or his or her testimony is needed for the determination of any substantial factual question;
  5. required levels of staffing for departments, divisions, shifts, stations, or assignments;
  6. procedures, processes, forms, and criteria for personnel evaluations, or the use of evaluations or seniority in assignments, promotions, layoffs, and reductions-in-force; or
  7. curriculum or standards of student academic performance, conduct, and discipline in school.

Rauner’s proposals are not limited to Chicago, however.

While they would be imposed by school board resolution there, in other school districts, 5% of the voters could petition to have a referendum to adopt them.

Here’s the question that would be on the ballot:

Shall (the legal name of the public school district) be free to determine certain matters without negotiating with employee unions, such as the use of service providers, the decision to provide health benefits, caps on total payroll, employees’ use of government time for union matters, required staffing levels, evaluation procedures, and curriculum?


Comments

How Rauner Would Change Collective Bargaining for Chicago Schools — 4 Comments

  1. The public sector collective bargaining laws are a mess.

    The public sector labor unions have too much power gained over the years by legislation.

    The entire structure should be considered too.

    Germany has works councils which are separate from the labor unions so all issues are not tied into the labor union.

    Members of the works councils don’t have to be members of the labor union.

    Not saying that’s the answer.

    Workers deserve rights so do taxpayers, the system is stacked to the advantage of labor, most people don’t understand that and certainly not all the nuances and politics in the collective bargaining agreements.

    Read the collective bargaining agreements of the taxing districts on your property tax bill, plus the state.

    They are public information, the taxing districts are supposed to have the agreements on their website, if you can’t locate the agreements on the district website, send an email or call them and ask for the URL or a copy in a searchable (non-image) format, such as a searchable (non-image) pdf (not all pdfs are searchable) or MS Word format.

    An even more important transparency measure Rauner could introduce is:

    1. If public sector union members (the rank and file) get to vote on a collective bargaining agreement, then so do the taxpayers in that district / state.

    2. Collective bargaining agreements should be archived indefinitely in searchable format on the taxing district website.

    3. The change document, which is the document illustrating the changes in the collective bargaining agreement (typically by underling new text and striketroughs for new text), should also be archived indefinitely in searchable format for each collective bargaining agreement on the taxing district / state website.

    4. If the union provides negotiation updates to the rank and file union members, the board / administration should provide negotiation updates to the taxpayers.

    There’s a good start.

    Right now the games is stacked to the advantage of unions over taxpayers.

    The taxpayers are too often sitting ducks on a pond.

  2. Here’s another good start: If you work in 2 separate government jobs, you don’t get to collect 2 pensions, just one.

  3. “If public sector union members (the rank and file) get to vote on a collective bargaining agreement, then so do the taxpayers in that district / state.”

    I like this one.

    Another thing: I have been lucky enough to be subject to the alternative minimum tax, so the thought just hit that some of these guys who make 300K on retirement from public service ought to be subject to an “alternative maximum pension.”

    Something that says that you cannot make more than 2 standard deviations above the average state income.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *