The evolving story of the CFT/Board negotiations

Keep checking back on this:

I asked (in the comment section):

What role does the public play in all this? The CFT held an “informational picket” before the regular board meeting at the beginning of the month, but it was not clear to me then (and nor is it now) what the public is actually supposed to do. I get that the event supposedly applies pressure on the Board, but to do what exactly? All we know are very general things. And maybe that is the way it is supposed to be – I just don’t get what part we play in this little saga. It is our tax money afterall, right?

I have also asked the PTA Council if they have any plans to hold a panel/discussion with CFT and Unit 4 reps – I know I would appreciate knowing more about what’s going on. But moreover, I really want to figure out what my own role is. Am I supposed to be just a bystander? I don’t think so.

UPDATE: Meg updated her article at 4:07 pm – I think some of the new text (in addition to an important change in the title) is as follows:

The school district issued a statement saying the school board was “surprised and disappointed” to hear of the vote while the district and union are still negotiating.

A strike authorization vote is when the union’s negotiating team goes back to its membership to report on how negotiations are going, said Illinois Federation of Teachers Spokesman David Comerford.

The union members then give the team feedback and takes a vote to give the bargaining team authorization to call a strike if necessary, Comerford said. The vote has to do with the union’s constitution and is different than the intent-to-strike vote the union would have to file with the state Educational Labor Relations Board at least 10 days before striking.

Comerford said a new state law has changed the timeline on which downstate teachers strike.


Additionally, I spotted Cathy Mannen, Sue Grey and Tom Lockman at the Mellon Center after 5:pm – I did not see them meeting or talking, so I cannot relay any facts other than that I saw them.


3 Responses to “The evolving story of the CFT/Board negotiations”

  1. pattsi Says:

    I have never been involved in a labor negotiation so my questions are purely academic and apply across the board. Why are negoitations prolonged? This costs at every level. And in the case of Unit 4, a recent N-G article indicated that the district has a surplus of funds. Of course, I do not know what surplus means or how this is computed. Why are negotiations closed off from the people who provide the money over which whatever group is negotiating. In other words, this is public taxpayer monies? Why not use a negotiation situation as a teaching/learning experience, in this case the students of Unit 4? There could be mock negotiations, just like in the ole days we had mock UN meetings or political conventions. These mock negotiations could involve some of the UIUC COE students, potentially. Actually, the more that I think about this as an educational opportunity for both students and public, the more ideas come to mind. Another thoughts from other posters?

  2. charlesdschultz Says:

    I updated the post since Meg altered the article with more information (including the title).

    I too wonder what other posters/readers/trollers think. 🙂

  3. CFT takes steps to prepare for a teacher strike. Again. | Citizen4: A citizen's blog about Champaign Unit 4 Says:

    […] of last year, the CFT is again putting into motion the threat of a strike. No, they are not officially striking. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: