You hear it all the time. Whenever a school group wants something, the demand is often followed by "Its for the kids". At CRAFT, we understand that children have parents, and those parents pay taxes. Over-taxation hurts families, which is turn, hurts kids.

The federal government saw fit to name its school improvement initiative "No Child Left Behind". We feel that No Child Left Behind is incomplete because it fails to address the basic lack of financial sense plaguing our schools. In researching Illinois law, we discovered that Illinois is one of the most teacher union friendly states in the country. Many of the common sense reforms so many have clamored for are prohibited or otherwise restricted by Illinois law. This is contrary to the public interest and must change.

Having encountered resistance all over Illinois to raising property taxes, the taxaholics are quick to solicit state involvement to raise our state income taxes. We agree that changes must be made at the state level, but another tax hike is hardly the answer. Its time for Illinois to get out of the way and stop protecting the teachers' unions and other special interests. Composed of community feedback (thank you!), we call this proposal "No Taxpayer Left Behind". We urge all overtaxed Illinois residents to contact their state representatives and ask them to support these measures. Let them know that sending more state money to schools that have squandered property taxes is no solution.

No Strike Law

Under this provision, teachers employed in public schools would be forbidden from striking. Homeowners cannot "strike" and refuse to pay, lest their houses be taken.

Another inference of some detractors is that such a prohibition would be "extreme".

41 States have laws specifically prohibiting public teachers from striking

In some states, teachers who choose to violate this law may be fined or even imprisoned. Clearly much of the country considers public teachers' strikes unacceptable. Striking is a flagrant dereliction of duty for which teachers should risk replacement.

Eliminate Tenure

As teachers will occasionally admit, it is next to impossible to remove a teacher once he/she has achieved tenure. In Illinois, tenure requires only four years. If tenure were a good idea, it would be the norm. Plumbers, doctors, accountant, etc. would all have tenure provisions. They don't, because tenure is NOT a good idea.

The original concept behind tenure was to protect university professors engaged in basic research from reprisals when publishing controversial work. Even in the universities, tenure often requires over 10 years to earn. Elementary and secondary teachers rarely if ever engage in groundbreaking work, and do not require such protection.

The public is expected to finance our schools. The school board and administrators are expected to get the best results. Yet all three are deprived of the ability to hire the teachers best suited to the task.

Revise collective bargaining laws

Illinois law regarding collective bargaining with teachers is sometimes difficult to follow. When questions arise, the teachers' unions are always happy to provide an interpretation. We've all seen teachers' unions strong-arm school districts, but rarely does the district get the upper hand. The law requires the school district to negotiate with the union, and dictates much of the method. This is why school boards so often cave-in with little or no resistance.

The sole purpose of a school district is to educate children, not line the pockets of union leaders. The law should reflect this, and allow districts to negotiate how they choose. School districts NEVER shut schools down because of a pay dispute, only the teachers' unions do. As teachers unions continue to strike their members into unemployment, the supply of good teachers willing to work for reasonable pay increases, and school districts should be free to employ such teachers.

If teacher strikes are to be permitted, school districts should have the uncontested right to hire permanent replacements.

Tax Credits and Vouchers

Vouchers are rarely discussed calmly; people see them as a sinister plot or salvation. Most people's basic sense of fairness says that those who pay for something should have some say in how it works. Being able to rescue a child from an underperforming school is a basic right that should not be afforded to the wealthy alone.

We feel that the parents should be the sole decision makers as to whether a school is serving the needs of their child. The idea that a school or government knows what is best for the child, or wants what is best for the child more than the parents do is ridiculous. Illinois should implement a genuine and complete voucher/tax credit program that allows parents to send children to the school of their choice without restrictions.

Ban Forced Dues

Illinois law contains a provision whereby as part of the negotiation process, a school district can force non-union teachers to pay for the collective bargaining activities of the union. These fees can be a significant percentage of the total union dues. A teacher who does not join the union and has no participation in the collective bargaining process may be forced to pay for it.

Call to Action

Once again, we urge taxpayers to contact your representatives and tell them to support "No Taxpayer Left Behind". Initial discussions with representatives have received mix reviews, usually split along party lines. Can we provide a quality education without raising taxes?

"Yes we can!"

If any of our readers still feels that everything is just wonderful and that the school boards aren't being strong-armed during contract negotiations have a look at some parts of the current Teachers' Contract.:

In 2002, District 50 teachers went on strike to demand better terms. The result is the 2002-2004 Collective Bargaining Agreement (teacher's contract). CRAFT recently obtained what we believe to be an accurate and complete copy of this document through our participation in the newly formed budget review committees. To the best of our knowledge, this information is public.

Like so many District documents, reading it entirely can be quite a challenge to one's patience. On this page, we provide information regarding its more "interesting" components.

ARTICLE III – NO STRIKE PROVISION

"The Association and teachers agree they will not take part in, encourage, or support any interruption of services to School District No. 50 during the life of this contract."

The phony student walkout in March was a blatant violation of this provision. Even for those who cling to the idea that the teachers were not actively supporting it, their failure to end it, as required by their employment, constitutes an obvious breach.

ARTICLE I – RECOGNITION

B. "The Board agrees not to negotiate with any teachers' organizations other than the Association for the duration of this Agreement. The Board agrees not to negotiate with any teacher individually during the duration of this Agreement."

That's right, we're not even allowed to pursue other teacher options.

ARTICLE IV – MANAGEMENT RIGHTS

"...The Board, however, shall be required to bargain collectively with regard to policy matters directly affecting wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment..."

More anticompetitive terms. Why did District 50 sign away its rights so freely? How dare the Harvard Education Association dictate how District 50 may negotiate?

ARTICLE V – ASSOCIATION AND TEACHER RIGHTS

(It comes as no surprise that the "Teacher Rights" section is over twice the length of the "Management Rights" section)

O. "The Association may utilize space on designated bulletin boards for the use of Association Business."

Why must the District be required to grant use of its bulletin boards to an organization that has demonstrated a periodically antagonistic relationship to the District? Should all political organizations be guaranteed the same level of access?

P. and Q. – To paraphrase, the District must make school facilities available to the Association upon request.

If the law does not require this accommodation, why is provided? If the law does require this, why is it presented explicitly in the contract?

R. "Any AFT-IFT information received by the Superintendent shall be delivered to the HEA President."

This provision is despicable. The AFT-IFT is, in essence, a competitor to the HEA (under the rival IEA-NEA). The contract requires the District to disclose all informational material submitted by the HEA's competitor. Imagine if buying a Chrysler meant that you had to let them know about every time you test-drive a Ford!

S. "The Board shall deduct from the pay of each teacher all current membership dues of the Association..."

The same school District that had to defend itself against the 2002 teacher strike is required to collect money on behalf of the group that organizes teacher strikes. Let the Association do its own dirty work!

ARTICLE IX – WORKING CONDITIONS

C.1. "The Board and the Association agree that the pupil/teacher ratio is an important part of an effective educational program."

This is a giveaway to the teachers union. Most studies not bought off by the NEA/AFT have concluded that class size has no effect on educational performance beyond the very early years. Nice excuse to create artificial demand for teachers. Guess who pays for it. Along the same line....

C.2. "The Superintendent shall apply the following criteria, among others, to determine efficient class size."

Another giveaway. If the Superintendent must answer to the community for the school's operation, what right does the HEA have to dictate method? Among the seven criteria listed, financial constraints are dead last.

D. "...No regularly scheduled meetings will be held on the last day of the work week."

What possible purpose could this restriction have except to allow teachers to sneak out early on Fridays?

ARTICLE XII – LEAVES

A. "The Board will grant fourteen (14) sick leave days per year."

Fourteen sick days for nine months work! That's almost 19 days per year for year-round employment. Being a District 50 teacher must be very unhealthy. Of course, these days are carried over from year to year.

H. "The Board shall provide to the Association five (5) days (ten half days) in the aggregate, not cumulative, per school year of released time for the handling of Association business."

Here again, the District is forced to provide accommodations to the teachers' union so they can plan more phony walkouts and teacher strikes. "For the Kids", of course. Our teachers work until 3:30pm, nine months out of the year. It would seem they could sneak some Association work into their abundant personal time.

ARTICLE XV – DISTRICT RETIREMENT PLAN

In summary, when a teacher retires from District 50 (at the ripe old age of 55!), they receive from the District/taxpayers:

- An $11,000 stipend, or 20% of their last annual salary (whichever is greater), plus the corresponding retirement fund contribution (about 9.9% of the stipend).

- 180 days of accumulated sick leave credit!

There are several more tidbits in the contract, certain to infuriate anyone who has ever had to mail a property tax check.

The District 50 contract pales in comparison to some of the contracts throughout the county. We encourage you to obtain your teachers' and administrators' contracts from your school board office.