IFT President Dan Montgomery and Executive Vice President Karen GJ Lewis testified on behalf of IFT members on Friday, Dec. 17, during the second day of hearings of the Special House Committee on Education Reform. The discussion of the day again focused on legislative proposals being advanced by self-proclaimed child and education advocacy group determined to take away teachers' collective bargaining rights and eliminating the right to strike.

"Let me be clear; we do not view the proposals before you as a serious effort to improve collective bargaining outcomes or improve educational outcomes for students," President Montgomery warned the legislators. "Instead, they can only be taken as a direct assault on collective bargaining itself. Read his complete statement online.

"

Most reform advocates in attendance, including Oregon-based Stand for Children and Advance Illinois insisted their proposal only seeks to improve student achievement by ensuring that strikes are “always a last resort.” Eden Martin, the millionaire president of the Civic Club of Chicago with a proven anti-union, anti-public pension agenda, sat alongside the reformers testified on behalf of the proposal to eviscerate collective bargaining, dramatizing the practice by characterizing it as a “thermonuclear bomb.” Martin openly admitted that, “In the end…the proposal is designed to preclude a strike.” Martin and his fellow reformers instead prefer giving complete control of the collective bargaining process to school boards, allowing the employees the right to strike in the event of an impasse only if board members cast a 2/3 vote to allow it.

The IFT leaders cited statistics that clearly demonstrate that since the passage of collective bargaining laws in 1987, strikes have declined dramatically. Last year, there were only two strikes out of 869 school districts statewide, Montgomery noted. “There has been no need to strike,” Lewis added. “So why do this now?

Longtime labor attorney Gil Cornfield also testified on behalf of the IFT, explaining the history of collective bargaining laws and the benefit of maintaining those collective bargaining rights to allow teachers to retain a voice in their working conditions.

Elgin Mayor Ed Schock, a former teacher and school administrator, concurred with Feldman and expressed the need for collective bargaining. “Based upon my experience reaching successful agreements with unions, negotiations is still the best way to solve problems,” he said. “There has to be a delicate balance between both parties at the table.

”

Legislators also returned to the topic of performance evaluations which they addressed on the first day of hearings. They expressed concern that the current system is ineffective, and IFT leaders didn’t disagree. Lewis reminded the committee that the IFT and other stakeholders worked with lawmakers earlier this year to pass the Performance Evaluation and Review Act (PERA), which requires the development of a new statewide evaluation system. Under the new law, the system is not scheduled to be fully implemented until 2014. “We need to first get PERA working,” she said. “My concern is that if we rush into these proposed reforms, we are putting the hammer down on all teachers, including the effective ones.”



Reform proponents continue to insist that changes must be made quickly, as soon as early January when lawmakers return to Springfield. The IFT will continue to advocate for the time to thoroughly evaluate the proposed reforms and to include teacher and stakeholder input in during the process.

“Let’s do this right,” Montgomery said.