|
 The Cook County College Teachers Union is planning
a strike for the end of October unless the college’s students get housing and
day care services (the teachers also want more money).
They are basically demanding a taxpayer-funded charity, “City Colleges for the
Common Good.”
It would subsidize child care, housing costs and expanded “wraparound” support
services for students. It sounds noble, but if the union wants to start a
charity, then maybe union money should pay for it.
The Chicago Teachers Union used the same tactic before it went on strike in 2019
– exactly three years ago – demanding the Chicago Public Schools compel
initiatives and tax measures to bring about more affordable housing. Mayor Lori
Lightfoot complained the non-traditional demand was delaying negotiations.
In both cases, we see teachers holding students’ welfare hostage through strikes
or strike threats. And the teachers are striking over issues intended to improve
student welfare? Sounds like a parent standing there with a belt, saying, “This
is going to hurt me more than it hurts you. And it’s for your own good.”
The CTU dropped its housing demands when the city came up with 16% raises for
them. A cynic would think the “social welfare” agenda was just a bargaining
tactic – a straw man put up to divert time and attention from the real goal of
more money.
It’s easy to wonder whether the City Colleges for the Common Good proposal will
also wind up in the trash can beneath the negotiating table as soon as the cash
comes through.
Illinois government unions have become more political with each decade. It’s
gotten to the point of public servants expecting extensive service from the
public, such as spending 25% of the state budget on their retirements while the
pension debt balloons to $313 billion.
That fealty could grow if voters agree to a proposed change to the Illinois
Constitution at the top of the Nov. 8 ballot. Amendment 1, which the unions are
calling a “Workers’ Rights Amendment,” would empower government union bosses to
negotiate over a much wider range of topics than wages and benefits. More topics
mean more costly demands to be satisfied by taxpayers.
[to top of second column] |
Stripped down, the proposal is a tax increase. Illinois Policy Institute experts
estimate the cost per Illinois family at $2,149, but it could be much greater
because of implications protecting unions. If passed, unions would have the
ability to strike over nearly anything and restrict lawmakers from ever limiting
those powers, which could produce a lot of unforeseen and expensive
complications.
And for anyone doubting if government unions would take advantage of the
expanded powers to force taxpayers to advance their social justice campaigns,
just look at the past action of the CTU and current push by the CCCTU.
Complicating this vote is that the same lawmakers who put this proposal on the
ballot, thanks to their reliance on government union campaign funds, also
essentially killed the main communication that explains it to voters. Before
Illinois voters decide a constitutional change, there must be a little blue
pamphlet mailed to them with the proposal’s language as well as the pro and con
arguments.
This time there is no blue pamphlet because lawmakers created a one-time
exception to the law and let the Illinois Secretary of State mail out postcards
that simply list the website where the pamphlet can be found.
Has anyone bothered to type in that long web address? It’s 49 characters long.
Again, the resident cynic might argue the information is less accessible this
year because the less information about the proposal, the better. Polling has
shown voters turn against Amendment 1 as soon as they learn how much it empowers
government unions and what it could cost.
It also stands in the way of fixing the pension debt and other government
financial messes because it gives government unions more power to protect their
interests and restricts lawmakers from protecting ours.
No other state has handed government unions this kind of power. Were Illinois to
do so, we’d either be the most progressive state in the nation or the most
gullible – or worse.
Brad Weisenstein is managing editor for the Illinois Policy
Institute.
|
