The Chicago Tribune investigation pulls the curtain back, to expose what really goes on behind the scenes at IFT, the powerful teachers union.
The investigation shows how IFT leaders game the system with the help of state legislators to reap huge rewards at the expense of taxpayers. In return, state legislators collect tens of thousands in campaign contributions from the powerful organization.
A win-win for the teachers union, politicians, and the teachers. A loss for taxpayers, and students.
Read more to find out how much our local politicians are collecting from the teachers union. http://thenumbercrunchers-bolingbrook.com/home.html
When groups like the Chamber of commerce and Koch industries donates much more to their favorite politicians I hardly think that this is a problem. Now if you are advocating taking money out entirely then I respect your position. If you are asking the hard working teachers to stay silent while their opponents lobby the politicians then I take issue with that.
ReplyDeleteCitizens United guaranteed that money and politics would go hand in hand until it was overturned. The Supreme Court is the issue, not the unions.
Yeah. Pretty one sided argument. Can you crunch the numbers of corporations that donate to the same individuals and how much? Include Dillard and Cross. Then, we'll have a complete picture.
ReplyDeleteIf Citizens United says corporations are persons, then shouldn't the same go for unions? Corporate lobbying groups drop so much more $ in political pockets. Put the corporations back in line and then the unions.
Missing the point gang. If members of the current board are taking money from the union, how are they suppose to "bite the hand that feeds them"; in otherwords how will the next contract negotiations go?
ReplyDeleteI do have a problem with government officials taking contributions from companies that do business with the village, school board, etc....
Isn't this the definition of PAY TO PLAY? Just ask Rod.....
The question that begs to be asked is "where is Lisa Madigan"? Isn't it her offices job to seek out and prosecute the corrupt officials, both state and local?
One question: Can we honestly expect Bolingbrook politicians to make decisions that are in the best interest of taxpayers, and the community, if their political careers are being funded by the teachers union?
ReplyDeleteYES!
I don't think they missed the point. I think that they recognize that there are many outside influences contacting the politcal structure with efforts to diminish teacher's pay, benefits, increase class sizes and so forth. They really have no choice but to participate in the current political process or be run over by it. I agree that if all money is removed it would be better. In the meantime I have no problem with the teachers exercising what has been identified by the supreme court as their first ammendment right. If there is specific evidence to connect the contributions to malpheasance by either the teachers or the politicians then I am interested in that. Decisions will still be made by the school board that go against the teachers. decisions will still be made by the school board that goes for the teachers. Regardless of contributions. The teachers did not create the political system. They do have to work within it. They have just as much right as corporate America to freely speak as defined by the courts.
ReplyDeleteIn recent years the teachers union provides contributions to the campaign funds of the same people (school board) who they negotiate pay & benefits. If you think this is a fair system..you are a little nutty. The school board should be looking out for the taxpayers. In the private sector a union does not bribe the management of the company they negotiate with. In the private sector there is more of an even playing field between union and management. Our school board continues to give out excessive pay and benefits. The cost of living was flat for several years yet the union continued getting excessive increases. I wonder why.. answer: the board owes them payback for their campaign contributions. Taxpayers should object to any tax increases from the schools.
ReplyDeletename calling isn't nice Wednesday.....what raise did the teacher's get and what should they have gotten? Can you tell us? Then we can decide for ourselves if it was fair or excessive for the work they do or not.
ReplyDeleteHey Friday, how about the multi-year guaranteed raises? The sweet pension deal, pushed by the union and approved by the school board, where the taxpayers are paying 100% of the teachers' pension?
ReplyDeleteThis crap rarely happens in the private sector.
If raises are negotiated fairly they are fine. What is unfair about the pension? Don't just call it "sweet" and leave it at that. What is it you take issue with as far as the pensions go and what would you do differently? Valley view teachers do contribute to their pensions even though you have read otherwise.
ReplyDeleteWhat does that have to so with the private sector?
Anonymous Jan. 20, 6:58am:
ReplyDeleteWhat are you smoking? You can't be serious.
Why don't you take the time to do your homework. You are asking questions that have already been answered in several articles published on this site, the Chicago Tribune, WLS, etc.
Please do your homework.
Your lack of research is actually shameful. It is quite simple. The teachers contribute. The pensions contributions are taken directly from the teacher's salary and the district deposits the funds into the pension. I don't expect you to know that, or bother to find out. You would apparently rather throw stones in here.
ReplyDeleteI am asking the same questions now. Knowing that the teachers DO contribute to their pensions, what is unfair about the process?
Teachers pay their full 9.4 percent of every paycheck. I am beginning to see that this truth isn't as important for some as the complaining about a benefit that they have.
ReplyDeleteTeachers just like some state employees have negotiated away pay increases to make up for pension funding. That saves the district money. It's very simple. If it didn't, the district would not have agreed to it. Rather than a ssalary increase the board and the teacher's union agree to pay the same portion of the teachers’ contribution to the pension. The teachers could have simply took the pay increase and paid the pension contribution dictated by the salary. This would not have saved the district a dime, that's why collectively it made sense to do it the way that they did.
Contractual agreements like this have saved school districts money because picking up the pension is often cheaper than a negotiated salary increase.
Now if WLS or the Tribune didn't explain this to you it isn't a lack of research or an abundance of smoking on my part.