Lawyers for Chicago Public Schools were rebuffed today in their hopes of winning a temporary restraining order and immediately ending the teachers strike.
Judge Peter Flynn did not agree to hold a hearing on the matter today, instead scheduling one for 10:30 a.m. Wednesday. The judge questioned if the legal issues wouldn’t be moot if the strike is over by then, according to Roderick Drew, a spokesman for the city’s Law Department.
The Chicago Teacher Union’s House of Delegates is to meet on the contract issue Tuesday. The union immediately condemned the move for a court order as an act of vindictiveness by a “bullying” mayor.
In its complaint seeking the order, CPS argued that the teachers union is prohibited by state law from striking over non-economic issues and that the strike is a clear and present danger to public health and safety.
It asked that CTU members be immediately ordered off the picket line and back into classrooms.
“State law expressly prohibits the CTU from striking over non-economic issues, such as layoff and recall policies, teacher evaluations, class sizes and the length of the school day and year,” the motion states. “The CTU’s repeated statements and recent advertising campaign have made clear that these are exactly the subjects over which the CTU is striking.”
The motion also contends that the strike is “a clear and present danger to public health and safety. It prohibits students from receiving critical educational and social services, including meals for students who otherwise may not receive proper nutrition, a safe environment during school hours and critical services for students who have special needs.”
The 700-page filing notes that more than 80 percent of the district’s 350,000 students rely on school meals for their basic nutrition, and 50,000 others, including autistic students, depend on special instruction. Out of school, children are more prone to fall victim to violence, it says.
“At a critical time in their lives, a vulnerable population has been cast adrift by the CTU’s decision to close down the schools, with consequent grave implications for the residents of the city of Chicago,” the court document states.
The CTU released a statement calling the motion groundless and “vindictive.”
“CPS’ spur-of-the-moment decision to seek injunctive relief some six days later appears to be a vindictive act instigated by the mayor,” the union said in a statement. “This attempt to thwart our democratic process is consistent with Mayor (Rahm) Emanuel’s bullying behavior toward public school educators.”
The union asked why the mayor did not file the complaint earlier, or at least filed a claim with the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board. “CPS has never filed any claim with the labor board that our strike is illegal,” according to the statement.
The CTU’s House of delegates decided to keep the strike going at least through Tuesday after union chief Karen Lewis met with delegates Sunday to discuss a tentative contract brokered after months of negotiation. Delegates said they wanted more time to consider the deal.
Lewis acknowledged returning to classes Wednesday may be optimistic, considering how difficult it has been for the union and CPS to find agreement on many key issues.
Emanuel reacted sharply to the delay, calling the walkout “illegal” and pledging to seek an injunction in court to force an end to the city’s first teachers strike in a quarter century and return more than 350,000 students to the classroom.
Emanuel has maintained for over a week that the two major sticking points in negotiations — evaluations and the ability to recall teachers who have been laid off — are not legal grounds for a work stoppage.
Zev Eigen, an associate professor at Northwestern University who specializes in labor law, said the mayor and CPS appear to have a good argument.
“The reasons they (teachers) are genuinely, really striking are frankly things on which the law is relatively clear on which they are not allowed to strike,” Eigen said, though he cautioned it’s not a black-and-white issue. “I think there is gray area here, and there are things that could be disputed.
“But if I were ruling on this, I would frankly rule in favor of the injunction, based on the facts and the totality of the circumstances,” Eigen said.
Under the Illinois Labor Relations Act, the union can strike over “policy matters directly affecting wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment, as well as the impact thereon,” Eigen said.
