Sections:

Article

CTU officers forced to post NLRB notice after CTU loses an unfair labor practice complaint from its own workers...

[img=9883]As the leaders of the Chicago Teachers Union move towards consolidating a corporate-style reign over the union's 25,000 members, other anti-union aspects of the CTU's current regime are becoming more transparent (even as the union's officers deny transparency in union political and "foundation" finances to the union's dues-paying members). In August, the CTU was forced to post a notice from the National Labor Relations Board indicating the the CTU bosses had lost an unfair labor practice complaint to the union's unionized workers.

Despite widespread public relations claims on the Left that the Chicago Teachers Union under the CORE leadership is a leading light in "progressive" unionism for the USA, a recent decision against the CTU's bosses again affirms that the union had been illegally mistreating its own workers. Above, the notice that the CTU was forced to post at its offices because the union's bosses had been violating the rights of the union's workers.And source in the CTU have told Substance that additional complaints will be forthcoming, as the union's bosses continue to deny the rights of the union's unionized workers.

There is no explanation as to why the NLRB notice was signed by union vice president Jesse Sharkey, rather then by union president Karen Lewis. Lewis, not Sharkey, is the "Chief Executive Officer" of the CTU.



Comments:

Add your own comment (all fields are necessary)

Substance readers:

You must give your first name and last name under "Name" when you post a comment at substancenews.net. We are not operating a blog and do not allow anonymous or pseudonymous comments. Our readers deserve to know who is commenting, just as they deserve to know the source of our news reports and analysis.

Please respect this, and also provide us with an accurate e-mail address.

Thank you,

The Editors of Substance

Your Name

Your Email

What's your comment about?

Your Comment

Please answer this to prove you're not a robot:

3 + 4 =