Sections:

Article

Linda Porter, CSDU endorse CORE

Chicago Teachers Union Treasurer Linda Porter and the Caucus for a Strong Democratic Union that she led endorsed CORE (the Caucus of Rank and File Educators) and King High School Chemistry teacher Karen Lewis now that the first round in the heated CTU 2010 election is over.

The CSDU slate came in fourth out of five slates running in the initial election held on May 21 in all Chicago public schools where union teachers and other school workers work. Chicago charter schools, which were expanded enormously with the support of incumbent CTU president Marilyn Stewart during the regime of CEO Arne Duncan and since, are not union schools. Despite four years of organizing attempts, only a handful of charter schools have become union, and because of prejudicial legislation, charter school teachers in Chicago are barred from being CTU members. Hence, no charter teachers were eligible to vote on May 21.

On May 5, 2010, the four officer candidates from the Caucus for a Strong Democratic Union (CSDU) gathered at Punkey's Pizza in Bridgeport following Linda Porter's speech to the House of Delegates meeting. Left to right: Jay Jiminez (Wells HS), Lisa Dimberg (Carpenter Elementary), Linda Porter (CTU Treasurer), and Jack Moran (Beaubien Elementary). Substance believes that the principals of Wells and Beaubien were told by Chicago schools Chief Executive Officer Ron Huberman to close their positions in retaliation for their opposition to CTU President Marilyn Stewart, who has the support of Huberman and Mayor Richard M. Daley. Substance photo by George N. Schmidt.In a statement issued shortly after the preliminary vote totals were announced on May 22 and published on their website, the CSDU said:

CORE heads to run-off with Stewart. CSDU endorses CORE and asks supporters to vote for change in leadership: (http://www.thecsdu.org, Latest CSDU Newsbriefs)

CSDU Congratulates and Endorses CORE

The CSDU would like to thank the members for their support during this campaign. Although we didn’t capture enough votes to participate in the run-off, we support the outcome. We endorse the CORE slate and ask the members to vote for CORE in the run-off on June 11th. Our primary objective was to replace the Stewart administration with new CTU leadership and voting for the CORE team will accomplish that goal.

CTU Election Results

UPC 6283

CORE 5970

PACT 3144

CSDU 1273

SEA 1127

We understand that the Triple AAA is arranging for the remaining ballots to be picked up and counted. Please refer the the CTU website for further details.

There will be no run-off in the AFT Convention Delegates Election, which is covered by the Landrum-Griffin Act. In that election the delegates who received the most votes on May 21st are the winners. 



Comments:

May 23, 2010 at 3:41 PM

By: Sarah

AFTconvention

So what are the results of the AFT convention delegates. If the UPC won the most straight ballots then it's likely they won the convention delegates. So if CORE wins the run-off, they won't be going to the convention UPC would.

there's still the problem with numbers:

19,477 votes but the total is only 17,797

May 23, 2010 at 5:05 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

retired teacher/parent

Sarah

Thanks for pointing out the concerns about AFT delegates. If CORE wins the election (which is my hope), they should look into revising the rules so that the group that wins the election sends their delegates to the convention. This was the type of concern that made people change the rules so that the President and Vice President can't be from two different political parties (on a federal level).

Marge

May 23, 2010 at 9:45 PM

By: chgotchr

Really, UPC delegates.

That is really discouraging. All the UPC "delegates" are going to do is badmouth CORE during the conventions. They will go on the union's dime for nothing. One last chance to screw the membership, I guess.

May 23, 2010 at 9:57 PM

By: math teacher

is this true?

George, is this true - that there will be no run-off for convention delegates?

May 23, 2010 at 11:34 PM

By: Sarah

2004

When the 2004 election was to be decided by a run off, Debbie Lynch, whose PACT delegates won in the first voting, decided to have the convention delegate election be done over because of this possibility. There were a number of then staffers and members of the Rules Election Committee who thought the first vote should stand but were overruled, So the run off election had both ballots. This does however create a logistical problem with making arrangements for the delegates for the convention which will be less than a month after the election. Perhaps the next administration should change future election dates to April or March. this would also allow the elected officers the ability to help prepare the next year's budget. It would also be better to have the election on a day in mid week for obvious reasons.

May 23, 2010 at 11:40 PM

By: Garth Liebhaber

What Will It Mean?

There are still 34 schools to count as well as the split ballots- not to mention the provisional ballots. Right now CORE is a little over 300 votes behind- all very close.

I would like to know more about what it would mean if UPC is the caucus representing us as delegates at the AFT. In my humble opinion, I feel that in this situation, perhaps proportional representation should apply? Meaning that each caucus would send a certain number of delegates based on its percentage of the vote?

While it would be discouraging for CTU to represented by UPC delegates- perhaps their is a way to minimize the the negative aspects of that and still let the majority voice of the membership be heard?

May 23, 2010 at 11:52 PM

By: Jay Rehak

The AFT/IFT delegates serve for 3 years

The delegate election has to be done over. Otherwise, the UPC folks will be going to the AFT/IFT conferences for the next three years. If Karen Lewis and CORE wins in the June 11th run-off, they need to represent the Union at these conferences for the next three years. So it's not just a logistical problem for this year, it's problematic for the next three years. Let's do it right and wait until June 11th to determine who is going to the various conventions.

Unfortnately, proportional representation wouldn't work unless all candidates agreed (hardly likely, as there are approximately 1,000 candidates who would be impacted by such a decision.

Let's wait until June 11th and get it right.

May 24, 2010 at 12:11 AM

By: Sarah

2004

When the 2004 election was to be decided by a run off, Debbie Lynch, whose PACT delegates won in the first voting, decided to have the convention delegate election be done over because of this possibility. There were a number of then staffers and members of the Rules Election Committee who thought the first vote should stand but were overruled, So the run off election had both ballots.\rThis does however create a logistical problem with making arrangements for the delegates for the convention which will be less than a month after the election. Perhaps the next administration should change future election dates to April or March. this would also allow the elected officers the ability to help prepare the next year\'s budget.\rIt would also be better to have the election on a day in mid week for obvious reasons.

May 24, 2010 at 12:17 AM

By: Sarah

Landrum-Griffin Act

Delegates are elected not chosen. AFT and Landrum-Griffin Act provide the rules for electing delegates. Perhaps someone should study the Landrum-Griffin Act. Of course it also might have been used against the UPC a few years ago.

May 24, 2010 at 6:25 AM

By: George N. Schmidt

No final vote count is presently available

Until the final vote tallies are completed tonight (May 24) and the official tally is signed off on by the representatives of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and certified by the Canvassing Committee, we are still in the middle of a vote count. I am an observer, for CORE, in that vote count, which has been recessed (to use parliamentary terms) not adjourned. So...

The first thing to know is that we do not "know" anything based on the preliminary vote count that is presently all that the public and which the union members have before them. Until there is a final vote count that is certified by the two parties that make it official (AAA; CTU canvassing committee) all of the discussion is speculation based on a "What If?"

Statistically, despite what the official CTU press release (stating that Marilyn Stewart had won a "victory") stated on May 22, the two caucuses that are still in the race are in a dead heat. The remaining three caucuses, as anyone can see from the numbers, are out of the race. When we got the list of the 35 (now, I believe, 34) schools that were still not accounted for Friday night, it was clear to me (based on "back of the envelope calculations) that we were looking at between 600 and 1,000 additional votes still to come in (assuming that all of those schools had voted and that their ballot boxes were left in the schools because they were not picked up). The failure of the process to account for those 34 schools is a significant factor at this point. Where were those ballot boxes all weekend, and under whose control?

I dare any amateur or professional statistician looking at the current public numbers to say that the two leaders are other than in a dead heat.

That means that the final vote counts will officially tell the public (and everyone reading this) who "won" the two runoff spots (and any other spots) in the Friday, May 21, balloting.

The final tallies will also tell us who "won" in every other contested spot, from the citywide officials (trustees and "area vice presidents") to the functional vice presidents (some of those groups have fewer than 100 eligible voters, remember).

Until we have the final certified numbers for what happened Friday, we do not know.

I will be at AAA again with the other observers and canvassing committee members this afternoon while any additional votes are counted, after they have been accounted for. At the Friday counting, there was an attorney present for the union. It may have been a good idea for each of the caucuses to have an attorney present for their point of view, too. I was there from beginning (first box brought in) to end (last ballots counted) as an observer for CORE Friday night because I was asked and because I was not on any slate. Given that there were 920 total candidates' votes to be counted Friday night (and now), it was probably a challenge for the caucuses to find active union members who were not on a slate.

When the final numbers are completed in the next 24 hours or so (I'm writing this before dawn on Monday) and we have witnessed the certifications and gotten the complete data (the final numbers for all candidates; the final school-by-school tallies), we can have this conversation. Meanwhile, those of us who will be watching the ballot boxes come in and be counted this afternoon and tonight (and who will be waiting for the complete AAA numbers) have some work to do. The work of those who campaigned is over, but the all-important counting continues. I'm glad to see so much interest, since, as friends and others know, I'm a big fan of democracy and the First Amendment, and this election has been an exercise in both.

May 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM

By: teacher

Are the opposition caucuses now together?

I've seen some PACT and CSDU people giving their support to CORE. Is CORE reaching out to Debbie and Linda and their people? What about Hadjeharis? There were a lot of votes and loyalists/idealists in those groups. Is CORE working with these people now?

May 24, 2010 at 4:36 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

retired teacher/parent

I hope CORE is reaching out to the members of the other caucuses because otherwise Linda will win the election. I hope and pray that doesn't happen because I firmly believe that it will be the end of the Union as an organization that truly represents the teachers. It's time for all of us to forget any differences we may have had and instead unite.

May 24, 2010 at 5:04 PM

By: Margaret Wilson

retired teacher/parent

Mea copa, mea copa I meant to type Marilyn not Linda in the message above. I was going to thank Linda for being so quick to throw her support to CORE.

Marge

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:

5 + 1 =