I really wish that there were other alternatives other than a strike when it comes to reaching an agreement about something. Case in point with the back and forth with the Chicago Teachers Union. Please don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree with organizations when they seek higher pay, benefits, pension reform and all of that. I think teachers deserve the very best of everything in life so let's be clear on that.
However, what I don't understand is that these demands are known to exist and should be negotiated throughout the course of time so there is not even a risk of a strike. When you call a strike for a public school system it affects the hundreds of thousands of children the most. Parents who are already struggling financially may have to take off work or find childcare they can't afford for their kids during a strike.
Some of our children already lack in education and missing even one day of school can make a difference in their learning experience. A strike can negatively affect a child's social behavior too, not to mention throwing them off their routine which can often be difficult to get them back on.
The pending strike by teachers, support staff and parks workers on Oct. 17 if a deal is not reached will definitely affect thousands of families in some way. Mayor Lightfoot says there are no plans for CPS to make up missed days from a strike, so that means teachers could miss out on pay too. So who's really winning here?