Yep

Expect when a group representing teachers goes out of its way to cut deals with a school district that the teachers will end up on the short end of the stick.

Those "appeals" panels are jokes because the hearings are rigged affairs. Administrative law is a joke everywhere since the usual rules governing branches of the law don't apply there.

The union has hailed the creation of a new “appeals” process, but there is no genuine basis for challenging ratings. The appeals board will consist of four individuals, one selected by the board, one by the union president, and two agreed on jointly—essentially making the union a partner in the firing and victimization of teachers.

Scores that are derived from testing can be appealed, “only if the teacher identifies a data integrity or data analysis error” as the cause of low test scores, ie., not factors such as poverty, understaffing and large class sizes. The appeals board can change an evaluation only if three members conclude that the rating is “clearly erroneous.” This puts the burden of proof on the teacher.

The granting to principals of broad authority to hire any teachers they choose, without regard to seniority. This will allow the CPS to push out more experienced and higher-paid teachers, as well as those who are more resistant to education “reform.” The layoff/recall section is not included in the partial detailed contract language released by the union, but the highlights make clear that the union has agreed to a layoff procedure that prioritizes ratings over seniority.

Principals have WAY too much power now and aren't held accountable for their actions--ever. THAT is the problem in public schools, not with teachers.