I'm not sure what to make...

...of the Chicago Teachers Union strike just yet (I really don't), but I did read this article in the Los Angeles Times yesterday, "High Turnover Reported Among Charter School Teachers" (my emphasis): 

Around 50% of teachers in charter middle and high schools left their jobs each year over a six-year period studied by UC Berkeley researchers, who released their findings last week. 

Charter schools are independently operated and free from some restrictions that govern traditional schools, including the need to abide by a school system's union contracts. Many charter schools can boast of committed families and enrollment waiting lists. And many produce high test scores compared with nearby traditional schools. 
___ 

"I averaged 70 hours a week of work, no problem," said Joshua Cook, who left a Los Angeles charter school after just three years. "The upside is that when you see positive outcomes, you feel like you are directly connected to them. But working 70- and 80-hour weeks is not sustainable." 
___ 

An English teacher said she joined a charter at age 29 to escape larger class sizes and lack of support in a medium-sized urban school system. She became disillusioned and left, however, because of a lack of promised input into school decisions, an unceasing workload and few job protections. 

And it makes me wonder, are charter schools just another way to bust unions and cut costs? Do they really improve the quality of education?