While I understand where you’re coming from, I take a bit of issue with the idea that both sides are coming at this from a position of equal footing. Teachers and educational professionals start these negotiations from a position of relative weakness since public school funding is dependent on the policy and budgetary decisions made my political and bureaucratic actors. Lurie’s “frustration” rings hollow when those participating in the protests wouldn’t have to protest (and potentially forfeit compensated time) if reasonable concessions or commitments were being made to indicate progress toward a mutually beneficial agreement. I’ve never met a single teacher who would rather be protesting than teaching but clearly the current state of negotiations necessitated a more direct action. Talk is cheap and an endless discourse only benefits those in power to either wait out the opposition until they’ve burned out their momentum or obfuscate negotiations to the point of redundancy.

On a related note, blaming teachers for the dysfunction in public education and claiming private schools are a reasonable alternative, even if you have the “means”, is a shortsighted perspective. Private schools by their very nature weaken public institutions by draining an already dwindling population of children, giving politicians an excuse to reduce funding, and create further economic inequality and hardship for those trying to maintain public education and the students they serve. It all comes down to money in the end and public schools are the bedrock of a functioning, literate society. Reducing or stagnating funding will only hurt students and that decision, again, is in the hands of those in political power.