Everyone knows why she did it, but without the proper context, its hard to argue against such things as continuing pay for teachers who are "going to be laid off," or what it might actually cost us in the end.  A look at whether or not teachers might be laid off has been done before by Michael Van Beek in his Series for the Mackinac Center:

"Finally, union contracts dictate that school districts notify employees of potential layoffs prior to the end of the school year. As a result, many more "just in case" pink slips are issued than the actual number of layoffs. Not surprisingly, the warnings get more attention than their later non-execution. In fact, the actual student-to-employee ratio of 8-to-1 has remained unchanged over the last 10 years."

In other words the mewling by the MEA generally serves to win its its political game more than the practical ends, as the perennial situation has remained the same for a decade.