Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Mulgrew Admits He'll Leave Critical Issues to Others in Proposed Contract

In an amazing admission our UFT president was quoted in a Wall Street Journal article yesterday that a critical issue, the definition of "problematic behavior" will be left to arbitrators to discern. Illusory promises and predictions for our precious health benefits, the future of the proposed"no-contract" PROSE schools, merit pay for a new class of teachers and the impact of inflation on 9 years of earned pay all demonstrate that this proposal must be defeated.

Mulgrew told the Wall Street Journal, "[that] a panel of hearing officers would "solidify the definition" of problematic behavior. "If someone says a teacher is screaming in the hallway, that's a problem," he said. "If you do that once, you should be written up. If you do that again you should go through an expedited hearing process."

This quote clearly shows how disconnected the proposers are. 

First, the statement assumes the truth of the allegations. A fundamental part of due process and 3020-a hearings is that charged teachers have the absolute right to cross-examine witnesses against them and present a defense if they wish. Our due process system has, until now, withstood the test of time and while some ed deformers might argue it does not work the bottom line is that based on the number of teachers charged and teachers returned to teaching and the settlements entered into by all sides it is clear that this right is taken seriously and mere allegations must be clearly proven before they become the basis for disciplinary action.

Secondly, the example used by our anti-tenure president, even if true, would probably not lead to disciplinary action for teachers working and maintaining personal relationships with their supervisors. If the teacher displayed psychotic behavior (I assume Mulgrew did not mean the teacher was trying to stop a fight or call attention to serious problem) we would hope that the teacher would be referred for proper medical attention. Instead Mulgrew further maintains and supports the ed deformer myth that ATRs are mentally ill people who should be terminated.

Progressive discipline is the hallmark to good labor relations. With 80,000 teachers we would expect some problems (including whatever "problematic behavior" turns out to be) but to strip away some of our most basic protections is outrageous and must be stopped.

Send these alleged negotiators back to the table to get a real contract without give-backs or illusory promises!



38 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just vote NO! It isn't difficult!

Anonymous said...

How can you vote on a contract you have not seen?

Where is the contract document?

In this UFT article:

http://www.uft.org/news/retiring-june-30-if-contract-ratified

"Pending ratification, the contract provides that members who retire on or before June 30, 2014, will receive payments in full for the retroactive raises in one lump sum. Members who retire on or after July 1, 2014, will be paid the retroactive money on the same schedule as that of in-service members: beginning Oct. 1, 2015, and ending Oct. 1, 2020. Your pension calculations will include all of your retroactive raises when you retire."

It is bizarre that the UFT has not released this document. It is also somewhat pathetic that no one has demanded to see it

Over and over....the contract, the contract, the contract?????

Anonymous said...

Time to pack your bags Mulgrew.....back to the woodshop with you!

Anonymous said...

With all sincerity, I am sincerely concerned with Mulgrews mental state. How could the leader of our union draft such a dangerous contract to ATRs, and let others (the DOE) interpret the intent.

Hey Mike, the contract is not designed to be The Constitution. Unless it's explicit, Principals will twist it around.

Vote NO on the contract, kick Mulgrew to the curb!

Michael Fiorillo said...

Mulgrew's comment is very revealing, as it shows the off-hand disregard - the most charitable interpretation - for the teachers he is paid handsomely to represent.

That a so-called union leader can't be bothered to insist that clear language, based on legal precedent, be used when trying to fire someone, shows that he either doesn't care about the membership, or is on the side of the boss.

ed notes online said...

I vote side of the boss - but let's not personalize this -- Unity Caucus machine comes down on side of boss no matter who is in charge. When we had districts, many of them were in cahoots with the UFT at the local level.

Anonymous said...

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2014/05/8545228/de-blasio-pledges-4b-reduce-school-overcrowding

Please see the story above. The Mayor will spend over 4 billion to reduce class sizes and get rid of trailers!

VOTE YES TO THE CONTRACT!!

Anonymous said...

Talking trash about the union president's mental state is such garbage. Please don't lower yourselves to that. If you don't like the contract, fine. BUT, that's below the belt and childlike behavior. Is that what MORE is all about? Sad.

Try to focus on the big fact that Bloomberg is finally out. This is a good contract and should be voted in, solidly.

Anonymous said...

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/05/a-letter-to-new-york-citys-school-teachers/

Please make this into a new topic.

Anonymous said...

I really hope that MORE can grow into a powerful opposition to the corrupt Unity Machine. It is our only hope for survival as teachers.

MORE needs to continue building a following to challenge these crooks in 2016.

Boss Tweed's corrupt rein eventually ended, we must be hopeful that Unity's rein can also end.

Anonymous said...

MORE, you have a typo (at least one...). Reign is spelled as such.

Anonymous said...

It is unbelievable that Mulgrew admits this stuff so blatantly. The UFT leadership does not even pretend that they are defending you. It is a sick joke.

Anonymous said...

http://online.wsj.com/articles/de-blasios-union-payback-1399844905

Why don't you read the full Wall Street journal article, above. The anti new contract, anti Mulgrew, anti union party- MORE turns everything backwards.

Vote yes to the contract.

Anonymous said...

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-

hall/2014/05/8545228/de-blasio-pledges-4b-reduce-school-overcrowding

Please see the story above. The Mayor will spend over 4 billion to reduce class sizes and get rid of trailers!

VOTE YES TO THE CONTRACT!!

Anonymous said...

Anyone that votes yes to this contract is selling out their union brothers and sisters. There is no reason why ATRs should be treated with less respect and afforded less job protections than anyone else.

Mulgrew and the Unity Caucus are the quintessesntial anti union party. They ignore the rank and file. They stifle dissent. They are in collusion with the ed deformers. They are undermining the teaching profession.

Vote no to this terrible contract.

Anonymous said...

VOTE YES!
-Or, wait around for the next "Bloomberg" to become mayor. Eva? Maybe you'll be happier with the contract offerings then?

Anonymous said...

is this a fair summary of question, so far:

1) why did my union leadership create the opportunity to eliminate contractual union protections in 200 public schools (albeit with 65% support of a chapter)?


2) why did my union leadership create a separate, and far lesser, set of due process protections for one group of members (atrs)?


3) why, after so many years of fighting against it, has my union leadership agreed to merit pay (under the woeful guise of a "career ladder" for certain teachers; btw, where does the "ladder" lead to--an administrative position?)?


4) why has my union leadership not specified where the billions of $s of "health savings" will come from? what will happen in the future if those savings can not be found?


5) why has my union leadership broken the pattern in pattern bargaining and allowed its members to have "future retroactive pay increases" when other unions received the 4-4 years ago?


6) why has my union leadership agreed to "increases" that do not keep up with the rate of inflation in nyc (especially in the future when inflation will likely be much higher)?


7) why has my union leadership not published the full contract (only a moa) to allow membership time to review and debate it?


8) will my union leadership agree that members can defer their union dues (or at least the increases) until 2020? we promise we will pay ya!

Anonymous said...

If you vote no what then do you want to do? Our last contract expired October, 2009. The bargaining table has just closed. It will not re-open (if it does) until after the other 150 unions negotiate their raises and packages. Guess when that might be... 2016, 7, 8? What will we ask for then? How will the ATR situation be resolved at that time? If we do not sign a contract the ATR pool may grow and grow. Danielson will not change. Had fun this year? Paperwork will increase. No oversight. Will we (the union) demand retro from 2009-2018 to be payable in 2030? Would we even have one leg to stand on to be "entitled" to that? And, why might you think De Blasio will even come back to bargain a new contract? We've worked without a contract for five years, let's make it eight years, ten years...? We can not legally strike. Do you want a strike? If yes, what are you willing to call a strike for? More money? More rights? Better healthcare? Less paperwork? A career path? ATR's are currently being hired in schools across the five boroughs, and their salaries are coming out of central, not the individual schools budget. If you think that by turning down this proposed contract is a great idea, think seriously about what the next steps might be-- like a chess game. If you vote no as your move now, then what might the city's next move be? Oh right, they are committed to playing 150 other games first.

Anonymous said...

Vote no. With this contract and the lack of support from our pathetic union leadership, in a few years there won't be any experienced teachers left. Remember anyone can become an ATR.

It is a lame excuse for Unity Caucus to tell us that this is the best we could do. They have never tried to mobilize the membership. They do nothing to organize the members. It is a ridiculous top down union. Loyalty oaths don't encourage open discussion or debate.

Anonymous said...

It is a lame excuse for people to say that we should ratify it because we haven't had a contract in years.

This contract in worse than no contract. Anyone who votes yes, be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Also why give the corrupt Unity Caucus hacks what they want which is to continue to collude with the management and sell out the membership.

Anonymous said...

Here is another example of how Mulgrew is unqualified to be the head of the UFT. Putting language in a contract that will end teachers careers, that is so vague and open to interpretation,is just plain stupid. This guy is a disaster. Thank you Randi Weingarten for pushing this clown on us.

Anonymous said...

http://www.uft.org/files/attachments/secure/teacher-schedule-2009-2018.pdf

This is good contract with good benefits! With no give backs. De Blasio is also spending $4B to reduce class sizes and get rid of trailers.

Please view the link above for the proposed (if voted up) Teachers salary schedule.
Vote Yes for the contract!

Dinesh gir said...

Lol n Troll Network with the Name of Lols Gag where you can find Videos, Gif Images, Troll Images, Prank Peoples, Funny Peoples, funny planet, funny facts, funny cartoons, funny movies pics, iphone funny, funny jokes, Prank Images, Fail Pictures, Epic Pictures, Lols and Gags.
LolsGag.Blogspot.Com

Anonymous said...

Please don't forget if the unions cannot save the city these BILLIONS of dollars that we will then be forced to pay a percentage of our health benefits. I'm guessing that's where the 2% of salary over $60k memo came from.

Sure, in the grand scheme of things it's not the end of the world. Long Island teachers pay some of their benefits, but they also make about $40,000 more than NYC teachers do. Their per session is also bases on their salary the same way normal OT is paid. So it's not uncommon for them to make over $200k in a year.

Anonymous said...


For those of you that are voting for the contract, recognize it has not yet been published!!!!! No one has seen a draft!!!

We truly have no idea what's in it, except for the very nebulous statements from Unity shills.

Vote NO and survive.

Anonymous said...

Just remember,

Randi (Unity) baited us with a good raise, agreed to mayoral control, and created the ATR.

Mulgrew (Unity) baits us with a pittance of raise, promotes an expedited 3020A against ATRs without asking for a binding definition of "unprofessional behavior", and will not divulge the contents of the final contract until AFTER its voted on.

There is only one sensible vote....NO!!!

Anonymous said...

new slogan...
MORE=less

Anonymous said...

BTW- Mr. Eterno, your comments to the news media make all teachers appear to be greedy slobs. You do not speak for all teachers.
The Daily News and Post however appreciate your support.

Anonymous said...

Does anybody know if it is legal for them to deprive us of the retro pay if we choose to quit? Its work we already completed. How could they make us stay on in order to get that money from 2009-2014?

Anonymous said...

Would love to know the answer to that also

Anonymous said...

Is it even legal to delay salary payment by up to 11 years into the future for work that you have already done? I mean, if the UFT was negotiating a loan so that the city can pay the teachers, then call it a loan to the city and decide on a reasonable interest rate.

Anonymous said...

Compare it to TWU. Our contract sucks.

Anonymous said...

Have you no self respect? Vote no and get our dignity back.

Anonymous said...

We can do better. Look at transit settlement.

Anonymous said...

It is not greed to want what other city workers got five years ago before 2020. Vote No

Anonymous said...

That is what it is: a loan. You want interest? That is so nineties. We love Bill and Carmen. Happy to help our fair city. Who cares if you have bills to pay? Teachers are good citizens.

Anonymous said...

So sad, Mr. Eterno that you remove comments from this board that you disagree with.
And you were crying on the delegates floor that you didn't have enough debate time? Who are you kidding?

MORE=less

Anonymous said...

Why are the unity hacks not discussing the fact that anyone who resigns before retirement will not receive ANY retroactive pay,even if they worked those years in question.The contract stipulates that this retroactive pay is only for in service members and retirees. For example, if a teacher needs to resign for health reasons they will receive no retroactive pay. If they have an ailing parent or spouse who needs medical attention outside of the New York area and need to relocate,they will receive no retroactive pay. If their spouse accepts a job in another part of the country and they need to relocate they will receive no retroactive pay. On this provision alone, A "NO" vote is unquestionably the only possibility.