Sunday, October 23, 2005


  • The right to grieve letters in our file to have unfair/inaccurate material removed immediately. (Currently letters can't be used against us in dismissal proceedings after three years and we can attach responses to letters in our file.)

  • The right to grieve unfair/inaccurate observation reports.

  • The right to do professional activities during our professional period.

  • The right to say no to hall patrols, potty patrols, and cafeteria duty.

  • The right to maintain our current teaching load; no 37.5 minute small group extra teaching period at the end of the day.

  • The right to transfer based on our seniority.

  • The right to be part of SBO Committees made up of majority teachers that determine who transfers into our schools, not principals exclusively deciding.

  • The right to due process so we can't be suspended without pay based on an allegation of misconduct.

  • The right to a full and fair hearing if we are charged with lateness/absence issues.

  • The right not to turn over confidential medical information to the DOE.

  • The right to a vacant position if we are excessed.

  • The right to widest placement choices possible if our school is closed or reorganized.

  • The right to any in license position instead of worrying about becoming an Absent Teacher Reserve if our school is closed or reorganized.

  • The right to a full summer vacation. (Many surrounding districts have school years fixed by contract at 183 days. If we vote yes, we will have a 190 day school year, the longest in the Metropolitan area.)

  • The right to one less work day in June for teachers in Brooklyn and Queens.

  • The right to current longevity and step increases without givebacks.

  • The right to have our pay based on our education and experience, not some merit pay system called lead teacher where a committee with a majority of administrators decides who will get a raise based on whatever criteria they want.

  • The right to grieve selection of our professional assignment to an independent arbitrator, not a city employee at the Office of Labor Relations.

  • The right to ask the state for 55/25 pension that will be paid for by the city, not us.

  • The right to push for a no layoff agreement like we had in the last two Contracts.

  • The right to full breaks for secretaries.

  • The right to demand real raises, not time for money swaps.

Contract supporters admit the contract is terrible. Be not afraid. Rejection does not mean strike. The law requires good faith bargaining.



Anonymous said...

Just suppose that your wrong with all these theories? What then? Will the members of ICE publically apologize for all the things they wrote or said? Slander is still a crime in America and there my be reprocussions in you actions.

Be care for what you wish or say. It might hurt you instead or helping you.

Anonymous said...

To anoymous-

Which theory is wrong?

Richard Skibins said...

The "theories" are facts. In 2002 our "theories" were dismissed, but now you can all see that they have come true. More rights are being taken away with each Weingarten contract. VOTE NO!

BTW, does anyone have a link to the painting of Weingarten and Bloomberg sitting in bed with their PJ's on? It was the highlight of Friday's rally!

Anonymous said...

Jeff, shouldn't you post that somewhere on edwize, even if it is relegated to comment section? Here, you are preaching to the choir

Anonymous said...

To Anon:
Sounds like a threat to me. Suppose ICE is correct. Are you willing to settle for less than what you are worth in the holy name of the UFT? Will the UFT apologize for lying, cajoling and manipulating its members into a contract that everyone knows is bogus from the get go? Will the UFT apologize for going after members by calling them "anti-union"? Why isn't this entire contract being explained so that new members can make a sound decision? Yes, slander is still a crime, and so are threats. Be careful what YOU ask for. You also may want to spell check your posts.

k-bnakedlady said...

i very proudly voted NO this morning. i refuse to let a meager amount of money (that i have to work even harder for) sway my vote or my opinion. This contract is bogus--anyone who thinks differently is selfish and sadly mistaken. This union is supposed to speak for ALL teachers--this contract does not.

Anonymous said...

I read about what they did to you in today's paper. Sue the bastards!

Anonymous said...

Let the next headline of the New York Teacher read: UFT contracts get put on ice. Rock on, Jeff, you are a great leader and a potential UFT president. My entire school is voting NO. Take a chance for something better!
Vote NO.

Anonymous said...

A copy of the painting at the rally (done by an elementary school chapter leader) referred to will be scanned and posted in the next week or so.

Kindermuse said...

I am so disheatened - a few teachers who were going to vote not decided to vote YES -- saying, "whatever: there is nothing we can do anyway..."

The apathy kills me

Anonymous said...

Keep encouraging people to vote no.

Frogmugsy said...

Samething happened to me. I was like WTF...? That kind of apathy kills me too! What am I suppose to think? You DON'T have a brain? What am I suppose to say? Are you really that stupid? My jaw dropped. I was proud to vote "no" and I tell them I did it in "defiance of tyranny." It's really just a cool line in Braveheart that I wanted to use. But I guess apropros.

Anonymous said...


Can you answer this question? In the contract memo of agreement, #16 states that the union agreed to withdraw certain cases which were in front of PERB. They were cases iniatiated by the Union because there is a U in front of them. Does you or anyone else know the details of these cases.

By the way, VOTE NO!

ferrychik said...

I fear it doesn't look good for us no voters. We only had 100 at the rally (the photos on the ICE site don't lie, guys; we didn't get several hundred). I'm worried. If we can only get 100 people out, it doesn't look like we got the support.When push comes to shove, people will vote yes just like they wouldn't show up. I fear Kindermuse is right about apathy.

Richard Skibins said...


At 5:00 I stood in one place and did a head count as the marchers passed. I counted 230 protesters. Turnout was slow at first, peaked, and began to wane by about 5:30. Considering that there was no coverage in Weingarten's mouthpiece or Bloomberg's controlled press, it was decent.

Anonymous said...

I was at the rally. There were over 200 people there and as some were leaving, others were entering.

Anonymous said...

We have some video of the rally which will be up at the ICE web site in a week or so. You can count them yourselves but the line looks pretty long and I know of numerous people who came early and left and others who got there at 5 or later. One thing for sure, everyone had a great time.

Anonymous said...

O.K. So we manage to "ice" the contract. Great! Whoopee! We won!!! Now what?

Does anyone here have an answer for that?

What if I'm the Mayor, right, and I say, like, "Wow...whassup with you? I don't feel like talkin bout this for another 4 years."

Then what? Huh?

Anonymous said...

The law requires good faith negotiations.

Anonymous said...

As I said...what do you do then? Yes, the law requires good faith negotiations and it took 3 years to get Bloomberg to talk last time. What are you thinking?

Anonymous said...

If we turn it down, we'll have all of our rights and we will have sent a strong message that we are angry. It won't take three or four years to re-negotiate.

The votes are all in; stop the fear mongering and look at history. In 1995 we went back to the table with a tough mayor and we were able to get a better deal. Lame duck second term executives have less, not more, power. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that our hand will be strengthened if we turned it down.

Anonymous said...

This is 2005, not 1995 and the Mayor will be Bloomberg. If you were reading the NY Times on Friday, you would've seen an article that made a good argument for the fact that the city does not really have the budget to support the raises it has already promised, never mind the teacher's contract that we may, or may not pass on Friday. If you honestly think you'll get anything near 15% plus retro pay plus no give backs, you are truly missing a few screws.

There will be no "new" negotiations for quite some time and you can be "angry" all you like. No one will really care. What are you going to do? Strike? I doubt it. If you were brave enough to have gone on strike it would've happened a while ago.

Read my new contract will even be discussed for a year or two and after that you'll happily accept 4% and all of the give backs in this contract. You'll be the first one to sell out the incoming teachers by agreeing to much lower salaries for them. ICE_UFT is nothing but hot air.

Anonymous said...

To anoymous above-

Same garbage and scare tactics we heard in 1995. The sky will fall if it's turned down. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Let's hope we can all find out who's right and that the no vote succeeds. Bloomberg is no tougher than Giuliani.

Anonymous said...

As you will see on the 3rd, this is all moot as the contract will pass, albeit by a smaller margin than originally anticipated. What would have happened if...will no longer have any relevance. Will Ice-UFT?

Anonymous said...

What's going on with Jeff Kaufman? The blurbs in the papers have been so vague. Are there no new posts due to the situation?

jameseterno said...

Everyone is waiting for the vote results. Jeff is fine.

Anonymous said...

Ha Ha Ha Ha! I'm getting my retro and my raise and guess what? I don't even have to put in the extra time! In your face suckers! This contract is going through! It's a done deal!

Anonymous said...

To the last anonymous-

I guess you are a full time Unity UFT employee. Glad to see you read this stuff.

Where's Your Spine! said...

What Idiot Believes the City Has No Money? The only Difference is that we work more and give up rights for the $$$. But they still are giving us the $$$.
But If you Voted YES, your not to bright anyway.....

Anonymous said...

Hey Jeff,
Why no comment?

NY POST 11/1

The city is being slapped with an improper-labor-practice charge for allegedly ousting a teacher from his school because of his union activity, The Post has learned.

Teachers union president Randi Weingarten said the union is filing the charge with a state labor board on behalf of Jeff Kaufman, an outspoken critic of the Education Department who was kicked out of his school at Rikers Island this month.

The Education Department said he was removed because he ran afoul of Correction Department regulations. Kaufman, a union leader at Island Academy, claims the city wanted to silence him.

In addition to leading the charge for teachers to reject the city's recent contract offer, Kaufman last year testified to the City Council Education Committee that the city fails to transfer juvenile offenders to regular schools upon their release from jail.

Education officials at the time conceded that the system was inadequate.

"There's no doubt in my mind that this move was done to prevent my members from being represented and to silence me," Kaufman said.

Anonymous said...

Oh how right you guys were!