Tuesday, May 27, 2014

SBA AD NOTES NYC's $4 BILLION SURPLUS

Our union colleagues at the Sergeant's Benevolent Association are emphasizing the city's $4 billion surplus in their new radio ad that recently hit the airwaves. 

Is there any precedent for a union accepting zero percent raises over a two year period, as the UFT is proposing we do, when the city has billions in surplus revenue?

UFT members got no raise from May 2008 -November 2009 in the last contract and we will receive nothing for eighteen months (2011-April 2013) in the new one if it passes. 

How can people even consider voting for this? I don't get it.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

And what about the tax bracket the retro lump sum puts you in?

Anonymous said...

What about the interest free loan we are giving the city?

Anonymous said...

I resent being a member of a nonunion union.

Anonymous said...

The union has turned their backs on the rank and file.

Anonymous said...

Time for the rank and file to turn their backs on the union as the fat cats are growing obese.

Anonymous said...

Anyone recently go for a Pension Consult? I and many like me can't get an appointment. Can anyone answer the first post? Just what exactly IS the tax bracket the enormous retro puts you in?

Anonymous said...

It's true that the proposed contract is flawed. But, that is our deal.
Our alternative would have many, many more flaws...
I voted yes.

James Eterno said...

What's worse than double zeros when the city is flush with cash: triple zeros?

Anonymous said...

I've said it once and I will say it again: This is all about the newbie teachers wanting that 1000 dollar blood money bribe as well as thinking that they could "never become an ATR". I have heard them say this to me over and over again. They have no long term idea of what this contract will mean to them. I would bet anything that this contract would get voted down if it were not for the 1000 bribe. The UFT get the genius award for that slick move.

Anonymous said...

I thought they all wanted to leave. Can they be that short sighted?

Anonymous said...

As far as I am concerned we received 5 years of 0's because of Bloomberg. We are getting 18% salary increase in the next 4 years plus retro . If and ATR is in a vacancy and if they are removed for problematic behavior they may be brought up on 3020a charges and have a one day hearing.So what? I could be brought up anytime by one principal. A longer hearing does not guarantee that you will not be terminated or fined If I am an ATR not in a vacancy the regular Slow process applies correct?

James Eterno said...

That's the whole point Why the different standard? How many people are brought up on charges based on two incidents of problematic behavior? Try none. Please come up with something better than Unity talking points. They are stale.

Anonymous said...

Why is this a Unity talking point? Is it true or not? I was told this was a part of negotiating since neither the UFT nor DOE got want they wanted. Who knows maybe this program will test out the waters. It says its for two years. Maybe during the next negotiation they will try to get this one day hearing for all of us

James Eterno said...

If you think weaker due process is a gain, then try it out for yourself and don't dump it on the rest of us who would rather have as much time as we need to defend ourselves. We are teachers and not guinea pigs. ATR's need more protections because of our isolation and not fewer. Sorry if I am offending you but I feel very passionately about this issue.

James Eterno said...

As for negotiations, when one side sets the lowest pattern in living municipal labor memory and agrees to defer money owed to us because of pattern bargaining for up to 11 years, one needs contractual non monetary gains in return. This is not a gain by any stretch of the imagination.

Anonymous said...

Stale? Different standard for the few ATR's who actually get put in a vacancy and then exhibit problematic behavior in more than one school? Dont like the different standard but I dont think it is the worse thing ever. I know a few people who were charged with 3020a for one or two incidents They made it sound like 4 different things but yea it wasnt a lot.

Anonymous said...

Its definitely not a gain and I respect your passion. Unfortunately most people I have spoken to do not believe the ATR issue is a deal braker and this contract will probaby pass. By the way I would not wish a 3020a on anyone expedited or not.

James Eterno said...

Ever heard about a slippery slope? The UFT has been on one for many years and this contract is just another slide down. If we don't stand up for a segment of our population and allow different due process standards, it is difficult to call us a union.

I am under no illusion that defeating the contract will be easy. The sales job by UFT salesmen has been top flight. People voting yes will probably regret their vote come September when they see how little they have gained monetarily and how they have to deal with the extra PD while nothing of substance has changed on evaluations. As for ATRs, which I will soon be, we will think of ways to fight back.

Anonymous said...

How to decertify a union:

www.unionfacts.com/article/union-member-resources/how-to-decertify-your-union

Alan Ettman said...

Do you realize that we are seeing some money next year? Do you realize that we have to be savvy enough to understand the political pressure the mayor feels from the reformers, the fiscal handiwork that it took to get every penny of retroactivity plus raises in this economy, that our sisters and brothers at 150 other unions also deserve contracts, etc. Everyone wants more, but some of the comments from your most prolific commentator "anonymous" are naive and short sighted.

Mr.Hughesonline said...

I'm confused. On one end, you write that we won't see any raises until 18 months from now-which will be late November 2015. But on the other hand, you direct your readers to a blog you posted earlier this month that breaks down how the raises will be distributed. According to you (and you were present at that May 2 meeting), we will receive 1% raises by May 1 of 2014 and 2015, as well as a 2% retro raise by May 1 of 2015. That's 3 raises *within* 18 months. Please explain. What do you see that I don't?

James Eterno said...

May 19, 2008 was the last raise in the previous contract. It expired October 31, 2009. That is almost six months with no increase. From November 1, 2011 through April 30, 2013 there is no increase in the proposed contract. That is basically two years of zeros. I don't think I said no raise over the next 18 months

Anonymous said...

Consider this scenario...

An ATR is in a school for a few days. At ten minutes to three he is called into the principal's office where is is informed that he isn't working out and will be returned to the pool. Per the instructions of the DOE (don't be naive, the DOE will direct principals to document the problematic behavior the requires a return to the pool) the principal gives him a letter describing "problematic behavior." Perhaps he picked his nose. Perhaps he complained to his colleagues in the teachers lounge that some practices of the school violates the contract and therefore he is fomenting discord among the staff.

School Safety escorts outside.

Repeat at the next school.

3020a comes. He has nobody's name. No witnesses. And almost no time to prepare a defense.

Bye bye Mr. ATR.

Unfortunately, a renegotiation will not get the ATRs better protection, because most teachers don't care and Farina wants us gone.

I'm an ATR. If I leave, I can do so with dignity. If I stay, I can look forward to a kangaroo court and being fined or terminated for mythical "problematic behavior."

Great choice, isn't it?

Mr. C. ATR

Anonymous said...

The issue is UNITY and these young teachers are not totally up to speed. They only see the "money" this contract can and should be improved. Any of us can be an ATR at any time. It has happened before and will happen again. The city has money and we are not the only ones talking about it. Don't be naive.

Mr.Hughesonline said...

James, I don't think it's logical to count the time between May '08 and Oct '09 in your argument. We were under contract during that period. Remember, the big issue that people might be losing sight of in all this is the fact that we've been without a contract for so long. The landscape and culture of education can (and has) change so much in 4 1/2 years, that to have nothing in writing to reflect potential shifts was a major setback. So, finally, we go from no contract and pay raise for 4 1/2 years (sans salary step), to an updated proposal that offers salary raises for 7 out of 9 years, full retro and a $1,000 bonus to cover one of the years that we won't get a salary increase. We may not be fans of Common Core/Danielson, but the reality is, we have to do our job and teach it, until the State-not the union-says otherwise. Now, we get two contractual days out of the week to familiarize ourselves with this curriculum. And speaking of which, administrators *have* to provide said curriculum. How many stories have we heard about schools that have no Common Core-themed materials, but teachers were expected to prepare their students for Common Core-themed exams? It really seems like people are being contrary just for the sake of being contrary.

And I still contend that ATR's are protected under this proposal. 2 principals have to show a pattern of problematic behavior. Operative words: "2", "Pattern", and "Problematic Behavior".

James Eterno said...

We had no raise in the last year and a half of the last contract so it is reasonable to include. Surrender in 2005 didn't work out well for us and it won't work out now. The hard sell from the UFT proved totally wrong and the nearly identical sales pitch today will not have a happy ending either. I hope I am totally wrong on this. Seven out of nine years of raises means two years of zero when the city has a $4 billion surplus. In exchange, weaker due process for ATRs. Pattern of problematic behavior can mean anything. I would like to have the option to have longer than one day to defend myself. I am an ATR in September so this is not an abstract to me.

Adrian Archer said...

You "Vote Yes" guys kill me. A "No" vote and political pressure can get you a better deal next year. Why take nothing now when you can get something next year? If you take this deal, you will be locked into a pay DECREASE until 2020. These raises don't keep up with inflation, your buying power will be less, so these are pay DECREASES. I'm DC 37 and all of my colleagues are shaking our heads. You can't do this. You will kill your union if you vote yes.

Anonymous said...

A weak contract from a weak union leader. Wow! what a surprise! This lousy deal is a direct reflection of Mulgrews inept leadership.
I really wish members would recognize that we could have done so much better with a shrewd, skilled leader with BALLS.(and yes, she could have them as well)
YOU SHOULD BE OUTRAGED AT THIS INSULT!
It's sad that this will pass and I am embarrassed to be a member of the UFT.

Anonymous said...

I will be happy when this passes. And, no I am not a "Unity" member... I am a dues paying teacher to the UFT of which I am proud to be a member of.
And, I voted yes.

Anonymous said...

Not sure how you are reading this contact but there are not 2 years of "zeros". As far as I can tell there is a 4% raise for the 2009-2010 & 2010-2011 school year. $1000 for the 2011-2012 school year, 1% for the 2012-2013 school year, 1% for the 2013-2014 school year, then 1%, 1 1/2%, 2% and 3% over the next four years. We are also getting retro money for the last two school years plus a 2% raise in September. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.

Anonymous said...

To comment 6:31- You are precisely who this deal is crafted for: the financially challenged.

Anonymous said...

MORE= less

Anonymous said...

The intellectually challenged like this deal too.

Anonymous said...

So much B.S. in these new schools I can't take it anymore.....its every where!!!!!! Contract will not change any of this.

Anonymous said...

How come none of these pro contract people ever write about the city's billions of dollars in surplus money? Just wondering why that is conveniently ignored as if it doesn't exist. You guys are the reason we are treated so poorly.

Anonymous said...

So tell me, what's to stop the DOE from ordering principals to excess anyone making over 6 figures-then ordering other principals to write 2 phoney letters leading to termination? Principals jump out of their socks to please upperlings...like the above scenario is unthinkable?

Anonymous said...

Not far fetched at all.

Anonymous said...

That's the way they get rid of the current 2 years of Imeffective ratings before teacher can be terminated. Just,excess, and make 2 false accusations, and teacher is terminated within a few months...voila!

Anonymous said...

Exactly and the Unity gang doesn't want to acknowledge this as they sell us out.

Anonymous said...

I decided 11 years ago to be a teacher. Too bad I chose the profession with a bunch of scarred women. Should have chosen a union where the BROTHERS are strong and stick together, like FDNY, NYPD, or corrections