Blogger Chaz says UFT members were"snookered" by this deal and we agree with him. On the other side is UFT Executive Board member NYC Educator who says that UFT members are better off because of this deal. That is debatable as maybe no deal is better than a raw deal.
To further add to the debate, I want to go back to NYC Educator's Minutes of the June Delegate Assembly where he reported UFT President Michael Mulgrew saying this about the cost of the Paid Parental Leave deal:
PPR—We said
we would not let city fleece us. We have done our job quite well on that one.
What will be required is nothing in next round of bargaining. One time
requirement will be extension of 73 days—that’s it. Equals 30 million dollars
and city will pay 51 million a year. We did our jobs well.
Let's go over this statement in detail. First Mulgrew says that we extended the contract by 73 days. If we examine the actual Memorandum of Agreement, we see that the contract is extended by "two months and 13 days." The last time I looked, December and January have 31 days in them so that adds up to 62 days. 62 plus 13 = 75 so it seems like it is 75 days unless December and January were shortened and I didn't know about that. Maybe a month is defined differently in DOE-UFT terms. Those extra two days, if they are in the deal, add up to over a million extra dollars for the city from UFTers. 75 days of delayed raises or 73 for that matter is not a one time requirement as Mulgrew states since all future raises will now start two months and 13 days later. City saves by delaying them for all time.
Mulgrew says our share of the cost is a one time payment of $30 million but that statement does not hold up. The city's Independent Budget Office did an analysis and they concluded the cost to UFT members will be more like $60.3 million.
How did they come up with that number?
First they added up the savings to the city from extending the contract. They used the new higher figures from the June DC 37 raises in their calculation. The DC37 increase is about 2% a year for their new contract which because of pattern bargaining (one city union settles on a raise with the city and other unions are then stuck with the same percentage increases), the IBO assumes the UFT will get the same raises. Mulgrew and the city worked with lower numbers from our pathetic 2014 contract when calculating the cost of Paid Parental Leave.
UFT apologists say Mulgrew had no way of knowing what the DC 37 raises would be. This is very hard to believe as the UFT along with the other unions in the Municipal Labor Committee had to agree to healthcare givebacks for the next round of collective bargaining before DC 37 could get to their contract settlement. The UFT is a major player in the MLC. Since the DC 37 contract was announced a week after the UFT Paid Parental Leave deal, I think we can safely conclude Mulgrew had a pretty good idea what DC 37's raises would be.
In addition, Mulgrew in his remarks on the cost of Paid Parental Leave does not count an additional $14.8 million in pension savings to the $45.5 million cost of deferred raises that the city also factors in as part of their savings. Parents on leave will not be accruing time toward their pension or Cumulative Absence Reserve days. That saves the city money. Adding up the savings means we are paying $60.3 million according to IBO, nowhere near the $30 million Mulgrew told Delegates. Dividing that $60.3 million by 100,000 UFT members (approximate number of UFTers working in schools: teachers, paras, etc...) means each member is paying roughly $603 for Paid Parental Leave. To summarize, Mulgrew undersold the cost by $30 million. The cost is double what he claimed and it recurs. If we divide that number by the approximately 100,000 UFTers working in schools, his undercount comes to about $300 a member. That is significant money.
Mulgrew is accurate in saying the city is paying $51 million ($50.8 million to be precise) to the UFT Welfare Fund, who will administer the Parental Leave benefit. IBO figured that the city would only need to pay UFT members $45.6 million for the benefit because it is quite restrictive. The city and Welfare Fund will only need $45.6 million but they are collecting $60.3 million from UFT members.
Therefore, the city pockets an extra $9.5 million (about $95 per UFT member) and the UFT Welfare Fund will have a surplus of $5.2 million (about $52 per member) according to IBO. I gave the Welfare Fund a pass in last week's analysis because even at my most cynical, I could not believe the UFT would suddenly find that they need an extra $5.2 million to administer Paid Parental Leave so surely they would give the money back to the members. Others aren't so sure the UFT will return the money to the members and have told me so.
To put it all very simply, if the IBO's analysis is accurate, and I have no reason to believe it is way off, UFT members are paying around $603 per member for Paid Parental Leave and that is an overpayment of about $147 per person.
I hope our elected non-Unity Caucus High School Executive Board representatives in September will ask about what happens to this projected surplus.
Here is the cost breakdown summary from IBO:
$45.5 million to the city from UFTers from deferred raises.
$14.8 million from UFTers to the city in pension savings.
$60.3 million total from UFTers for the cost of the Paid Parental Leave program.
$45.6 million needed to go from the city to the UFT Welfare Fund to parents to pay for Paid Parental Leave.
$50.8 million is what is actually going to the UFT Welfare Fund to pay for PPL.
Surpluses:
$9.5 million city surplus
$5.2 million UFT Welfare Fund Surplus
Mulgrew told the Delegates according to NYC Educator that "we would not let the city fleece us." The numbers are in from an independent source and yes we got fleeced.
What I cannot get a grip around is how DC 37 got the much more expansive Paid Family Leave Benefit that was part of the state law in the private sector at a much lower cost per member than what the UFT negotiated. Yes they are only receiving 50% of salary and only up to a certain level for their benefit whereas the UFT Welfare Fund is paying 100% of salary for Paid Parental Leave (however no pension, CAR accumulation or time accumulation). DC 37's benefit will go up to 67% in three years and the benefit can be used for 8 weeks now, not just six, and that will expand to 12 weeks by 2021. I couldn't find a requirement that they have to return to work for a year or have to pay the money back like the UFT has either.
More importantly, DC 37's Paid Family Leave can be used not just for parenting but also to take care of a sick relative or if a relative is deployed in the military. The cost is a small payroll deduction of a maximum of $85 per year which comes out to less than $2 a week. I think there are approximately 125,000 active DC 37 members so if we multiply that number by $85, it equals a total of $10,625,000. That is much, much, much less than our $60.3 million. Multiply theirs by 5 and you won't get $60.3 million and that assumes they all make maximum which isn't the case. IBO estimates DC 37 will be cost neutral for the city. How is that possible if UFT members are paying so much more for what seems like a benefit that is limited to fewer possible people? Perhaps they are assuming many more teachers or paras are going to get pregnant or adopt a baby because of our new benefit.
This blog is only partially Monday morning quarterbacking here with 20-20 hindsight since we had a plan to win the state's Paid Family Leave plan back in February that UFT obviously didn't use. We also have to point out again the city's financial picture has never been better.
I also don't believe the DC 37 Paid Family Leave is nearly as good as the UUP (SUNY teachers) deal where they boast that it is free to the membership and included in their contract from the more financially challenged New York State government along with annual 2% raises. The UFT should address Paid Family Leave/Paid Parental Leave in bargaining now as our contract is due in February. Then again, with Mulgrew at the helm, he might come up with something where we pay even more and then misinform us that we are paying next to nothing.
I agree with our critics who say Paid Family Leave should be a universal benefit. In the real world, however, UFTers are now paying for a limited Paid Parental Leave benefit and in addition we are giving the city a tip/tax for the benefit. I just do not feel UFT members should give the city even one extra dime for providing a Paid Parental Leave or Paid Family Leave benefit we all should have.
51 comments:
And then you have the nerve to tell us to keep paying dues for this shit. Because we need a union. A union which is pushing us backwards. And of course, as far as this deal, what else is new?
We keep getting fucked, teachers are too stupid to realize, and we are now paying over $60 per check. We are damn fools. Principals do whatever they want, we are tipped up every day, have tons of extra work, have 6 observations instead of 2, lost the 8.25 tda, got 1.3% raises over 8 years, the list goes on and on.
I am betting a shitload of teachers got pregnant over this summer just to take this "paid" leave.
As the uft, on twitter is celebrating that teachers are already in school getting classrooms ready, for free.
As medical cost keeps going up for us as well. Yes, it is great having it, but understand we are paying more. That is a loss, in addition to what is stated above.
Eight out of ten female teachers under 40 are getting knocked up as close to Labor Day as possible to maximize their time away from the hellholes we call schools. I don’t blame them. Good luck ATRs - you are all royally fucked with this paid parental leave. Tell Mike Sill to go fuck himself. Glad I retired.
I heard the female teachers from my school are having a big orgy this weekend to ensure they get preggers before school starts. Mulgrew is a pimp for sure.
Pimpin ain’t easy, I got you morons paid parental leave. Now all of you shut the fuck and let me get back to my vacation. I know who you are 742 and no one with eyesight would touch the female teachers in your school. They’ve all contacted Paul Egan for a donation. I never knew he was so popular.
We get it, you don’t like it.
Get over it.
I’m not a Mulgrew apologist, or unity, but the deal is done.
You are feeding the anti-union trolls.
I don’t appreciate the very anti-women comments that keep popping up. It’s rude and insulting.
Stop being such an angry man.
All I hear from you now is, “Get off my lawn."
I decided that under 40 years old, I will be quitting. Just cant take it.
I hate to say it, 7:59, but those comments are not anti-women. Every single woman of child-bearing age in my school is either pregnant, or considering getting pregnant- that's how much they despise our work environment.
These comments are totally not meant to be anti-woman. In fact, I heard many teachers somewhat jokingly mention that it might be time to have another kid literally the day after the news broke over paid maternity leave. And like the Anno 8:06 wrote, there are a ton of teachers at my school who are currently pregnant or are planning on getting pregnant soon. This paid leave is what is getting that momentum going.
Parental leave wasn’t done for women or families or for any other reason other than Janus. It was meant as a desperate attempt to mitigate any possible ill effects that that decision would have. Did it? No. The numerous people that were angry and hate the union, still feel the same way. There are a lot of frustrated people that would like to opt out, but now have to wait until June to have the payments stopped. It doesn't make sense to drop out and still make payments, so I guess the UFT wins again. Mulgrew, Weingarten, Eagan,Sill and the whole lot are despicable.
I wasnt aware that payments wouldnt be stopped immediately.
Maybe that is why so few opted out, they need to wait till next june to stop paying.
How do we opt out?
Where does it state a restriction to opt out?
You can opt out but the dues will still be taken out. Call HR to confirm.
What? How can they keep taking dues if you opt out?
Its in the fine print. Have to opt out june 15-june 30 for next school year.
Wow, what a scam by our union to restrict us from pulling dues!
Amen
If the UFT really wants to mitigate Janus, they should get us 2 observations like the rest of NYS. Unlike what many of the posters are writing, the fact is that not every single teacher in the UFT wants to get pregnant. Many teachers already had kids and are not planning on having more kids. Also, there are plenty of teachers who never want kids of their own. Lastly, there are tons of teachers who will leave NYC, quit, or get fired before they will ever get pregnant while teaching in the DOE. However, every single teacher pretty much hates having excessive observations. As such, these extra observations effect all of us and it should be a priority for the UFT to do the sane thing which is to simply push the UFT to get us 2 observations.
I don’t care about 2 observations and no one I know cares about it. I’m an ATR and all my friends are as well. I support 2 observations because of people like you that want what the rest of the state has. Since 2005 NYC has hired 5-10000 newbies a year to replace veteran teachers that have been turned into ATRs and that have retired. These newbies are overwhelming young and women. They are a rapidly growing soon to be majority base for the UFT, and I support parental leave. This was all about mitigating Janus, but those young teachers will be some of the first to opt out next June. Those that are constantly shit on by the UFT and DOE will stay out of fear - including those with the rallying cry of 2 observations and the UFT knows it. Otherwise there would have been 2 observations and parental leave.
Stop this ridiculousness about two observations! If you are doing your job, have a quality lesson plan and are making the effort to work, it does not matter if you have two or thirty observations. Have you ever been to an office or other job? You are seen and thus evaluated doing your job every single day. There is also the fact that they will never make two observations the maximum allowed, it would be the minimum.
If you are so afraid to be observed, and you’re not an ATR traveling through hell, there is something very wrong with what goes on in your room.
I have a lot of issues with our union, the pay, decline in benefits, safety and comfort at work, lack of protection and support, etc. but two observations won’t change a damn thing. At my school we are observed by multiple supervisors on a rotating basis, the more observers and multiple observations has made it much more fair and we find they are more reflective of what goes on in our classrooms.
I remember the past, close the door and as long as no one complains you can do what you want, the world has changed and it’s probably for the better in this case. With that said, get me my S/U back and I’d be happy!
Question for 7:34: Do you think instruction is better in NYC compared to the rest of the state because NYC teachers are observed more often than teachers in other districts?
I say the answer is no.
More observations are detrimental to instruction here in NYC and just create a toxic classroom work environment when misused by too many administrators.
Danielson has been weaponized by many administrators. Getting us to the state law mandated minimum of two observations per year would help many teachers. There are also plenty of administrators who don't want to waste their time with so many pointless observations. Observations are generally not helpful toward improving teaching.
I know for me personally, I often changed what I was doing if observed as it wasn't just me and the kids. It was the administrator, (since 2013) the stupid Danielson rubric, the kids and me. I taught to the stupid rubric sometimes. Students usually liked me so they would put on a show and ask how they did after the administrator left but we all knew it was not how we really operated. Observations were something to get over with.
I don't know how you can argue that it is probably change for the better with more observations. If you are doing nothing while you are supposed to be teaching, the kids will let you know quickly and they talk, talk, talk outside the classroom so administration and your colleagues will know too.
As for the comments from last night on women trying to get pregnant so they can get six weeks paid leave, I hope you were just joking. Nobody in their right mind would make a life changing decision to have and raise a child based on a few short weeks off, even if they are paid.
James it’s the truth - I’ve met several young women that were on the fence about having children and were putting off the decision as long as possible. Paid parental leave is now going to facilitate a baby boom.
Paraphrasing the overwhelming majority of comments on this blog
Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine,
woe is me, woe is me, woe is me, woe is me, woe is me, woe is me,
when can i opt out, how do i opt out, when can i opt out, how can i opt out
i opted out today, i opted out yesterday, I opted out a week ago, I'm opting out tomorrow, I've opted out so often on this blog I am wealthy
mulgrew sucks, mulgrew sucks, mulgrew sucks, mulgrew sucks,
whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, whine
Six weeks paid leave is not a difference maker on whether or not to have a child. Maybe they were being sarcastic.
If we organized that anger into a real union 10:47, we would be a real force for positive change in the NYC schools.
So i guess our students, with no money and no medical insurance, as teens, take tons of time thinking about if it is the right time to get pregnant.
The problem is some of these kids don't think rationally about getting pregnant.
Oh, is that the reason?
I’m not opting out or complaining. I’m collecting my 119K to babysit as an ATR and have bought a new bottle to pee in.
NYC Educator is a traitor. If he really cared about teachers he'd be showing us how to opt out inastead of encourage pregnatnt teachers.
NYC Educator and I are pro union activists who happen to have a disagreement on this issue. We both are not in the business of trying to tell people to be anti-union or how to be anti-union. This blog has repeatedly declared itself pro-union. Nobody is encouraging pregnant teachers.
When my wife and I were planning to have our 2nd child, and I was still not back with the DOE, we did make an effort to time it when my wife would have health insurance. (My first was born on the day after the last day of school, which was also nice as I had all summer with him We probably waited about 3 months longer than we would have. So it's not a difference maker of whether or not to have a child but I think it does have an effect on the timing. I would not be at all surprised to see a mini-baby boomlet in the Spring. Also I know many female teachers who would time their kids to be born around summer vacation so they did not have to deplete their CARs to be home with the babies. If I recall correctly they will still have to use days, but if it's not as much of a dent in CAR days, you may see more in the way of 6th classes and ATR assignments during the school year.
I don't mind paying for others having this benefit but like James I don't like how our Union capitulates and makes terrible deals. The City knew the UFT was desperate for good news with Janus coming and took advantage. I don't blame the City for that, I blame the Union.
Wait until UFT'ers retire. UFT only reimburses you $760 towards drug. PSCCuny full funds retirees drugs. Even city cops get drug coverage BUT NOT UFT>
I do not want to sound like an miser, but I have a quick point: Does anybody think there should be a monetary payout of a certain amount to any teacher who DOES NOT have kids throughout say a 25 year career in the DOE? Maybe the DOE could pay back half of whatever maternity days that would be in the contract at the time that the teacher retires? I bring this up because it looks like that we will all be paying into this in one form or another as long as it is around. We get to cash out half of our sick days so why can't we cash out half of paid maternity leave if we never end up using it?
Not happening, so why ask? Might as well ask for all the retro now, or since the city is doing so well, raise the 1% raises, or get 8.25% tda back.
What a terrible deal this is, especially for those of us who aren;'t haveing kids. Why should we have to pay for everyone else? Thanks a lot UFT. I'm opting out as soon as I figure out how. what a terrible union. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Why would anyone be a teacher, or stay in this job? Desperate for medical insurance? In NYC, the salary isnt that great. I will be informing my principal next week that I plan to quit ina couple months, the pension aint worth it, and I am way underage to leave the job. Dont want to die from this, or spend the rest of my life doing something I hate. i will pay my own medical.
My school had a 30% teacher turnover rate from June till now, and that was with zero retirements.
God, how I miss the "good old days" when I started teaching in the early 90's. Took a couple of years to get tenure and my principal literally never stepped in my room again. Closed the door and taught in peace. UFT had our backs and got us some decent contracts with retro right up front. Schools did not have any restoritive justice and actually suspended kids. Teachers hung out with one another and were not competing to see who was the hottest shit in the building. Most staff worked in their school for most of their career and could transfer easily before the 2005 contract. Well, those days sure as hell are over now. Sad. Sad indeed.
As above, the job sucks.
Some of you should just leave teaching.
I’m not looking forward to going back because I like to sleeping. I like my students for the most part and when I close my door and get to teach, it is wonderful, sometimes even magical. Yes, there are times I count years until I hit milestones like 30 years and then age 55 so I can retire (and sometimes during the school year-days), but it is rarely about teaching. (I have less than 10 years left.) I could live happily if I never saw any school administrator, again. They are awful for the most part. The best part of being observed is knowing they probably won’t be coming back for a while. But, I still like my job when I’m allowed to do it the way I want. There is still nothing better when a kid finally understands something they found difficult or they get a 90+ on a test for the first time and/or even for some, pass a test for the first time.
Good luck with the new year.
Does that ever honestly happen with all the grade fraud? My high school students cant write a proper sentence.
If 10:03 is talking to me 9:57, yes it happens. I can’t teach the unwilling, but if a student is unskilled and wants to learn, for the most part, I can help them improve. Of course the administration throw in students who shouldn’t be in the class and it is awful for the kids and for me. I won’t pass them. The last time I was pressured to pass more people I handed my administrator a copy of my grade book and attendance and told them to pick the students I should pass and to put it in writing in an email and I would do as they wish. Never heard a peep about it.
Nice post @ 9:57. I hope you and everyone else have a wonderful school year.
9:57 PM You sound like you really have your head on straight. Cherish the rare moments of solitude and success. Retirement will come soon enough. Remember, The days go slowly, but the years go fast Have a great year
Post a Comment