I sometimes am stunned by how little pull the UFT has with the Department of Education. If teachers are promised per session pay in a posting, the UFT should not have to file a union initiated grievance to get the money.
This is from the latest edition of Gene Mann's The Organizer:
UFT to file grievance over summer training
The UFT is filing a union-initiated grievance over the rate of pay for members participating in enVisionmath curriculum training this summer.
When members registered for the training, the posting indicated they would receive the per-session rate of $51.13 per hour. However, the city Department of Education is now stating that these members will instead receive the staff development rate of $23.30 per hour.
“Members have a right to get what they signed up for,” UFT Secretary LeRoy Barr said, “and we are going to fight to see that they get it.”
The training was open to common branch teachers.
This may be one of the many grievances the DOE knows they will lose but takes it through to arbitration to clog up the process so legitimate grievances are delayed and delayed.
Ummm, the UFT has no "pull" whatsoever with the DOE. If the DOE did in fact violate the advertised pay of these teachers, then anybody has the legal right to step up to defend them. It is not about"pull", it is about abiding to the contract that these teachers signed up for. Can the DOE represent these teachers in the form of a grievance? Yes, they can. However, this is merely representation and not "pull". "Pull" is more aligned to powerful mafia dealings, not the wussified UFT.
ReplyDeleteAll I meant was before Joel Klein defanged the UFT that has continued to this day, a phone call to a well placed Bd of Ed official would stop something like this.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is the UFT never had any pull. However, they did actually do their job a long time ago. You know, THEIR JOB: Things like ensuring the contract is adhered to in every school, going after vindictive admins, staging demonstrations in front of schools when our contract expired, etc. Today the UFT is a company union that could give two shits about the teachers in the trenches.
ReplyDeleteThis is so old. I was a staff developer in the late 90s and got the per session rate in our after school trainings. The teachers in our classes got the half pay training rate. Now if the DOE in its announcement screwed up then they will have to pay I assume.
ReplyDeleteWhat about the implicit bias training. Sill said he doesnt know. Huh? How could the postings differ for the same implicit bias training?
ReplyDeleteAnd still nothing on 12/23.
ReplyDeleteGet over it dude. We're working. Either get on board with a sick out or suck it up and take it like we take everything else.
ReplyDeleteGlad I ain't paying $62 per check anymore.
ReplyDeleteUFT will win. DOE should have settled before grievance.
ReplyDeleteUFT will win. DOE should have settled before grievance.
ReplyDeleteHalf of Teachers Have ‘Seriously Considered’ Quitting in Recent Years, Survey Finds (link: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-08-05-half-of-teachers-have-seriously-considered-quitting-in-recent-years-survey-finds) edsurge.com/news/2019-08-0…
ReplyDeleteWhy should this shock anyone? The teaching profession is disrespected. And the job is a sad, sick joke.
DOE knows they will lose. That is why they do this so much. It clogs up process so legitimate cases have to wait.
ReplyDeleteHow's this one for politics... A principal emailed me asking if I would available for a 15 min phone interview last Saturday. Sure, no problem... interview lasted 45 min. Then invited me to come in on Monday for a demo and debriefing... had nothing but good things to say. She then emails me Tuesday stating that she was highly impressed with my demo and my interactions with the students. She invited me to come in on Wednesday for one last meeting before making her final decision. I met with her, another teacher, a principal from another school (she needed another perspective) and her AP via video chat. The meeting went well and she said she would definitely let me know later that day. I get an email at 11 PM the next day stating "As you know I was and still am very impressed with your demo lesson but am unable to offer you the position at this time." I emailed her back and asked what I could have done better to secure the position (just to see her response). She emailed me back and said she would call me to discuss. She called me to let me know that not getting the position had nothing to do with me or my teaching ability as she was very impressed with my professionalism and lesson. It had to do with the city's and new chancellor's push for cultural equity. She had to take the neighborhood into consideration when making her final decision. That's translated to me as... this is East NY and you're white so... Why did you waste my time then? Why did you waste a 3rd day of my life if you knew you were not going to hire a white teacher?!
ReplyDeleteSorry you went through that 6:13.
ReplyDelete6:13 - I know two people including my principal who as teachers in the 70s went through the same thing at the same school in District 16. The principal wouldn't hire a white teacher no matter what.
ReplyDeleteMaybe if more teachers spent their energy complaining to the union rather than bitching on the DOE FB page, this issue would have been resolved already. So tired of people complaining but never actually trying to fix it.
ReplyDelete6:13,
ReplyDeleteThat’s illegal, unethical and immoral. You can file a EEOC complaint. https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/charge.cfm
You may be able to do anonymously.
UFT is a paper tiger with no cojones whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteThis is a real NOTHING story. The bottom line is
ReplyDeleteThe city may have messed up the particulars of a job description in a posting. The union is calling them on it by initiating a grievance. SO WHAT!!!
They shouldn't have to grieve obvious violations like if a posting says per session, that should be it.
ReplyDeleteCan someone please explain the difference between Daily Training Rate which pays $48.97 per hour and Staff Development Rate which pays $23.30.
ReplyDeleteThanks
Daily Training rate is a stipend you get for the day so you get $48.97 for the whole day. Staff Development rate is $23.30 per hour. Both Stink, you can flip Burgers at McDonalds for $15 an hour no stress.
ReplyDeleteDaily Training rate is a stipend you get for the day so you get $48.97 for the whole day. Staff Development rate is $23.30 per hour. Both Stink, you can flip Burgers at McDonalds for $15 an hour no stress.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the clarification 10:46. I didn’t realize the training rate amount was for the day and had thought the $48.97 was the amount paid per hour.
ReplyDeleteQuestions Regarding Notes in File:
ReplyDelete1. For how many years can a letter remain in file? Ungrieved.
2. Does the Rating Officer have to prove that Teacher was notified of a letter in his file?
3. If Rating Officer claims Teacher refused to sign letter in file? Is this a second write up?
4, What if the Rating Officer just puts a letter in file...and does not notify Teacher, at all?
5. Must the Rating Officer document/prove his license in a Grievance?
Answers:
ReplyDelete1-Letters stay in the file for three years. See contractual Article 21A5
2-If you didn't sign it in a place that says, "I have read this letter and understand a copy will be placed in my file," then it shouldn't be there. See Article 21A1
3-If you refuse to sign a letter, it can be insubordination if you were ordered to sign it by an administrator.
4-If the Principal just puts a letter in the file without notifying the teacher, you have 30 school days after knowing it is in your file to grieve under Article 21A1 and 20. Proper procedures were not adhered to so the letter should not be in the file.
5-I am not sure I get this one but if the argument in a grievance is the principal is unqualified, go ahead and make that case but I don't think you will get far.
Email us at ICEUFT@gmail.com for further clarification. We won't blab unless you want us to.
In reply to #4 a letter was placed in my file.....
ReplyDeleteI was never notified of this.....
Over a a year after I was discontinued...I saw it....
#5 This is very, very important. There are many, many
hell-holes throughout our varied, multicultural system.
In the instant case, District 9 just took a Bilingual Teacher and made him an Acting Principal. The DOE and NYSUT/UFT have jointly obstructed verification/determination of his credentials.
This Rating Officer, Dennis Sanchez was removed from his position for "conduct unbecoming a Teacher"
and, at the time, the Superintendent of District 9 stated he would not be allowed to work as an Administrator again.(I think they lied).
I do believe action was taken against his license for engaging in an illicit relationship with the union delegate during school time at the worksite.
I don't believe he ever held a supervisory license. (The DOE is capable of lying, you know)
ADDITIONALLY, I ask....when the Rating Officer threatens a hostile personnel action...and puts a letter in your file ( or threatens to put a letter in your file)
is the Grievant entitled to union representation?
Still not sure how to fight on 5. 4 grievable. Yes you are entitled to union representation when threatened with a hostile action. Email us if you like.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the qualifications of a Rating Officer.....
ReplyDeleteHow does one take this to the map?????
A Rating Officer comes in....makes a Determination that a Teacher is Unsatisfactory....
In legal practice...a party is entitled to review of the Opposing Counsel's license...
Can you take this "to the map"
In the event that you cannot....please provide the written Rationale....
It makes a mockery of the Grievance/disciplinary process.....if an unlicensed/ unqualified person....can inflict irreparable professional damage upon a Teacher....and not be subject to scrutiny himself....scrutiny which must include review/assessment of his professional license....
What is the email address of this blog?
ReplyDeleteICEUFT@GMAIL.COM
ReplyDeleteIs this upper-case? Is this case sensitive?
ReplyDeleteAgain I am requesting..."What constitutes proof of Orientation"?
ReplyDeleteBurden of the union to define and determine what Orientation is!!!
Burden of the union and the DOE to determine what proof of orientation is!!
On what date...was Advanced implemented...by the DOE? Need to know in the contract where this is stated. It looks like school year 2014.
ReplyDelete