MULGREW PUTS A STOP TO VIRTUALLY ANY ACCOUNTABILITY AT DA (Updated Monday)

 I was sent a copy of the proposed Robert's Rules of Order changes for the electronic Delegate Assembly that will take place on Wednesday. The Dear Leader, Michael Mulgrew and his Unity Caucus, have made a decree that all but the most rudimentary dissent will not be tolerated.

In the name of lack of technology, the UFT has placed severe limits on Robert's Rules of Order for the Delegates Assembly (see below). One of these is no Points of Order. If someone can't raise a Point of Order, then how can there be any accountability? For those who are not familiar with Points of Order, according to Robert's Rules on page 249, "It is the right of every member who notices a breach of the rules to insist on their enforcement." There's basically no accountability if the rules cannot be enforced by the members of a legislative body.

I used to raise Points of Order repeatedly because Mulgrew almost never followed the principle of even-handed debate where there is a speaker for something, followed by a speaker against, followed by a speaker for and then one against. Randi Weingarten used to try to claim that she didn't know which side speakers she called on were going to support to which I told her to please not insult my intelligence as Unity Caucus members support Randi/Mulgrew's resolutions or they will get kicked out of the caucus and lose their union perks.

As for the limits on technology, do you think anyone is really going to buy this one? Am I to understand the UFT does not have the technical capabilities of responding in real-time to ensure that rules are followed? For example, Delegate Johnson notices that the Dear Leader Mulgrew puts through three speakers in a row in favor of the latest Unity proposal to kiss Governor Cuomo's butt or something like that. Delegate Johnson presses 0 and an "operator" answers. Delegate Johnson says, "Point of Order." The operator immediately puts Johnson through. I think in 2020 that technology exists to do this and I gather the UFT can afford it with the money they charge for dues.

This is another one of the new rules:

Motions from Delegates that are directed to the agenda must have been submitted in advance of the meeting.  They will be addressed in the order received

Unity has their own resolutions disposed of beforehand by the Executive Board so they can set the agenda so that all of theirs will be acted on. They can clog the agenda up and not give anyone else a chance to get a motion in. My guess is anything coming through like a motion to have Chapters walk out of unsafe buildings will be screened and will never see the light of day.

How about this new rule?

Operators will ask whether the individual would like to speak for or against the resolution, so that the operators may present speakers on both sides of the debate, if necessary.  Individuals must identify which resolution they want to address and may also include whether they will be speaking for or against the resolution. 

Watch how the usual Unity favorites will be called on to speak during the meeting.

If you are interested in how a deliberative body is supposed to work, try watching the United Kingdom's House of Commons. Since retirement, I've become somewhat of an addict.

Watch the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson (Conservative Party) have to be held accountable with the leader of the Labour Party opposition, Keir Starmer, asking six questions. The next biggest party's leader, Ian Blackford from the Scottish National Party, gets to ask two.

This is a mostly remote meeting wth social distancing. Watch this pre-COVID-19 UK PMQ's from last October to see real fireworks in a deliberative body. You can see what I got addicted to after retiring while my kids were at school before I found some part-time employment.  Watch at about the 34-minute mark when a Member of Parliament asks the Prime Minister about lower class size for her son in UK schools.

When I started at the DA and UFT Executive Board in the 1990s, no we were not the House of Commons but there was a lively spirit and some true debate at the DA and Executive Board. They are absent these days and we are the worst for that in my opinion.

Could you imagine the UFT Delegates Assembly following a UK style accountability system? Someone after three months could have asked the Dear Leader Mulgrew about the UFT not pulling members out of infected school buildings in the middle of March. When will that question finally be asked? How about someone asking about us walking out of school buildings that are not safe when we return?


Proposed Robert's Rules of Order Changes

Due to the current coronavirus crisis prohibiting an in-person Delegate Assembly we have to make some changes to our process as a result of technological limitations.  These changes include suspending certain rules and substituting the following in their place. 

The Parliamentarian has reviewed these proposed rule changes and have advised that they comply with Robert’s Rules of Order.  The Parliamentarian will be present at the meeting. 

Procedures that will not be possible due to technology limitations
Amendments to resolutions
Point of order
Point of information
Point of personal privilege
Motion to extend time for debate
All other motions to interrupt debate
Questions

The question period will be 15 minutes. Although this is a change from our last remote Delegate Assembly, this rule is consistent with how a typical in-person Delegate Assembly would be conducted.

Motions

Motions from Delegates that are directed to the agenda must have been submitted in advance of the meeting.  They will be addressed in the order received.

All motions will be automatically deemed seconded.

If the motion is for the current month’s agenda, the individual making the motion will have the opportunity to read the motion but will not be permitted to motivate it.

If the motion is for the next month’s agenda, the individual making the motion will have the opportunity to read the motion and to motivate it. 

During the meeting the Chair will ask members to call in if they want to speak for or against a motion directed towards next month’s agenda. Individuals should address and whether they will be speaking for or against the motion 

For motions directed to next month’s agenda, there will be a maximum of one speaker for and one speaker against.  Speakers will be selected randomly from those who have dialed in.
The motion period will be 10 minutes, as it is during in-person Delegate Assembly meetings.  There will be no extension of time for debate.

Resolutions

All resolutions will be submitted and sent out in advance of the meeting.  Due to the limitations in technology, amendments to the resolutions cannot be permitted.  A resolution will either be approved in its entirety, as drafted, or defeated.

The individual putting forth the resolution will have the opportunity to read and motivate the resolution.

During the meeting, the Chair will ask members to call in if they want to speak for or against a resolution.  Operators will ask whether the individual would like to speak for or against the resolution, so that the operators may present speakers on both sides of the debate, if necessary.  Individuals must identify which resolution they want to address and may also include whether they will be speaking for or against the resolution.

For each resolution, there will be a maximum of 5 speakers. Each speaker will be given 2 minutes to speak.  After a maximum of 5 speakers have had a chance to speak, there will be an automatic calling of the question on each resolution. Speakers will be selected randomly, seeking to include voices both for and against a resolution if necessary.

We will be unable to extend time for debate.

 Voting 
Voting will be done via telephone poll.

Voting lines will be open for 1 minute on each vote.

The Chair or timekeeper will announce when voting on a particular motion or resolution opens, will explain which number to press for ‘yay’ and which number to press for ‘nay’.  The Chair or timekeeper will announce when there is 30 seconds left in the vote and will then announce when the vote closes.

Upon the closing of the vote, the timekeeper will state the percentage of the body that voted ‘yay’ and the percentage of the body that voted ‘nay’.  The Chair will then announce whether the motion or resolution passes or not.

Update:

UFT Executive Board member Mike Schirtzer spoke in favor of democracy at the UFT Executive Board this evening. He was defeated of course but he made a valiant effort.

Here is what he said:

*We are in unchartered waters right now.
Facing the challenges and threats our union has ever faced.
*When you’re in unknown and murky waters, the only thing to do is to set the compass to true north and to proceed with caution.
*Lucky for us, we’re the United Federation of Teachers. and our “true north” has always been Democracy.
*My presence on Executive Board is living proof that our union is indeed Democratic even when it’s challenging.
*Thank God we have the UFT to help guide us through this difficult time. We are in this together, but let’s not sacrifice one bit of what we do, or how we do it.
We know amendments and points of orders are messy and time-consuming.
Let’s keep that compass set to true North as we stick to the democratic rules we have in place now-despite their many challenges- then when we get to the other side of this crisis, in much better shape and stronger than any institution out there.
We believe the answer to motions, points of order and amendments is texting or emailing the Parliamentarian as a clearinghouse to bring it the floor, that’s how we keep democracy secure in our union.

The truth is The Dear Leader Mulgrew and his Unity followers will not liberalize the rules until they are sure they have complete control over the Delegates. It is about control and power for them more than anything sadly. (That's James talking, not Mike.)