UFT PRESIDENT INVOLVED IN CREATING BLENDED LEARNING PLAN HE NOW CRITICIZES SO WHAT'S NEXT?

The NY Times had an article the other day called: Teachers are Wary of Returning to Class and Online Instruction Too.

This is a national story but I am going to concentrate on the New York portion where UFT President Michael Mulgrew is quoted.

“I would not say that being a teachers’ union leader is a job most people would want to have at this moment,” said Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers in New York City, the largest local teachers’ union in the country.

Later on:

New York City, the nation’s largest district, is one of the few big systems in the country planning to reopen schools even part time this fall. Mr. Mulgrew, the local teachers’ union leader, helped officials settle on an approach that would allow children to report to classrooms one to three times per week.

But in the weeks since the plan was unveiled, Mr. Trump’s push to reopen classrooms has magnified growing alarm among educators about returning to work, and some have threatened to stage a sick-out.

In a town hall with members last week, Mr. Mulgrew threw the plan he helped create into disarray, telling teachers he does not currently believe it is safe for schools to reopen physically in September, absent a major funding influx to pay for more nurses and upgraded air filtration systems.

“I am preparing to do whatever we need to do if we think the schools are not safe and the city disagrees with us,” Mr. Mulgrew said on the call.

City officials said they were caught off guard when Mr. Mulgrew backed away from reopening, in part because the city had already agreed to a number of safety measures, including requiring masks and social distancing in the classroom, and to allow teachers over 65 and those with pre-existing conditions to work remotely.

Let's look at where we are now. We know that Michael Mulgrew was on the Mayor's Advisory Council on reopening schools. We now learn from the Times and other sources that the city basically agreed to what the UFT asked for with regard to masks and social distancing in the classroom. Apparently, Mulgrew appeared satisfied with what the city had done which is why the city was caught off guard when Mulgrew backed away from buildings reopening. 

I gather that when the UFT President went back to his own people, he got an earful about how the rank and file understands perfectly well how these safety measures cannot be properly implemented in most school buildings. Mulgrew was put in a bind where he had to choose between supporting his rank and file or his DOE partners. To the astonishment of many, he made the right call on Friday in his latest email. This was especially surprising because it came only three days after he sent out a concessionary email that was particularly weak.

My educated guess is that rank and file pressure is working. Mulgrew understands much of the membership is angry about what happened in March when schools stayed open too long and we paid a heavy price. Nobody wants to see anything close to a repeat in the fall even if only 1/3 of students are in buildings.

At the height of the pandemic in NYC, Mulgrew would only go as far as threatening a lawsuit. It was too little, too late. He never urged members to stay out of COVID-19 infected buildings. He allowed members to attend three days of useless in-person staff development from March 17-19. 75 school-based DOE employees lost their lives from COVID-19 along with a dozen School Safety Agents. As we stated on several occasions and it is worth repeating, even Mulgrew concedes that logic would dictate that some were infected at work. 

In Friday's email to members, Mulgrew took a 180° turn in his tone compared to Tuesday by sounding like a tough labor leader. Here is the most important part of Friday's email:

It's the Department of Education's job to keep us safe, and it’s the union’s job to make sure the DOE does it the right way. That’s why we are fighting for your health and safety each and every day. We will not allow UFT members and our students to be put in danger in unsafe schools.

We don't think most buildings will be safe in the fall. In the best of times, DOE protocols and mandates are, shall we say, loosely adhered to. I don't see that suddenly changing now. Will fighting for your safety mean UFT lawsuits to shut down individual schools on a case-by-case basis for a limited period of time or a wide ranging safety strike-sickout? I would not even call it a strike as UFTers would be more than willing to work from home. I think I know Mulgrew's answer but I also believe it is the rank and file, not the UFT President, who are in the driver's seat. If only all of you understood this.