UFT Solidarity have retained famous "Teacher Lawyer" Bryan Glass to go to court to attempt to obtain an injunction to allow teachers to work remotely if they so desire.
The Solidarity case has many strong, valid arguments. They do not mention the Family First Coronavirus Response Act which I think is a part of this but I am not a lawyer. This is part of what we printed last week from the Department of Labor's Frequently Asked Questions on this law that allows many workers to telework from home.
17. When am I able to telework under the FFCRA?
You may telework when your employer permits or allows you to perform work while you are at home or at a location other than your normal workplace. Telework is work for which normal wages must be paid and is not compensated under the paid leave provisions of the FFCRA.
That would solve the childcare dilemma for UFTers who have kids that are at home while they are working. It looks to me, that if your child is home from school several days a week, you have a federal legal right to be at home with them and get paid too as long as you telework. There is some flexibility here for employers but by the DOE already allowing people who have certain medical conditions to work from home, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the DOE to discriminate against UFTers who are parents. Again, I am no lawyer.
Everyone should also note that the Detroit Federation of Teachers did not have to go on strike after all. 90% voted to authorize an illegal strike.
Some of what the teachers agreed to taken from the Detroit Free Press:
Under a new deal with the Detroit Public Schools Community District, the Detroit Federation of Teachers negotiated the following terms:
The right of teachers to choose to teach online or in person through Nov. 9
A $750 bonus for each marking period for teachers who teach in classrooms instead of online
The right for teachers to bring their own school-age children to their classrooms in lieu of childcare
Note that the option to work remotely was the first gain they mention.
The UFT Solidarity press release:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 1, 2020
Contact:
Lydia Howrilka (917) 705-5699
Lydia.howrilka@live.com
NEW YORK: Five educators in NYC public schools have filed an injunction against the City of New York and Chancellor Richard Carranza stating that the City’s system of permitting certain educators with the opportunity to file for and be granted a medical accommodation as “arbitrary.” These educators are calling for emergency injunctive relief “to protect Petitioners from Respondents’ arbitrary and capricious policies regarding eligibility for remote work promulgated by the NYCDOE which jeopardizes their health and safety due to COVID-19.”
Alarmed at what they have concluded is a dangerous and unsustainable safety plan, public school educators affiliated with the second largest caucus of the United Federation of Teachers have begun efforts that they hope will lead the largest school district in the nation delay a return to in-person instruction “until the City of New York has determined it safe to conduct indoor activities and the State of NY has removed all bans on large group events, as per Executive Order No. 202.3 filed by Governor Cuomo from March 12, 2020.” The Solidarity Caucus helped fundraise for this litigation through small donations from other UFT members and community members using GoFundMe. At present the caucus has fundraised over $5700. They have retained Bryan Glass, a well-known and respected labor and education attorney in the New York region.
The litigation, filed September 1, 2020 following an internal review of de Blasio’s plan and the UFT’s three-point approach to reopening schools, came after a long period of reflection and discussion with it’s membership who were largely alarmed with the rejection of remote learning and a gradual phase-in of in-person classes after the UFT lost 75 educators over the Spring.
After examining the city’s safety plan and recalling the track record of city officials thus far, the union caucus has concluded that too many students, families and staff will become sick or die if they did nothing additional to protect teachers who were prevented the opportunity to work from home. Attorney Bryan Glass sent UFT President Michael Mulgrew the following email on August 31,
As you may know, our firm has represented many teachers, including many of your members in recent years. We wanted to extend to you the courtesy of letting you know that we are shortly filing an application for injunctive relief for several educators who do not qualify for the DOE medical accommodations, and on behalf of others similarly situated.
The NYC Department of Education used the categories designated by the CDC as “high-risk” categories for contracting coronavirus. However, many of these categories are arbitrary and capricious and do not protect teachers who do not fall within the guidelines, but should also be allowed to work remotely. Five UFT members who live and work in different boroughs and schools allege the following in their petition:
In contrast, many employees, including Petitioners and others similarly situated, would not qualify for these medical accommodations for permission to work remotely for the upcoming school year and can only take a leave of absence using their own leave time to avoid being taken off payroll by the NYCDOE if they refuse to report at the beginning of the 2020-21 school year. These educators have a Hobson’s choice between their paycheck/livelihood and the health and safety of themselves and their loved ones.
As Petitioner Shannon Corwin states in the petition, “[Her] school campus has severe issues regarding ventilation. Many offices in the school are internal and have no windows to allow for fresh air. . . The air quality in the staircases is terrible. Many teachers have complained that they have difficulty breathing when they use the stairs.”
According to Petitioner Umang Desai, most students from Brooklyn Technical High School live in “multi-generational households with elderly relatives.” Many of their parents work as essential or health care workers as well. Since Brooklyn Technical High School has over 5,900 students, even with multiple cohorts, there is a fear that students will still contract coronavirus from public transit, another student, or a faculty member and get others sick.
Other petitioners are guardians of children who have been signed up for remote-only instruction. Many of them are deeply concerned about the expense and logistics of child-care and keeping their families safe from being exposed to the virus. Other petitioners live with partners or take care of elderly parents who suffer from conditions that, if exposed to coronavirus, could jeopardize their lives.
Solidarity Caucus member and former UFT presidential candidate Lydia Howrilka told caucus members, “We cannot trust Mayor De Blasio and Chancellor Carranza to protect our students, our colleagues, and all our families. Governor Cuomo warned that in-person classes at this stage would be disastrous and lead to a resurgence of coronavirus in the midst of flu season. We must not be complacent and expect the union leadership which is largely removed from the rank-and-file member’s experiences of teaching in poorly maintained buildings to protect us. While I am disappointed, the 3,600 UFT members who support us must know now that this is another example of a pattern of leadership that simply does not make the grade . It is time for us to act. If the union leadership fails to take a strong stand against the Mayor and the Chancellor, calling for a work based action and not allowing members to return to the schools until the ban of large gatherings is lifted, UFT Solidarity must be this model of democratic union leadership.”
31 comments:
I think the ultimate argument against returning to the classroom is the government's ban on large public gatherings but approval of schools meeting in person.
Wow, RESPECT! Looks like someone's been listening after all.
While I disagree with the whole "shelter-in-place" mindset, what the Solidarity caucus has done here is proof positive that the Janus decision needs to be brought to full fruition, where a teacher instead of having to choose between a sh-t union or no union, could instead choose to spend his money (as they did with crowdfunding nearly $6K to pay for Glass) on the Union that he feels will best represent him. The "sole bargaining" status Unity has bought for itself from the Legislature has made it a lazy monopoly that does not respond to its membership. A true choice (not just union or no union) would leave us with better representation through competition.
What about teachers who do not have children? If we win this argument in court, would any teacher have the option of working from home simply for the reason that they don't feel safe?
How does a member join Solidarity caucus? Thank you.
Reading into what the Union is doing with delaying the vote it's obvious to me that a few things are happening here.
First, I don't know if they truly know if they have a majority of the members wanting to strike. Even if it was 60/40 to strike that is not overwhelmingly in favor of striking. I think you would have to reach 2/3's to truly say membership backs it. They obviously would be better off if it's a 90/10 type vote but that's not happening. That's why the vote won't get to us.
Second, the increase working with the city to improve safety measures is a sign that they don't believe the have a solid case for a safety strike. If they felt the city wasn't close to making schools acceptably safe then we wouldn't even be discussing this 7 days before staff returns. They may be successful however in closing some schools, a partial win.
Third, The UFTs testing demand, while would seem to make sense, is not effective with current testing procedures. Unless you have an effective rapid test, a test 10 days before is always useless especially when you deal with young people who will all most likely be asymptomatic if infected. We won't have those results until after school started. It's a flawed plan the mayor is right to reject.
Fourth, I think the union has been reading about people resigning from the union and threatening the cross. Delaying the vote gives those members less opportunity to notify the union by mail and fears of union fines could keep them in line. (of course, it's an illegal strike and the union would not being able to do anything besides dealing with it "in house")
Finally, the union is realizing that they may in fact be going at this alone, not just from other unions but from within. And voting for a strike without membership authorization could be a big mistake. Many people have said if they lose $1,000 a day they will simply get it back by withholding dues for a year or two. No one else has pledged to strike with us.
I am not sure if it's anti-union and fear of the Taylor Law or just stress and being fed up with the pandemic but there is a distaste for striking and longing for normality that is also a factor. But the union went with this strategy hoping to hit back but it was more of a swing and miss.
We should be advancing the strike.
Why?
Members should know that all strategies are risky and that we have, in NY, a weak union, crippled in part, as Martin Malin's analysis explains (posted here previously), by the Taylor Law, and that a strike, even the threat of a strike, that reliance on the right to strike is superior to other forms of collective-bargaining dispute resolutions.
We should have, all public employees should have a statutory right to strike; there should be no requirement of fact-finding as a precondition to a lawful strike, and injunctions should be issued rarely, if ever.
We do have strengths and have made some progress on the Taylor.
For example, the “probation penalty” (probation for one year) against tenured teachers who strike has been eliminated.
Why trust this mayor? The layoffs are a threat that the mayor simply can't agree to remove.
How will he pay for it?
They've had ample time to get the money by borrowing it, issuing debt. He is now saying he needs $5 billion not $10 billion. Where did he get the other $5 billion? He thinks he going to get it from workers.
Someone mentioned a relative that works for the MTA. Here is what the MTA did. THe went directly to the Federal Reserve. Read it here---->
https://www.bondbuyer.com/news/new-york-mta-sells-second-large-deal-to-federal-reserve
This is a big deal. They saved huge dollars by issuing debt directly to the Fed at super low rates.
Why aren't we pushing this at Cuomo?
The Ralph Nader plan to Tax stock transfers? Crickets from the unions. Why?
We need huge dollars, and we can't count on Biden.
A strike threat is the best position for us. We should advance it.
We should also be screaming about gender inequity in the proposed layoffs. We are still 75% female and the Pink Recession is hitting us disproportionately. Females are losing jobs, are the targets of layoffs. Females are also picking up the pandemic induced increase child care, rearing and educating of children at home. The mayor, his wife, the chancellor love to point out the inequalities of policies, we should stick this right in their faces.
Don't give up the fight!
This would be wonderful. It would avoid the need to strike. The entire UFT should be supporting Solidarity instead of being ideologically divisive and autocratic.
UFT TOWNHALL WEDNESDAY 3 30
Get the latest official union report to the membership
Yes, teachers shouldn't use their own children as a reason to get out of going to work. That's not fair to the parentless ones.
haha we will pay you 700 a marking period to risk your life. Do not get me wrong, I would gladly take it since going in anyways. Whatever scheme UFT is planning besides the scenes with Dibalsio, I swear on my kids if MUlgrew takes our retro away somehow, if I find him I will drop him.
Whyyyyyyyyy is it soooo hard to just push school back to October 1st, least bullshit to buy 1 month to finish making schools "safer."
At least the tier VI and newbees can see what a shit hole the DOE really is early on. 18 years in I am chest high to leave and def want to finish 20th year.
What about starting late (October) in exchange for giving up July this year? I would do that.
http://nycdoenuts.blogspot.com/2020/09/uftdoe-deal-reached-yesterday-around.html?m=1
Outrageous. Enough for a wildcat strike? Once it sinks into the rank and file, it could/should be. The dishonesty from Mulgrew and his Unity toadies is, as always, breathtaking in its implications. The UFT is not a union.
Where is the link to donate to Go Fund Me to Soldarity
7:47: " Many people have said if they lose $1,000 a day they will simply get it back by withholding dues for a year or two."
I've heard this from one of my members. Where did you get this info (link please, if possible)?
Are you saying that a strikebreaker will get fined by the UFT?
(Not that I'd be a scab)
My district rep glossed over the fact that the contract would be voided, retro and medical could be lost. In a separate chapter meeting, at least 1 person said she couldn't afford to lose a paycheck and another said she is retiring soon and won't ruin her final average annual salary.
And here’s the situation in Los Angeles:
www.utla.net/news/utla-members-ratify-ta-95-yes
The state Taylor Law, enacted in 1967, outlaws strikes. It has its theatrical aspects, but it also comes with sharp fangs. It allows for the jailing of striking union leaders — the theater — but also for heavy fines and loss of civil-service job tenure for individual strikers — the fangs.
Plus, it permits the cancellation of automatic union-dues check-off, a doomsday weapon of sorts. Mulgrew likely would enjoy a few days behind bars — his martyrdom thereby certified — but having a huge hole blown in the revenue stream that underwrites his $300,000 salary and lush expense account would be another matter altogether.
Pushing people into a wildcat strike is unfair. You’re asking people to risk their careers without an officially sanctioned strike. I would never participate.
Mulgrew is on presser right now with Mayor.
TeachNY, You already declared you wouldn't participate in a union sanctioned strike so it is no great surprise you would not engage in a wildcat action.
Something was just agreed to
Per the mayor, remote learning for all students on 9/16-18.
First day of blended learning on 9/21.
Teachers' prep from 9/8-9/18.
UFT, CSA and DC 37 agreed to this.
Unions heads looked beaten down and sheepish.
Per the mayor, mandatory testing will be done monthly.
No Strike... but what have we lost now?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/01/nyregion/schools-open-coronavirus-nyc.html?referringSource=articleShare
This entire school reopening with all teachers is playing out like a scene from the Titanic as DeBlasio and Carranza have chosen to go directly into the iceberg. But let’s get those aged 65+ along with those with medical issues onto the safety of lifeboats and out of harms way. All the others—too bad— stay aboard—as your health is less at risk —so report in your buildings. Just hope and pray that you can stay out of danger and that your building and your life doesn’t sink.
New start date: 9/21. 11 more days is going to make that much of a difference? Any idea when teachers report?
http://nycdoenuts.blogspot.com/2020/09/uftdoe-deal-reached-yesterday-around.html?m=1
If you read this, see the uft had a deal yesterday, held it over our head without telling us, and then made the agreement with no real improvement...As mulgrew is threatening a war, he already had an agreement, and then hours later is sitting next to mayor and chancellor saying how great they are and how safe it is...
If you dont thonk the uft is a bunch of scumbags, I cant help you.
Uftsolidarity.org/membership
It's not just about those who have children but those who were denied accommodations and don't feel safe going back in. It's arbitrary and capricious that those who smoke and have damaged lungs can work remotely the whole year, but those who are healthy and live with elderly and are susceptible cannot be approved.
UFT TOWNHALL WEDNESDAY 3 30
Get the facts not the rants of many who are not even members
Post a Comment