Friday, September 25, 2020

THE LATEST NEW AND IMPROVED UFT-DOE AGREEMENT

Dear ______,

I appreciate your patience and perseverance as we push through these tough initial weeks of the school year. We reached an agreement today with the Department of Education that resolves outstanding issues that have been a legitimate source of frustration for many of you.

More discretion to work remotely: The DOE will be instructing principals that all UFT-represented employees in all job titles who have no on-site duties or responsibilities have the option to work remotely. This applies to UFT members who have full days of remote responsibilities as well as UFT members with on-site assignments who have work that can be done remotely when no students are assigned to be in the school building. This policy will keep us safer and reduce the traffic on overextended school Wi-Fi networks.

Supervisors may require UFT employees to remain on site on an as-needed basis only.

New protection for vulnerable family members: To the extent possible and as soon as practicable, UFT members who are the primary caregivers of family members in their household who have underlying medical conditions that put them at higher risk of COVID-19 complications as set forth by the Centers for Disease Control guidelines will now get priority for any remote positions not filled by staff with medical accommodations.

Other highlights of the new agreement:

●Per session work can be done remotely, and retention rights will be protected.

●All parent-teacher conferences will be conducted remotely this school year.

●The DOE must consult with the UFT before changing the working conditions for itinerant employees who are working remotely or at one school.

●Teacher programs that violate the DOE-UFT agreement on schedules and class size must be changed unless the school chapter agrees to the program as is through a school-based option (SBO) vote. In certain cases, the superintendent and the UFT district representative, or the borough rep and the executive superintendent, may help principals and chapter leaders find common ground on these issues. Live streaming is an individual's choice and should not be included in any SBO proposal.

This new DOE-UFT agreement also incorporates our prior agreements (on instructional programs, class size, itinerant employees, paraprofessionals, speech teachers and occupational and physical therapists) so they are all enforceable as part of this Memorandum of Agreement.

The full agreement

The UFT's FAQ:











 



55 comments:

Anonymous said...

Notice again, they use the term uft members in some spots. I'm not starting an opt out conversation, just, as per furloughs, not sure of meaning.

Anonymous said...

Can they work out partial remote days?3 days every other week, I would only be needed for lunch coverage and maybe that can be worked out

Anonymous said...

Woooooow! I'm wondering if the Solidarity lawsuit had any impact on this agreement. This should have been the agreement beginning on 9/8/20. Mulgrew must have realized there was about to be serious boil over.

Sunsettz said...

Unless I'm really misreading this, I call cynical bullshit of the worst sort on this Friday news dump by Mulgrew and co. They got their two weeks of free cleaning and guinea pig duty out of the UFT workforce and now -- and only now -- that that's done, they announce what sounds like a compassionate and reasonable change, but one that in fact only applies to very few lucky souls.

The whole point of the crazy hybrid model is to keep buildings opened with full staff every day, even if it's just for a tiny number of students. How are admin, already short staffed as they are, supposed to be sending non-accommodated teachers home? Who are all of these teachers who are not needed by their principal for any in-person work for entire days of the week? It doesn't add up or make sense, except as another really sleazy PR effort by UFT to make it seem as if (1) they have done something and (2) give a shit about the safety of teachers, neither of which is even close to true.

Anonymous said...

So does this mean if you're grades 6-12 and we don't get students until Thursday, we can stay home Tues and Wed next week without getting permission from the principal? Also, I think they would need the remote teachers for coverages when school is in session.

Anonymous said...

Where’s the “unity” in having already arbitrarily-assigned in-building remote teachers getting to work from home while the rest of us have to continue to assume all of the risk? Is there hazard pay for us that are stuck in the buildings? The tensions were already high between staff that are in buildings vs those who are remote and don’t see kids in person or those with accommodations. Allowing this just furthers the argument that it is not safe and should either all be remote or at the very minimum include hazard pay. Preference now being given to those with at-risk Family at home? Assignments already have been made and we need to question the timing of this. The Friday before kids show up after school hours? It’s just not right, unified, or equitable. Divide people and keep your power. That’s what the politicians do and it seems Mulgrew is no different. Haves and have-nots.

Anonymous said...

Mulgrew did say during town hall meeting in the summer that they were negotiating accommodations for those that take care/live with vulnerable family members. The lawsuit may have accelerated the process to reach this agreement.

TeachNY said...

People have to stop with the “it’s not fair!”
stuff. The new actions are more than fair. If people are upset or fearful the option to take a leave is always there.

Anonymous said...

If I was one of the few having to go in everyday, I would be furious.

Unitymustgo! said...

My concern is over the SBO language. Agreeing to change class size? What the heck is that? There's only one reason for that: TO INCREASE CLASS SIZE. Why would we do that? I can hear the calls going out to Principals already to pressure CL's to run SBO's and fix their biggest problem. I could absolutely see my weak CL cave, and my weak co-workers crack under the pressure from Administration to vote to increase class sizes. ME I'M A HELL NO VOTE. So what happens to me if an increased class size SBO is bullied through?? Sounds incredibly divisive to me.

Anonymous said...

This is a house of cards. I say one more month of this experiment and it will all be remote. It's an embarassment! All for a political point. But, what point? All teachers will soon be remote "caring for a family member", or, on accommodations of their own. Who will be with the "blended" students? Take a look around, all the teachers covering in person classrooms are soon going to be subs from CUNY and other places, like folks who had fingerprints done a few years ago and are now unemployed. Blink and you can kiss our jobs goodbye..

Anonymous said...

My neighbor is a principal and he hasn't even heard of this agreement! How pathetic is this system?

Anonymous said...

LOL.

Chalkbeat New York
@ChalkbeatNY

“I am ready to quit,” one principal said of the Friday night agreement between the city and teachers union

Anonymous said...

LOL.

Our story's now updated. Mark Cannizarro, head of the principals union: “To do this at the 11th hour is unacceptable,” he said. “Unfortunately, we’re getting all too used to that.”

Sunsettz said...

Can someone please tell me roughly how many teachers this actually applies to? It is being presented as if there are lots of non-accommodated teachers who have been assigned a fully remote teaching schedule, which is news to me.

How is it possible that admin has simultaneously staffed their in-person classes fully, as required, AND assigned a big chunk of its blended teachers to just teach remote kids?

Anonymous said...

This decision can only be made by De Blasio. The NYC COVID new cases went up 40% comparing to one week ago. De Blasio is losing confidence that things won't go bad.

The UFT letter contains two keywords: "agreement" and "UFT-represented". I guess UFT wants to make sure that the upcoming "agreements" will only cover "UFT-represented" due-payers.

There could be another court battle about equal-treatment vs you-get-what-you-pay-for.

Anonymous said...

SCOTUS said opt out is 1st amendmment. Many will sue if they are targeted and discriminated against. Anyway, I opted out and my princiapl already gave me permission to stay home without the accommodation because of how how ridiculous it is. Obviously, I have a full remote schedule. Bottom line, this is a sinking ship. The city and state are broke. I wouldnt expect any raises or teachers choice for 5 years in the next contract. I would expect to pay more for medical, as in out of pocket. But dues will continue to rise. Students cant read or write but we have the highest grad rates ever. I would look for another career if I'm not close to resgnation or retirement.

Anonymous said...

Janus held that opting out is pretty much a function of freedom of expression protected by the First Amendment. Therefore, any state action, such as furloughing, which punishes teachers who opt out is probably unconstitutional.

Anonymous said...

So the union managed to divide staff even further. I would be pissed to no end if I had to report to a building. CSA is furious. Mulgrew and de blasio, typical doe and uft.

Anonymous said...

Dem de blasio did this?
Susan Edelman
@SusanBEdelman
A CEC 3 staffer blasted plans to furlough low-wage city employees, arguing that poorly paid non-unionized workers should not have to suffer pay decreases to shore up city coffers. DOE will reconsider,
@selimalgar
reports.

Anonymous said...

"They are reprogramming their school every other day,” he said of the city’s principals. “It’s just too much to ask of any human being. You can’t give them two pieces of wood and say, build a house.”

Anonymous said...

Mulgrew will alwys be a fake and a fraud...so instead they handcuff administrations with staffing restrictions and the like which ultimately make it impossible to make hybrid work.

I respect union leaders who say what they mean rather than play the passive-aggressive game like the UFT.

During the summer, UFT leadership should have come out and said, "No we don't think in-person learning is possible during a pandemic given the piss-poor conditions of the school system."

Quite frankly, that statement was true then, it's true now.

Anonymous said...

The cynicism of UFT doing this now, when it applies to almost no one — as opposed to two weeks ago, when it would have (even briefly) protected almost *everyone* — is a new low, even for them.

Anonymous said...

So if I am in a partnership with partner A and partner B, and I sign an agreement with partner A and completely ignore partner B- how does that fly in any situation?
CSA what are ya doing????

Anonymous said...

Here's the thing about UFT deals carving out categories of teachers who won't have to report to buildings: opening schools doesn't just put individual, high-risk teachers in danger. Opening schools is a threat to *public* health & puts our entire city at risk. That's the fight.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I'm opting out in june. Enough. I am truly glad for my colleagues who might now be able to work remotely and help keep their families safer, but I am also furious because the UFTs latest agreement marginalizes anyone one who is single and healthy. It's as if the UFT has agreed that some of us deserve to be safer than others because we don't have certain types of relationships.
If the building are not safe enough to be fully staffed (medical accommodations aside, then they are not safe enough for anyone, including kids. Am I the only one who thinks this? The UFT has failed a significant part of its constituents once again.
What are other's experiencing?

Anonymous said...

OK....i am crying "NOT FAIR". Others were asked, and out of seniority too....to go remote...and now they dont have to report to the buildings and I DO. I am scared to death, and it really isn't fair. The UFT can and should do something, at least offer some kind of compensation....oh, and BTW, where is my hazard pay?

Anonymous said...

it’s all love for my colleagues 💜 BUT
teachers that are going in to schools should get hazard pay. i’m cool with going to school to teach, but i’m putting myself at risk in a setting that is out of my control. also, in a setting where i can’t control or dictate the social distancing protocols nor who follows them. the UFT is not doing anything for me, except taking my money. maybe these mfs can put my membership on hold!

Anonymous said...

Where the fuck is the uft? So we got the “form letter” email about a possible Covid case at our school on Wednesday morning. (Letter was dated and time stamped for Tuesday at noon). Not one follow up email from admin or CL. Nothing....is this normal?

Anonymous said...

So I'm guessing if you in a program like Single Shepherd or such, you have to go into the building?

Just an endangered CL said...

Grievances placed last week were not taken to DOE by UFT.

They delayed for this new BS agreement which now places the onus of the failures of the DOE to keep to the agreement onto the Chapter Leaders. Chapter Leaders are now expected to create an SBO specifically to allow violations of the MOA and increase the workload of their staff. Failure to do so may involve intervention by UFT to negotiate for you.

Instead of having our grievances resolved within two workdays, nothing was done. CL's were informed in the evening yesterday (9/25). UFT continues to shit on their CLs, endanger the staff of our schools and purposely delay any resolution for their health/safety & operational grievances passed the Sept. 29 and Oct.1 return of students.

UFT you have failed this city.

Anonymous said...

Subs should get free funeral expenses, as many of them are over 60. They should also get free hospital care if they catch Covid. All for under $200 a day pay? The DOE should take out ads for subs on The Suicide Hotline, as it’s a direct avenue to their intended audience. DeBlasio and Carranza the humanistic, caring duo.

Unknown said...

Under our school's hybrid schedule, every teacher has 1-3 days a week they teach only remote classes because of the hybrid-remote days (example: I teach an in-person cohort Monday and Tuesday, and then those same kids remotely Wednesday-Friday). I was happy about the email announcement, but I don't know how common a schedule like ours is.

Unknown said...

I tend to agree. Sounds like a lot of rhetoric to me.

Unknown said...

Agreed

Unitymustgo! said...

The SBO language is the biggest deal of this agreement. Who has ever, truly ever, heard of a union negotiating to add language to create a process to alter a contract on such a core issue as class size? Increasing class size is not the solution. It's not even necessary. What is necessary is for Deblassio & Carranza to get their heads out of dark places and accept the fact that there are not enough teachers for blended to work. Begin informing those that wanted blended that they will have to go remote. I bet there are plenty at this point that would voluntarily switch. If that still leaves us a little short on teachers, then begin canceling 3K and even Pre-K. The focus should be on K and up. I mean seriously 3K never even existed until a few years ago. His ego is all that's holding this up. Now, let's switch gears to Mulgrew. That Mulgrew doesn't get everything I just said is a real flaw and very reflective of the problem with the UFT as it exists. That he clearly seems to think that one of the only possible ways out of this mess is for individual schools to alter class size contract language is... well there really are no words. Solutions exist to get every student a teacher with out altering class size. It's just egos getting in the way. The pure divisiveness any attempts by weak CL's to cave and run class size changes will in my opinion lead to straight out fist a cuffs. I might even be the one throwing some.

waitingforsupport said...

Microcosm of ?

Anonymous said...

The uft and all the commenters make the opt out group look real smart. Even chapter leaders are furious.

Eric said...

I have a great idea for the budget. Make school permanently Monday to Thursday, cut 20% off salary. Problem solved.

Anonymous said...

DRs undermining CLs is nothing new. Many years with a fundamentally decent CL, corrupt principal, and a DR who protects the principal better than the CSA. There is no accountability! Mulgrew gets to appoint DRs, thanks to RW. And more recently the UFT board decided appointees do not even have to have worked in the district to "qualify" as DR. Decent DRs have been reduced to shills for Unity/Mulgrew. In my previous district several chapter leaders from large schools belonged to dissident groups or no group at all. They held the DRs feet to the fire every year, but especially when elections for DR came around. That DR did a lot of "stand up stuff" that was really important to the members but did not always get cheers from union hierarchy. Now, no democracy, no input from members, just send me your cash. I cannot imagine why anyone would risk life and limb to step into a public school!!!

By the way, where is the last installment of the Bloomberg money? Only UFT members would be foolish enough to wait a decade for bills to be paid...how many may have died before receiving it???

Anonymous said...

The only way teachers get furloughed is with UFT agreement. (There’s no way those that have opted out are targeted. Don’t forget the city is short teachers and all the new hires are not UFT members, until they have filled out all their paper work - usually the first week or two of work.) I do believe something painful is coming though. Mulgrew may agree to a two week (all) teacher furlough if the schools close down again for two weeks or even a month to save city from financial disaster. Cuomo has to really consider pulling deBlasio out of office before creates even more damage.

waitingforsupport said...

@11:10 pm
Is it normal? For sane people,he%/ NO.
Is it normal for the DOE/UFT? Sh!$ yeah.

waitingforsupport said...

@ALL

THE UFT UNDER THE AHEM "LEADERSHIP" OF MILDEW HAS FAILED YOU FOR MANY MANY YEARS. MAYBE YOU DIDN'T NOTICE. I DON'T THINK TOO MANY ATRS OR OLDER EDUCATORS ARE SHOCKED. PUSH HIM OUT. GET TOGETHER AND YELL LOUD AND OFTEN. NO JUSTICE! NO PEACE.

Anonymous said...

I am happy we can finally vote on the program we created. Been waiting to do an SBO since August.
We created a schedule we are happy with , that is not in compliance with the other agreements but works for. No class size violations , just mixed teaching roles . We did not want to pls with s other blended remote teacher.

Anonymous said...

UFT represented employees are not necessarily union members. If you opt out you can run or vote in school Chapter elections ( CL, Delegates, Para Rep) , you cant vote in next year UFT officer elections and you cannot vote in SBO votes.
I don’t see that helping anyone on here promoting opt out.

Anonymous said...

I am one of the teacher who complained that I had to report to school to teach my totally remote kids. I am happy that I can decided to stay home or report to school if I choose.
Since this Mayor is never going to agree to the school system being fully remote ( Unless Covid positivity goes over 3%) I don’t know what more the UFT could have done.

Anonymous said...

I am concerned about the bleach used every night to spray or disinfect the room. When it dries, it leaves a dust which I think can be bad for our health also. The windows must be open, but its a challenge to open them. You need muscle strength to open them. The deep cleaning of the building is a lie. Of course lacquer or varnish over dirt looks good.I am very disappointed in the union. The union cannot be trusted.

TJL said...

Re 7:10, Schools with good admin and/or a good programmer have situations like this. Also in my building the entire math and science departments are in person. So you end up with teachers who are in person assigned fully remote classes. If you don't have a "leadership academy" principal they don't insist you're on premises for those, your C6, etc.

Anonymous said...

Text from a dedicated principal this morning after learning of more school changes on eve of re-opening via social media last night: “I can’t do this anymore. I’m not OK. I can’t look my community in the eye and tell them with a straight face that we’re OK. I want to quit.”
Mark Treyger
@MarkTreyger718
·
10m
A reminder that while it is easy for folks at City Hall to tweet about last minute changes, it is ultimately up to school leaders and their team to operationalize plans. They’re carrying the burden to make sense of this with inadequate info, support, staff, resources, and tech.

Anonymous said...

Unknown 7:10, my friend has in person classes either 1 or 2 days a week, depending on where in the cycle we are. My principal told her originally she could work from home, had to rescind it, and will allow it again as of the 5th of October when the agreement goes into effect. I recommend asking.

Anonymous said...

So far, my remote attendance, for 5 class, ranges from 15-30%. So much for every person getting live, synchronous instruction.

Anonymous said...

Letter from Tottenville HS says students can come to school — but they would be doing remote learning in the classroom, basically, while supervised.

This is also happening at other schools though the mayor seemed not to know that when asked last week.

Anonymous said...

the promoting of opting out is to stop this madness, at least defund it. If you can decertify instead, go right ahead.

Anon2323 said...

Mini Mike Bloomberg can do some good with his money but he rather spends 16 million to free people from jail to allow them to vote instead of using the money towards schools or homelessness etc. Sick country of power and greed.

Anonymous said...

Yes this is the hybrid mode I heard of, baby sitting and having others cover you to continue while you open your computer when your class begins