SUE EDELMAN HAS STORIES ON DOE'S LACK OF ATTENDANCE POLICY & THE LATEST ATR COUNT

There are two Sue Edelman pieces in Sunday's NY Post on the schools.  They are basically updates on grade fraud and the Absent Teacher Reserves.

Here is what Sue reported on the NYC Department of Education not having a minimum student attendance policy:
Going to class is not required to receive a city diploma.

It’s not widely advertised, but under Department of Education rules, students cannot be denied credit or  graduation “based on lack of seat time alone.”

Under state law, school districts may adopt a “minimum attendance standard.” New York City does not. While city schools must take attendance, kids can still  pass or be promoted even if chronically absent, which is missing more than 10 percent of days.

Students can pass classes because there is no minimum seat time policy in New York City schools.  This isn't exactly new news. We have been writing about this since 2009. I guess it's news as Maspeth High School shows that the problem is worsening now. I used to think the high school diploma was being rendered meaningless because of pressure on administrators and teachers to pass everyone, regardless of student ability but since 2009, the students no longer have to even show up. We advocated for the enforcement of a minimum attendance requirement while serving on the UFT Executive Board when the meetings were still held at 260 Park Avenue South circa 2001.

I have said before that I was a lucky teacher.  When I got a job at Middle College High School in 2014, I discovered that the Principal enforced a seat time requirement. For the first time in my 32 year career, I had to defend passing grades for students who had more than 8-9 absences for the trimester. It was a good policy.  For the previous 28 years, Jamaica High School administrators never questioned me if I failed a student who seldom showed up. I understand there are extenuating circumstances but I can't comprehend how this grade fraud has not yet been stopped by anyone in authority. Teachers should not have to fight this alone but should do it as Chapters backed up by their Union.

Sue also has an article on the Absent Teacher Reserves.
The city still keeps 930 excess teachers on the payroll, and many other school employees without permanent jobs, The Post has learned.

As of this month, the tenured teachers alone cost the Department of Education close to $100 million a year in salary and benefits, but remain idle or serve as roving substitutes.

DOE officials refused multiple requests to reveal the number of guidance counselors, social workers, secretaries and others in the “Absent Teacher Reserve.”

Despite the surplus personnel, the DOE continues to beef up its workforce.

“We hired over 5,000 teachers over the summer,” Chancellor Richard Carranza boasted in a radio interview on Hot97 last month.

DOE spokeswoman Danielle Filson corrected Carranza, saying the department hired about 4,800 new “teachers, guidance counselors and social workers.”

As someone who was an ATR and has someone very close to me in the ATR pool, I find it quite uninformed that teachers are referred to as being "idle or serve as roving substitutes." When teachers in the ATR are given long term assignments, they are teaching a class like everyone else but with no job security in a particular school. In addition, roving substitutes can be a very difficult assignment when going into some NYC schools. I will say it is positive that Sue got the DOE to turn over ATR numbers for teachers but who knows how accurate any figures from the DOE are?

CHICAGO TEACHERS UNION STRIKING OVER CLASS SIZE LIMITS THAT IN MOST GRADES ARE ALREADY LOWER THAN NYC LIMITS

The more I read about the Chicago Teachers Union strike, the more respect I have for the teachers out there and their union leaders. They are striking over class size and staffing levels as much as raises. Salary and benefits are all that they are legally allowed to strike over but I don't hear calls for injunctions over what could be construed as an illegal strike.

The public looks like they have the backs of the teachers. I have done some more research and it is clear to me that Chicago teachers are not bad off financially but they can't be bought off with an offer of a decent raise. This is encouraging but as teacher militancy is now a national movement, we have to wonder why there is zero, absolutely zero militancy in NYC even though we have plenty of reasons to fight for a better deal. Let's do a little comparing.

Right now according to Chalkbeat, Chicago teachers start out at a little over $56,000 a year and max out at $108,242 per year after only 14 years (NYC teachers do not get to maximum until after completing 22 years). Factor in the cost of living which is 42% lower in Chicago compared to NYC and Chicago public school teachers earn a decent living. Add to this that the city is offering the teachers 16% salary increases over five years. The starting salary, if they just say yes, will be $64,960 a year in Chicago by 2024. That would be higher than the $61,070 starting pay New York City teachers will earn when the current contract ends in 2022. We would need two years at 6% total in NYC to catch up with their starting salary. The last time the UFT achieved two consecutive annual 3% increases was a while ago. The Chicago teacher maximum salary would rise to $125,561 if the union accepts the city's offer. Remember, top salary only requires 14 years of service to reach. After 14 year in NYC, a teacher with a Masters +30 credits will make $104,145 in 2022. Strike or no strike, Chicago will really not need the lower cost of living to beat NYC at almost all of the levels.

Any way you slice it, Chicago teachers, where teachers insist on a militant union, are doing better in terms of salary than the passive NYC teachers and our "do little" union.

Let's now look at the class size issue, a major focus of the CTU strike. When we examine contractual class size limits, Chicago before the strike doesn't look bad compared to NYC. In NYC, the contract says 25 maximum in kindergarten, 32 in elementary schools, 33 in middle schools and 34 in high schools except required music and phys ed which are permitted to go to a maximum of 50. There are of course exceptions to these ridiculously high limits that are easy to use and if the Department of Education routinely violates the limits, the remedy is determined by arbitrators. Resolutions have included one less professional period for the teacher with an oversize class. I have no idea how that helps kids.

For Chicago, this class size information comes from Patch:
Chicago's class size cap is 28 students in kindergarten through fifth grades, and 31 students in middle and high school. If a K-2 class has 32 or more students, the district must provide an additional teacher assistant, a demand won in the last contract. A joint district-union panel reviews classes exceeding the caps and seeks ways to mitigate the crowding.

Except for kindergarten, their limits are lower than NYC and Chicago teachers are striking over these caps and other staffing issues (more librarians, social workers, nurses). They want it in writing in the contract. They are demanding lower class size maximums and strict enforcement. Wow! Watch Jennifer Johnson if you have Facebook. 

I am not stating any of this to say that the CTU should be happy with what they are being offered so they should take the money and run. No, their union is doing right by their membership and their students. The rank and file is out on the picket lines and the streets rallying. I support them 100%. They will have better salaries, teaching conditions and learning conditions when this ends. I also hope they get a provision so if the district retaliates against them for striking by closing schools, they cannot fire the displaced teachers. 

What about the teachers here in NYC? We complain anonymously on social media about how terrible conditions are and some foolish individuals are dropping their union altogether so they can save union dues. Judging by what I am seeing out of Chicago and around the rest of the nation, we would be doing much better if we demanded a better union, not an end to the union.

Chicago average teacher salaries compared to other big cities from CBS Chicago. Notice the media spin against the teachers. I think their NYC figures are a little out of date but our salary schedule moves up very slowly so averages are low.

REPORTS FROM CHICAGO AND NYC TEACHER UNIONS WEDNESDAY DELEGATE MEETINGS

Yesterday there were meetings of the Chicago Teachers Union House of Delegates and the United Federation of Teachers Delegate Assembly. There are detailed accounts of both meetings on the internet. In Chicago, they voted unanimously to go on strike today even while they are being offered 16% salary increases over 5 years.

In NYC, the UFT Delegates voted to support the CTU strike and the UAW strike against General Motors where there is a tentative agreement. (Update Friday: The UAW strike will continue until ratification vote.) The UFT also welcomed three City Council members as guests: Mark Treyger, Danny Dromm and Speaker Corey Johnson. President Michael Mulgrew said this according to the minutes from Arthur Goldstein after Speaker Johnson spoke:

Mulgrew—We have a lot of enemies looking to destroy our system. They say if NYC comes down entire country will fall. DeVos wants vouchers. We’re doing better than ever on achievement and dropout rates. Never hear enough. With city admin on way out, how do we move forward? NYC is under corrective action, can be used against us. What do you think we should be doing this year to move forward? How do we motivate DOE to stop power games and stupidity?

I have an answer: Have a militant union whose members, more so than their leaders, are demanding action.

Councilman Mark Treyger, a former NYC teacher and UFT Delegate, followed Mulgrew. I thought he made this very interesting point.

From Arthur's minutes of Treyger's remarks:

Special ed. is non-negotiable. Dealing with mandates. We need someone in DOE who knows rules. Their own person came to my hearing. I ask questions. Have DOK knowledge chart. Asked how many IEPs they have translated. They didn’t even know there was federal requirement. Let’s start with people who know what they’re doing. Let’s empower people who know more than them.

Well yeah, is the UFT going to demand or even promote and stand up for teacher empowerment?

On class size the UFT is claiming victory. From Mulgrew's report via Arthur's minutes:

We asked you to engage. At this time last year 400 schools 2K classes. Day ten this year 350 schools 1500 classes. At next level, we bet superintendents wouldn’t want this going above them. Were able to make it major issue. Ten days went from 350 to 105. We used to have this going on for seven months. Today only 87 schools with oversized classes. Lowest number of oversized classes in October in history of UFT. Will get rest done by Thanksgiving.

I recall when the UFT went to direct arbitration after the first ten school days as part of the 2002 contract. It was touted as a great victory to take the Superintendent and Chancellor out of the class size grievance process. Now, putting them back into the process is another big gain. While I applaud fewer oversize classes because they are resolved before they get to arbitration, the UFT allowed the DOE to make a mockery out of the class size grievance process. Also, what happens if there is again leadership at Tweed or City Hall that doesn't care about oversize classes? Putting the Superintendents in the process won't mean anything then. The long term solution is to force the DOE to follow state law on lower class size (I don't know why the UFT did't join the parent lawsuit on this issue.) or to make it a contract demand to lower class size or at least to close the loopholes that the DOE can drive a truck through. We haven't put lower class size numbers in the contract in about fifty years.

In Chicago, they are striking today over the class size issue as well as staffing of other positions such as librarians and nurses. 

Here are some of what the Delegates at their House of Delegates meeting stated yesterday as reported on by George Milkowski in Substance News:

At this point he (CTU President Jesse Sharkey) started to go through an 8 page summary of the CPS proposals and CPS responses, if any. He said delegates may ask questions with a five minute time limit on each page. No one asked questions. Everyone but one delegate who went to the mic had some strong comments, among them were:

Sue Sebesta – We cannot agree to a five year contract.

Alix Gonzalez – We need to expand sustainable community schools.

Tom Lalagos – He serves on the class size panel and will resign if class sizes are not reduced. He doesn’t want to be part of a sham. One delegate stressed that veteran teachers are at the top of the pay scale in 14 years and hence have not had a raise. She said we need more steps. The Ravenswood School delegate said that elementary prep time has to be gained. Without it, it is a deal-breaker. Frank McDonald said that if we have to still deal with REACH (evaluation system), then we need a 5% raise per year as compensation

Regarding REACH, the Fulton School delegate said teachers are required to provide documentation as part of their evaluation but the evaluators are NOT required to read any of it. Our proposals are that the evaluators be required to read it but CPS responded that the evaluators would not have time to read all that material.

Delegate Oscar Ortiz asked about how are teachers to deal with kids who are incorrigible. Jesse said that this comes down to proper staffing in the schools. CPS proposes to increase the number or nurses, social workers, or clinicians by 20%, but that a school would only get one new person of those possible positions. It would be up to the principal to decide on which type of position to fill.

At this point a motion passed to move the agenda and the House voted unanimously to start the strike tomorrow.

From this morning's CBS local news in Chicago:

Chicago teachers went on strike on Thursday after failing to reach a contract deal with the nation's third-largest school district.

Both sides have been negotiating for months over salaries, class sizes and the number of support staff in schools, such as librarians and nurses. Teachers began picketing in front of schools Thursday morning, calling for the district and city to give in to their demands.

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERS AGE DISCRIMINATION BILLS

This was sent to me by a reader. It is from the Chief Leader.

The City Council is weighing a package of bills that would create a city agency to help senior citizens find jobs and require the city to investigate age discrimination in the workplace.

“We’re tired of being swept under the rug,” said City Council Member Margaret Chin at an Oct. 8 City Hall rally. “Age discrimination creates a toxic workplace culture that results in job loss, financial strain and perpetuates the myth that when you hit a certain age, you are no longer valued in the economy.”

60% Report Bias

More than 60 percent of workers across the country 45 or older reported experiencing or witnessing age discrimination on the job, according to an AARP survey. A report by the Urban Institute and ProPublica using data from the University of Michigan Health and Retirement Study found that 56 percent of respondents 50 or older said that they were pushed out of a longtime job. Just 1 in 10 were able to find another job paying the same salary.

I am fairly certain that most of the Absent Teacher Reserves who are over 45 and many other workers beyond 45 working in or pushed out of the New York City school system would say they are experiencing or have experienced age discrimination.

Fair Student Funding where schools have to pay more on their budget to have a senior staff and closing or redesigning schools to get rid of senior teachers are examples of age discrimination. It would be helpful if we have more recourse to fight this type of discrimination based on age.

IBO NUMBERS SHOW PRINCIPAL RETENTION GREATER THAN TEACHER RETENTION

The New York City Independent Budget Office on October 11, 2019 released its latest public school indicators report. Thanks to Harry Lirtzman for sending it out to me. The statistics are somewhat revealing. I focused on the sections on teachers and principals which mostly cover the decade from 2005 to 2015 so we can see the impact of the Klein-Bloomberg years. The data shows that NYC teachers are much more likely to leave the system than principals. Principals, as we all suspected, have excellent job retention rates.

Let's first examine the teacher retention numbers. The overall turnover back in 2000-2001 was 79% of new teachers survived year one and came back, while after five years only 52% stayed in the system and after ten years it was just 44%.

The 2002, 2005, and 2006 contracts with all of their givebacks, which basically destroyed the job for many veteran teachers, did help with teacher retention as major salary increases were included in all three contracts. (I know, I know that much of the increases were time for money swaps but hey it was still more money.) Here are the retention numbers for teachers hired in 2004-05. 86% were still in the system after a year while 56% made it for five years and 47% lasted a decade. The difference in teachers lasting a decade from 44% to 47% isn't that great but the needle moved.

The numbers for 2013-14 reveal that 60% stayed up to five years.  We have to concede more teachers were staying in the system in 2014 compared to 2001 when teachers maxed out at $70,000 a year.

I guess that those hired at the height of the Great Recession were more likely not to have great job prospects outside of teaching. We have yet to see current five year retention statistics to see how the inferior Tier VI pension system, the stronger economy, the extra year to achieve tenure or the new evaluation system have impacted on teacher retention.

We also learn from the IBO that 60% of teachers in 2014 who went through traditional teacher training programs stayed in their original school after four years but only 41% of Teaching Fellows and a very tiny 24% of Teach for America teachers were still in their original school after four years.  Teach for America teachers truly are mostly temps.

Now we go to the retention statistics for NYC principals. In 2008-2009, at the height of the Klein-Bloomberg principal empowerment years, 100% of principals were still in the system a year after their first assignment. That figure held pretty steady as 99% stayed  over a year by 2013-14. The five year retention rate for the 2009-2010 cohort was 82%.  That is a pretty healthy retention rate.

The IBO report also shows that the number of general ed teachers in NYC went down from 2007 (62,867) to 2015 (54,008) while special education doubled from around 11,000 to 22,000 during roughly the same time period. This is somewhat surprising as it seems special education services were denied or withdrawn much more compared to the pre-Joel Klein years. The overall number of teachers peaked at 78,862 in 2008-09. It dropped steadily but recovered a little after Bloomberg left office. The latest year covered by this report is 2014-15 where there were 75,040 teachers. My guess is the proliferation of charter schools is the cause of the decline.

On the other hand, nobody will be astonished to learn that the number of principals rose from 1,443 in 2005 to 1,726 in 2015 and that principals in 2015 had less teaching experience than in 2005. More small schools means lots more principal jobs.

For anyone who wants to use this data to argue that the unions are not doing their jobs, maybe you should look at the Council of Supervisors and Administrators as a more successful union than the UFT. It pains me to type that.

DEFINED BENEFITS PENSIONS NEARLY EXTINCT IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR

This is from Yahoo News:

Once upon a time, Americans graduated from high school or college and entered the workforce, typically working for the same employer for a very long time. These jobs offered more than just a reliable paycheck -- they also promised retirement income for life, thanks to company-funded pensions.

In the heyday of pensions in 1980, roughly 38% of workers had one. And though pensions remain relatively common in the public sector (government jobs), pensions have largely disappeared in the private sector. Their return appears unlikely.

Only 18% of private-sector workers had access to a pension in 2017, and just 15% participated in one, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over time, the number of private-sector workers who have access to a pension is largely expected to trend toward zero.

This is from CBS from Tuesday, October 8:
General Electric announced it will freeze the pensions of 20,000 U.S. salaried workers, a measure designed to reduce its pension deficit and trim debt. The move will shave GE's pension deficit by as much as $8 billion and its net debt by as much as $6 billion.

Further down:
Like other corporations, GE has been phasing out its pension amid a push toward self-directed retirement plans such as 401(k)s. GE said it hasn't allowed new workers into its pension plan since 2012.

Please look at the reduction in TDA interest from 8.25 percent to 7 percent for NYC teachers and the passage of Tier VI for NYS government employees in 2012 in the context of this anti-worker world we live in.

If the business leaders finish off defined benefits pensions in the private sector, do you think the powers that be will stop? They will come after our pensions in the public sector. Anonymous comments blaming the UFT leadership for everything and dropping your union dues will not help.

Please recall that unions, including ours, led the highly successful campaign in 2017 against the Constitutional Convention which could have put our pensions in jeopardy. Protecting defined benefit pensions is important.

Tier VI is terrible compared to tiers I to V but it is better than nothing. To get actual improvements for the Tier VI teachers, we have to fight collectively as a much stronger union. If we do not, we will not make gains and eventually we could lose our defined benefits pension like they have in the private sector.

MORE STATES MOVING AWAY FROM EVALUATING TEACHERS BASED ON STUDENT TEST SCORES

This is from Chalkbeat:

Fewer states are using student test scores to evaluate teachers, according to a report released Tuesday by the National Council on Teacher Quality. As of this year, 34 states require scores to be used in teacher evaluations, down from a high of 43 in 2015.

The decline illustrates the continued retreat of an idea that took education policy by storm during the first half of the decade, but proved divisive and difficult to implement.

Does evaluating teachers based on student test scores work?
A study of a Gates Foundation-funded project showed that tougher evaluations failed to yield any clear benefits in a number of states.

These terrible education ideas just won't go away. A big cause of this is our UFT continuing to support teacher evaluations based on student scores on assessments. We have to change this. Dropping union dues won't do that. Becoming an activist just might.

Our petition to completely overhaul the teacher evaluation system needs to take off again. Tell five or more teachers or friends. Spread the word beyond this inner circle.

SOCIAL PROMOTION HAS NOT MADE IT TO CUNY

When there is difficulty with students who don't succeed in elementary and secondary schools, often despite heroic efforts from teachers and other professionals, many schools are closed or redesigned and educators are forced out. We are the scapegoats of school reform. We are easy targets.

Students have a right to an education but in the 21st Century, that right has been expanded in certain schools so it seems now there is almost a right to a high school diploma. If too many students fail, even if they do no work or don't show up, teachers are held accountable.

Whether the kids themselves, their parents, the school system, politicians, philanthropists, poverty or institutionalized racism are the true culprits is not my central focus in this piece. I clearly don't believe the vast majority of teachers are responsible for students not ending up ready for college of adult life.  Teachers have been exposing the grade fraud in many schools with the help of NY Post reporter Sue Edelman.

What is clear is way too many students receiving a grade inflated New York City High School Diploma are unprepared for university study. Please don't tell me to look at the college or career ready statistics. Instead, look at how many pupils receive a college degree.

Let's go to the numbers from the City University of New York, where many of our high school graduates in NYC attend college, to see what the on time graduation rates are.

First, the community colleges:
As of the fall of 2018, 9% of students who entered CUNY two year colleges in 2016 had earned their Associates Degree. That's 9% who earned a two year degree in two years. Go to the link above to verify.

How about the four year CUNY colleges?
Of the cohort entering as freshmen in 2014, by 2018 26.7% had earned a four year Bachelor's Degree in four years.

I am not criticizing the colleges or CUNY as an institution for not graduating more students on time. Many of the high school graduates who are entering CUNY, mostly from New York high schools, are not ready for college. Obviously, there are still standards at the City University as students are not pushed through. College degrees still mean something.

Despite these statistics, there is no call to privatize CUNY or turn the colleges into charter schools. I don't think they are retraining all of the professors either or threatening to redesign the low performing colleges by replacing the professors and making them Absent Professor Reserves at other colleges.

I am not advocating for high school to be like college but we do need reasonable standards (for example, we used to have a 90% attendance requirement) and if students don't meet them, look beyond blaming teachers and schools to see what we can reasonably to to change things.

LUMP SUM PAYMENT DOUBLE DUES FROM 2018 REPEATED; WHY YOU SHOULD NOT QUIT THE UFT REPEATED

We get new readers all the time so instead of writing a new post with updated numbers on the double dipping the UFT is doing on the lump sum payments coming to most of us in October 2019 (anyone is welcome to provide 2019 numbers in the comments), I am copying below  last year's post on the double dues that the UFT takes from us. Union dues were taken from the original checks back in 2009-2011 when we did the actual work for which we are now receiving money back because we should have been paid at a higher rate back then.

The lump sum payments are essentially an interest free loan we gave to the city from 2009-2011 that we are still waiting until 2020 to be paid back in full. In 2008, DC 37 and NYC negotiated a contract with a 4% +4% pattern for raises for NYC municipal employee unions. The tradition of pattern bargaining then took effect where other unions asked for and received the same raises as the union that set the pattern. However, in an unprecedented move, then Mayor Michael Bloomberg refused to give those pattern raises to UFT members so we went almost five years without a contract.

In 2014, new Mayor Bill de Blasio falsely asserted that the city was broke so he claimed the city could not afford to give the UFT the back-pay they owed us. Instead, the city agreed to give us paltry raises and pay us back the money we were owed in those pattern raises from 2009-11 in small doses. UFT President Michael Mulgrew bought the mayor's ridiculous argument that the city had no money and unfortunately 75% of the teachers voted yes on the 2014 contract so we are still waiting for half of our money from 2009-2011. 25% will come to most of us in October. The UFT is getting their slice of the pie by taking extra dues. This is what we posted last October.

LUMP SUM PAYMENT UP AT PAYROLL PORTAL

October 7, 2018

Go to the the DOE Payroll Portal to see what your 25% of the money the city owes us from 2009-2011 amounts to for October 15, 2018.

UPDATE WITH FIGURES:
UFT dues, which are normally $60.36 per pay period, more than doubled to $143.67 for one teacher for this pay period.

The generic term for the extra $83.31 the UFT is taking is thievery since we paid union dues on this money when we were paid for these pay periods years ago.

As I say every year when the city repays us back part of the very large interest free loan we made to the city, the UFT before Michael Mulgrew never took union dues from retroactive money that was owed to us because we already paid union dues on the paychecks that this money is based on.

This should be a campaign issue in the upcoming 2019 union election.

Needless to say, UFT double dipping did not become an election issue in 2019. It should also not be a dumb excuse to drop out of the UFT and make us a weaker union with fewer members. For those who want to read my lengthy explanation on why dropping out is pure selfishness, it is copied below. I'll go back to having some original thoughts again soon.

Not Paying Union Dues will not Improve Working Conditions

May 15, 2019

On just about every topic we write about recently concerning the schools in New York City, one or two or sometimes more comments are written saying that routine extensions of probation, the broken testing system, school on Monday, December 23, etc. are just more reasons why we should stop paying union dues and drop out of the UFT. I disagree with these commenters but not because you don't have a point that UFT advocacy leaves much to be desired. 

I agree wholeheartedly on this point and nobody has been a more robust critic of the UFT in public than me, including while serving on the UFT Executive Board and at the Delegate Assembly. However, the commenters who want to drop out provide no viable alternative to the union we have. You say the UFT doesn't support us so to protest we should stop paying union dues. Short term, you will keep more money but long term you are dooming all of us to much more and deeper misery. Quitting the UFT is not the answer unless you are organizing something better which I see no sign of anywhere in the New York City teaching force.

Understanding all of the UFT's faults, including a lack of a real democratic structure, let us still acknowledge that NYC teachers during the current contract will eventually start out earning $61,000 per year and max out after 22 years making over $128,00 per annum with good benefits and, except for Tier VI, a very good pension. Do you think our salaries, benefits and pensions are in any way, shape or form possible without a union? Be truthful, please if there are comments.

Beyond the wages and benefits, you say the UFT doesn't defend us very strongly and in many cases they merely go through the motions by pretending to advocate for members. I agree there is some truth here. UFT's advocacy is not full force like say the way PBA President Patrick Lynch defends his members or TWU's John Samuelson supports his.  Let's accept it here as a given that the UFT is not always behind teachers 100% although I am sure many who work for the Union would disagree with that assertion.

The question then becomes this: What are you going to do about the sorry state of the UFT in many schools? If the answer is you are going to drop out and keep some more of your money, well how does that help our cause?

The argument I have heard is that if we all starve the UFT beast, then the Union leadership will be forced to work harder to support us to win back our dues money. There is a giant flaw in this argument as I see it. Many in the UFT leadership are basically incapable of changing and dues money or no dues money, they aren't becoming a militant union on behalf of their members. It is not in President Michael Mulgrew's DNA. Any show of activism is purely for show. The only game he and many of his Unity Caucus followers will play is the political game to try to convince the politicians to support us. They do play this game well at times.

These are not great political times for unions but we have kept a core of  a decent  salary and benefits. The UFT will still play the political game whether they have $100 million in the Union treasury or 100 pennies. If they only have 100 pennies, they will just be even weaker advocates for the members than now. If thousands of UFT members drop out and are not organized into anything, do you think the city is going to say we better listen to the teachers? No, we will all be that much weaker.

Do you truly feel that Michael Mulgrew is going to become Eugene Debs if half of us leave in order to convince the other half to stay? It won't happen. The militancy has to come from the rank and file. It will have a much greater impact if those militants are UFT members.

Potential defectors need to face reality. There is absolutely no evidence or historical precedent that anyone can find showing that weakening unions by dropping out and leaving the union with fewer paying members and thus fewer resources leads to improved wages, benefits or better working conditions. Find me an example, just one, where this has worked and I will listen.

There is plenty of evidence, however, that working people in states that have right to work laws  (unions can't force workers to join a union or pay a fair share fee if a non-union member) do worse economically. 

From the Economic Policy Institute 2018 study comparing right to work with non-right to work states:

• Wages in RTW states are 3.1 percent lower than those in non-RTW states, after controlling for a full complement of individual demographic and socioeconomic factors as well as state macroeconomic indicators. This translates into RTW being associated with $1,558 lower annual wages for a typical full-time, full-year worker.
• The relationship between RTW status and wages remains economically and statistically significant under alternative specifications of our econometric model.

Now that we are right to work in the public sector nationally after the Supreme Court ruled last June that government employees cannot be forced to join a union or pay fair share fees for what the unions do, those of us who are union dissidents are left with four choices:

1-We can shut up rather than be critical and ask to join the in crowd (become Unity UFT cheerleaders).

2-We can quit our union, go home and hope for the best.

3-We can try to form a better union.

4-We can attempt to bring about change from within the union while still being critical of its flaws. 

I still believe, until someone can convince me otherwise, that choice 4 is the way forward. We are better off staying in the UFT, even if we despise much of what our Union's leadership does, or rather often doesn't do, to defend us. Change happens in schools when we persuade our colleagues that it is in our collective interest to be active and force the UFT to support us. Dropping out to save some money each check is the wrong answer; it is pure "me only" selfishness.

DE BLASIO PLANNING BLOOMBERG ERA NEW AND REORGANIZED SCHOOLS

This is from Diane Ravitch's blog. The title: "New York City Joins Forces with Corporate Reformers."

From Ravitch:
Mayor Bill DeBlasio joined in partnership with Laurene Powell Jobs’ XQ Institute and the hedge-funders’ Robin Hood Foundation to create new schools and transform existing schools. The corporate reformers are not offering much money—only $15 million (crumbs from the billionaires’ table)—but they are getting the Mayor to admit that amateur “reformers” know more than the city’s professional educators. You might say that this deal is a vote of no-confidence in Chancellor Richard Carranza.

Leonie Haimson, the executive director of Class Size Matters, has been consistently critical of the DeBlasio administration for ignoring the importance of Class size reduction. She is also critical of this alliance. On the NYC Parents blog, she wrote:

Robin Hood is spending “up to $5M” to create up to “10 New Imagine schools” – and will be involved in the selection process — which means the DOE is giving up authority over the design of these schools to the assorted #corpreformers there for as little as $500K each. #XQ is funding $10M for “up to 10 HS” either new or redesigned schools.

Thus the DOE must be putting in $17M more – to create or “transform” 35 additional schools, as the application specifies that “20 of the 40 schools selected will be existing schools to redesign, and 20 will be new schools.”

In other words, she says, NYC is “a cheap date.”

Even the NY Post and right wing Manhattan Institute are smiling at this initiative. It looks like Bloomberg's new schools all over again.

The UFT is of course on board.

“We know our schools are more successful when parents, educators, students and community are at the table, deciding what their school needs to engage, support and enhance education. We need buy-in from the children and adults in the building as well as the community at large,” said Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers.

THE UFT COULD LEARN (BUT PROBABLY WON'T) FROM UAW, TWU LOCAL 100 AND CHICAGO TEACHERS

One of my biggest complaints with UFT leadership is they don't demand much from the city or the Department of Education. When I was on the UFT Executive Board serving on the Contract Negotiating Committee, I told Randi Weingarten that if Joel Klein was demanding an 8 page contract that would take away virtually all of our rights, we had to respond by demanding Great Neck conditions to counter that. Randi said that we have to appear to be reasonable and can't demand more. She told us we would look extreme. The result was the center of gravity for negotiations for the 2005 contract moved toward the city and we ended up accepting the 2005 contract with its horrible givebacks and the extension the following year.

I served again on the Contract Negotiating Committee under Michael Mulgrew starting in 2009, hoping for a change in direction from a different leader. This time it wasn't me rather it was my friend Julie Woodward who rose during negotiations to say that our contract demands were milquetoast. (I remember she used that exact word.) If you want to know why we never get anywhere, a primary cause of our stagnation at best as a union is we demand very little in negotiations.

Ask for very little and you will receive almost nothing. Ask for more and you may just actually get more. This is "Negotiations 101" and the city and DOE use our timid stances against us. The city-DOE were very successful in 2005 and have been trying to finish off the job of completely crippling the UFT ever since. Our "Let's be Reasonable and Responsible" strategy fortunately is not being copied by unions around the country.

The Detroit Free Press offers a behind the scenes look at the General Motors-United Auto Workers negotiations. That strike has gone on for 19 days. Experienced negotiators talk in this piece about what goes on prior to contract talks:

The collective bargaining process starts 12 to 18 months before the two parties square off across a big table. 

“The union negotiations process can be a very daunting task even for the most seasoned labor relations leaders. So it’s never too early to start the bargaining preparation process," said [former Fiat Chrysler director of labor economics Colin] Lightbody in the webinar Bargaining Preparation.

Both sides usually review previous negotiations, study old notes and analyze the personalities of the other sides' bargainers.  

“In negotiations, past behavior is often a good predictor of future behavior. Are there any patterns? For example, does the union initially ask for general wage increases in every year of the contract, but then later settle for a general wage increase in year one and then lump sum payments in subsequent years of the contract?” Lightbody said.

In negotiating with the UFT, the city and DOE do the studying and figure out quickly the UFT will ask for little and settle for even less. Do you think they get hysterical laughing when they know how soft the UFT will be?

The Detroit Free Press piece goes on by quoting Art Schwartz, a former GM labor negotiator, on the days leading up to the actual bargaining:
“We used to call it being in the locker room,” it means you haven’t taken the field yet. You’re trying to figure out the union’s position, get cost and come up with a list of demands. Both sides know they have to move, so the first offer on both sides tends to be extreme and that is when bargaining begins."

As stated already, the UFT does not take any extreme positions, and has not in many years. I know this having served on two Contract Negotiating Committees. We lose before the process starts.

Someone is going to comment that I can't compare the UFT to a private sector negotiation. Well how about comparing the UFT to the Chicago Teachers Union where 94% voted to authorize a strike now set for October 17? CTU teachers were offered 16% pay increases over five years. Why did management make such a substantial offer that has not been accepted? Because the CTU asked for a whole lot more than money in their contract demands.

Here is an excerpt from a January piece on the start of bargaining:
Pay and benefit increases are atop the union’s list of demands, as [CTU President Jesse] Sharkey said CPS’ pay rate has fallen below other districts. But the union is also pushing for more investments inside the classroom, calling for reduced class sizes and new hires to help fill critical staffing shortages.

“We will be told these demands are unrealistic, the price tag is too high, it’d be nice but it’s just too expensive. Bullcrap,” Sharkey told media Tuesday.

“If we can afford a billion dollars for [the] Riverwalk, a billion dollars for Lincoln Yards, then we can afford a billion dollars to invest in the children of the city of Chicago for our future," he said. 

Union leaders have long called for additional counselors, nurses and librarians in their schools and are now demanding improved staffing ratios.  They also want the district to put an end to student-based budgeting and add 100 sustainable community schools on the South and West sides the city.

We are told in NYC that we can't demand lower class sizes because the money would have to come from decreasing teacher raises. The city only has so much money and anything to lower class size or lower guidance ratios would have to come from some of the funds set aside for our salary increases. In Chicago, the Chicago Teachers Union doesn't care about how they will look. They are demanding more than a raise.

Now you will tell me that the CTU doesn't have the Taylor Law to contend with where public sector employees in NYS are fined two days pay for each day out on strike. That doesn't seem to worry Transport Workers Union Local 100. New York City Transit Workers have been without a contract since May. Have you seen their demands? Their demands last contract were seven pages long. Nobody will call their demands milquetoast. Clearly, they did better than the UFT at the bargaining table in the prior round. Now look at their hard hitting television commercials that they have just released.

You don't have to keep taking the punches in the stomach teachers and other UFT members. Demand a whole lot more and don't take no for an answer. 2022 when our contract is up is not that far off. The UFT acted like a real union at one time. It can happen again. It's up to all of us to make it happen.

INFORMATION ON OBSERVATIONS FOR 2019-20

This is from Gene Mann's The Organizer concerning the observation process. Read and use it to your advantage teachers.

Teachers and the observation process
 The UFT seized the opportunity presented by the 2018 contract negotiations with the city Department of Education to revise the teacher evaluation system to focus on quality of observations rather than quantity and to incorporate meaningful professional development as part of the process. Here’s what you can expect for the 2019–20 school year.

How many times will I be observed this school year?
The required minimum number of evaluations will be fewer for the vast majority of teachers.

If you are a tenured teacher, the number of observations your principal or other evaluator will conduct depends on your overall rating from previous school years.

Highly Effective for the prior year: minimum of two informal observations.

Effective in the prior year and Highly Effective, Effective or Satisfactory in the year before that:minimum of two informal observations.

Effective in the prior year and Developing, Ineffective or Unsatisfactory in the year before that:minimum of three informal observations.

Effective in the prior year and no rating in the year before that: minimum of one informal and one formal observation.

Developing in the prior year: minimum of one formal and three informal observations.

Ineffective in the prior year: minimum of one formal and four informal observations.

No rating in the prior year: minimum of one formal and three informal observations.

If you are a probationary teacher, you will receive a minimum of one formal and three informal observations. If you are a probationary teacher who was rated Ineffective in the previous school year, you’ll receive a minimum of one formal and four informal observations.

As in previous years, there is no maximum number of observations. (Emphais added by ICEUFT blog)

When will my observations be conducted?

In a change from previous years, the 2019–20 school year will have two “observation windows.” The fall window begins with the initial planning conference, which must take place no later than the last Friday in October, and ends on the last day of the fall term. The spring window begins on the first day of the spring term and ends on the first Friday in June. Half of the required minimum number of observations must take place during the fall window; the other half must be done in the spring. You should not be observed during the spring window until you receive the final required evaluator form for all required observations during the fall window.

What kind of professional development and training about the evaluation system will I receive?

The UFT and the DOE have collaborated to develop new joint training sessions regarding the evaluation system. All employees — teachers, administrators and other evaluators — will receive the same training so everyone is on the same page regarding evaluation. This training will take place at your school during the workday no later than the last Friday in October.

In addition, the joint DOE-UFT professional learning team is working to provide guidance on the use of evaluation tools for specific teaching settings such as special education, English as a new language and physical education classrooms.

What is the difference between a formal and an informal observation?

A formal observation lasts a full period, is scheduled ahead of time by mutual agreement between you and your evaluator and must involve individual pre- and post-observation conferences with your evaluator. An informal observation lasts a minimum of 15 minutes, may be unannounced and does not require pre- and post-observation conferences, although your evaluator may conduct them.

What aspects of my teaching will be evaluated during an observation?

As in previous years, evaluators will base their ratings on eight components of the Danielson Rubric:
1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy;
1e: Designing coherent instruction;
2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport;
2d: Managing student behavior;
3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques;
3c: Engaging students in learning;
3d: Using assessment in instruction;
4e: Growing and developing professionally.

When and how will I receive feedback on my observations?
The UFT believes timely feedback is critical for professional growth. Your principal or other evaluator must provide feedback within 10 school days after your observation. Feedback can be provided through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication. At your Initial Planning Conference, you may indicate a preference regarding the feedback format.

In this feedback, your evaluator must tell you whether the observation will be used for evaluative purposes. Your evaluator must provide you with an evaluator form no later than 30 school days after your observation.

From the time an observation is conducted until the time you receive the evaluator form for it, your evaluator may conduct only one additional evaluative observation (formal or informal).

When should I expect to meet with my evaluator?

Your evaluator must conduct an Initial Planning Conference with you no later than the last Friday in October. This in-person conversation between you and your evaluator should take place at a mutually agreed upon time. This conference is an opportunity for you to discuss previous evaluations, current classes and plans for the upcoming school year.

Your evaluator must also conduct a summative conference with you between the last Friday in April and the last Friday in June. This in-person conversation gives you a chance to talk about the year’s observations and to answer any questions your evaluator has.


All I can add is that I would request a post-observation conference for feedback so that you can get to show your side of the lesson in advance of the observation report being written. I would do this unless you are assured of good observations in advance as some of you are.

CHICAGO TEACHERS UNION TWEETS GET WELL WISHES TO BERNIE SANDERS WHILE GM WORKERS REMAIN ON STRIKE UPHOLDING TEMPORARY WORKER RIGHTS (UPDATED WITH BERNIE VIDEO)

You've probably heard that Bernie Sanders raised a whopping $25 million for the third quarter of 2019 in his run for president with a million plus donors (including me) and that teachers were his biggest donors by job title. However, yesterday Bernie was hospitalized with a blocked artery and two stents were inserted. Friends at the Chicago Teachers Union, where last week 94% voted to authorize a strike, (October 17) sent Bernie a rather appropriate get well wish on Twitter.

ChicagoTeachersUnion

@CTULocal1

We said a couple of weeks ago that @BernieSanders was in good hands, and that's even more true today. Rest up, friend, and we'll see you back in the struggle soon!

Once again it's me not ICEUFT that is touting the Bernie stuff.

Meanwhile, the UAW strike continues. It is now day 17. What is so impressive about the GM strikers is their sense of solidarity. Permanent workers will not settle until their temporary colleagues have a clear path to a permanent job.

From the Detroit News:
UAW Region 1A Director Chuck Browning told members picketing outside GM's powertrain plant in Romulus on Sunday afternoon that negotiators are "dealing with the same thing" they were dealing with more than two weeks ago.

UAW Region 1A Director Chuck Browning told picketers outside GM's powertrain plant in Romulus on Sunday that negotiators are trying to "take care of the temps."

UAW Region 1A Director Chuck Browning told picketers outside GM's powertrain plant in Romulus on Sunday that negotiators are trying to "take care of the temps." 

"We’ve been telling the company you got temporary workers and they’re working full-time for years, they need to be full-time employees," Browning told a group gathered outside the plant. "You need to give us language that prevents that from happening from this point going on." 

A UAW member posted a video of Browning's nine-minute appearance on Facebook.

The UAW and GM have said for months that temporary workers would be a contentious issue in the 2019 negotiations. The UAW argues that the Detroit Three misuse line workers with that "temporary" designation by using them as though they are full-time employees.

New York City teachers could learn from this kind of union solidarity. Could you imagine if we said no more ATRs, no more at will employment for probationary teachers (we demand a just cause dismissal standard), and no more extensions of probation? Now imagine all New York City teachers were ready to walk unless these demands and others were met? No, that is inconceivable. As that is the case, things will probably not improve much.

Update
I was truly moved by this Bernie Sanders video from independent vote for Bernie.org via Common Dreams showing the corporate media images of Bernie followed by the real life caring, compassionate, Bernie.

MASPETH HIGH SCHOOL PARENTS AND MAYOR LOOK TO BE IN DENIAL ON GRADE FRAUD

When you are going to go up against an administration of a school, make sure you have the parents with you or it will be much tougher. There is an article in this week's Queens Chronicle where the parents are standing behind the administration at Maspeth High School, even with substantial evidence of grade fraud that has been reported by Sue Edelman in the NY Post and here and here. I fully understand parents supporting a school as they don't want their own children's diplomas devalued but the evidence here is very strong.

For anyone who may have forgotten the original NY Post piece:
At highly rated Maspeth High School in Queens, students know they can play hooky, skip course work, flunk tests — and still pass.

They call it the “Maspeth Minimum,” meaning everyone gets at least the minimum grade or score needed to pass or graduate, no matter what.

Whistleblowers call it fraud. The secret to the school’s 98% graduation and 90% Regents pass rate, they say, is simple: “Cheat!”

Four teachers told The Post that the 2,100-student high school — awarded a prestigious National Blue Ribbon in 2018 by the federal secretary of education — has an unwritten but iron-clad “no-fail policy,” even for kids who repeatedly don’t do the work or even show up.

“Teachers are not allowed to fail students,” a staffer said.

One recent Maspeth graduate posted on Instagram about taking Mandarin in 11th grade, writing, “there was no way I should of passed that class.”

But in the end, someone raised the student’s failing grade just high enough to earn a credit.

“At the time, I didn’t believe in the ‘maspeth minimum’ thing but I almost never showed up to class and vividly remember having multiple 0’s on quizzes I never took,” the student wrote. “My average was a 45 and then magically turned into a 65 when my report card came in.”

Mayor de Blasio knew about this halfway through the summer. From another NY Post Sue Edelman piece:
The stunning allegations surfaced on July 30, when (Councilman Robert) Holden first met a Maspeth teacher who brought him a binder full of evidence, including schedules with non-existent classes, records of no-show students who graduated, and statements by students who said they received passing grades or test scores they didn’t deserve.

Holden called the mayor’s office immediately. On Friday, Aug. 2, he met with Lydon Sleeper, the mayor’s intergovernmental affairs director, asking him to bring in the city’s Department of Investigation.

Holden then forwarded the evidence to DOI, which sent it to the Special Commissioner of Investigation for city schools, Anastasia Coleman.

The next week, four ex-Maspeth teachers came to Holden’s office to speak with investigators, but SCI said it had no one to send.

To update the story, the Queens Chronicle sent a reporter to the September meeting of the Maspeth HS PTA and parents were not at all upset with the school but instead blamed the whistle-blowers.
As allegations about widespread cheating at Maspeth High School swirl, the September meeting of the Parent Teacher Association saw support for the school last Wednesday.

One mother, whose son who is a junior, said, “I’ve never seen a school so well run,” to applause from other parents.

Another mother said, “I know that this school will succeed even though there was some negative press and will be investigated. And I’m sure that everything will be null and void.”

Her husband noted that their son has improved since coming to the school.

“Every teacher has put that extra effort in,” he said. “So please don’t believe what you hear.”

Accusations from former teachers who came forward to the New York Post include math teachers changing incorrect answers on Scantron exam forms, truant students passing classes and an assistant principal teaching a course where attendance is not required. Two official investigations into the allegations are underway.

Mayor de Blasio's office is also attacking Councilman Holden. Back to the Chronicle: 

Mayor de Blasio’s senior communications advisor, Wiley Norvell, criticized Holden on Twitter last Sunday, saying the councilman’s “conduct here is irresponsible. He is playing fast and loose with the facts.”

“When he learned of complaints, Holden didn’t do the ONE thing all City employees and elected officials are required to do — report these issues directly to the appropriate investigators,” Wiley tweeted.

He added that Holden initially refused to provide details, including the name of the school. The Mayor’s Office contacted the SCI and a few days later Holden disclosed the school in question, which the office passed on to the SCI, according to Wiley.

“Rather than let SCI do its work and investigate, Holden has been trying to score points in the press, repeatedly jeopardizing the investigation,” Wiley tweeted.

Holden shot back on Twitter, saying “Like grade fraud, incompetence is systemic in the @NYCMayor’s administration. @BilldeBlasio cares more about the press than the children affected by this corruption. As is evidenced by him sending his lapdogs to do his spinning.”

I am not sure how contacting the press jeopardizes an investigation. In my experience and I am certain with many others too, when it comes to the Department of Education if the press is not involved, incidents are swept under the rug.

At Jamaica High School in 2010, the DOE initially said there wasn't any transcript fixing when insiders reported it to the NY Post and provided substantial evidence to investigators. The DOE comment on Sue Edelman's October 31, 2010 article:
"Jamaica High School took the proper steps to review documentation and grant credit appropriately,” (a DOE Spokesperson) said. 

Then a week later after the story hit the paper the DOE was singing a different tune:
The DOE at first denied any wrongdoing but "took a closer look at the school’s data' after The Post’s report," said a spokesman.

It found that the school had recently erased some 1,100 credits to about 150 students for 606 “foreign transfer courses.”

Stay quiet at your own peril ladies and gentlemen.

I will be emailing support to Councilman Holden. If you want to also, his email is District30@council.nyc.gov

NEWS OF MASPETH HIGH SCHOOL SLOW FRAUD INVESTIGATION LEADS ME TO ASK WHAT DOES THE UFT GET FOR BEING ON TEAM DE BLASIO?

Sue Edelman has a couple of pieces on Maspeth High School's grade fixing today in the NY Post. One concerns a teacher who resigned rather than play the everybody passes game. The other is primarily an interview with Democratic Councilman Robert Holden who provides an account of how he told Mayor Bill de Blasio about what was occurring at Maspeth HS and then nothing happened.

From the article:
Mayor Bill de Blasio was personally alerted to evidence of grade-fixing and fraud at Maspeth High School in mid-August, but ignored pleas to remove the school’s allegedly crooked leaders before the new school year, The Post has learned.

“It was like I had witnessed a crime,” said City Councilman Robert Holden, who demanded to speak with the mayor after meeting whistle-blowing teachers with documents showing a culture of cheating at the highly rated school.

“I wanted him to put it on the fast track. I wanted him to step into this and get those people out,” the Queens lawmaker told The Post.

But the mayor did not act with urgency, Holden charged, prompting him to go public and to meet with acting Queens District Attorney John Ryan, who has launched an investigation.

It is not at all surprising that de Blasio did nothing.

Further down we learn about Holden's conversation with de Blasio in mid-August about Maspeth HS:

After two weeks, when no investigators had contacted him, Holden emailed de Blasio on Aug. 13, a day after the mayor returned from Iowa for his now-defunct presidential campaign.

The subject line: “Need to talk.”

The mayor called back the following evening. Holden went over the litany of alleged misconduct at Maspeth HS, including grade-fixing, Regents rigging, fake classes to give students credits toward graduation, and intimidation of teachers who didn’t play ball.

“They’re gangsters,” Holden said he told the mayor. “They should not be in there one more day.”

But de Blasio seemed more concerned about Holden, a fellow Democrat, going to the press.

“It’s good that you gave it to me, but if you want to be on my team you have to play like a team member,” Holden quoted him as saying.

The mayor noted that Holden was fortunate to speak with him. “You have your district. I have to run the whole city. I’m the big leagues.” he said, according to Holden.

“I just kept saying, ‘Maspeth High School needs attention,’” Holden said.

Classes started Sept. 5 without any sign of attention. The Maspeth whistleblowers finally asked to meet with a reporter, Holden said.

Chaz exposes yet again how this case shows the Department of Education's double standard where teachers suspected of anything would be immediately removed from their schools but administrators  and their supporters stay in place even with overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing. He is 100% right. There should be equal due process. I am also thinking about another angle of this story.

At the Executive Board, UFT leadership said members should give them the information on suspected fraud so they can deal with it. They deal with it by passing it to DOE and then, except for a few cases, the complaints go nowhere while whistleblowers risk retaliation.

Have you heard much from the UFT on grade fraud in general? I think we all can agree that UFT President Michael Mulgrew is part of de Blasio's team as the UFT doesn't say much negative about the mayor in public or private and Mulgrew even helped to fund raise for the mayor's presidential campaign. Touting the system, as the UFT does, is a very questionable strategy.

Besides less public support for charter schools compared to former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and two sub-par contracts, what have we gotten in exchange for Mulgrew kowtowing to de Blasio?

IS ELIZABETH WARREN ON THE SIDE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION?

Like many news junkies, I am very interested in who will be the next President of the United States. After reading his Thurgood Marshall Education plan and his Workplace Democracy plan, I (not speaking for ICE-UFT) am sold that Senator Bernie Sanders is a friend of teachers, workers and public education. I even donated to his campaign like about a million other people.

However, because Bernie has the socialist label attached to him, and his plans are so people friendly, I am not naive. The establishment/elite/ruling class/donor class/oligarchs/billionaire class or whatever you want to call them will do just about anything in order to knock him down. Can the public ignore the noise and vote for someone who is really on our side? Who knows?

Some of my friends are really looking close at Elizabeth Warren as an alternative. A former student is working for her. Senator Warren is rising in the polls. Is she our friend or is she just shilling for our votes and then she will abandon us for the donor class like so many Democrats have done in my lifetime once elected? (See Barack Obama supporting the firing of teachers and Race to the Top for quick examples)

The Network for Public Education Action has excellent reviews of all of the 2020 presidential candidates. This is some of what they say about Senator Warren:

Senator Warren’s Senior Education Policy Advisor was a TFA teacher and a policy intern with the Alliance for Excellent Education, a reform leaning 501(c)(3) organization that has received almost $20 million in grant funding from the Gates Foundation.

At a recent Oakland rally, she was introduced by a former charter school teacher who who was a fellow and blogger for GO Public Schools, a charter school lobbying organization.

There are red flags on testing too but on the positive side on donors:

FUTURE45

This Super PAC spent $1,026,590.17 to oppose Warren’s election. Paul Singer is a main contributor to the PAC. Singer is a billionaire hedge fund manager who makes large contributions to Success Academy, the largest charter school network in New York City, and to pro-charter New York PACs.

 

Diane Ravitch calls Warren's education positions "murky at best." Here is what Ravitch concluded last week after citing a critical analysis of Warren's education positions written by Eric Blanc:

If Warren wants the support of public school teachers and parents, she must issue a plan that clarifies her plans on testing and privatization.

She needs to be crystal clear about whether she would eliminate the federal mandate for annual testing in grades 3-8, a leftover from George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind, which has been an expensive dud. The testing has enriched the testing industry but had no effect on student scores.

Warren needs to take a stand on the federal Charter Schools Program, which is Betsy DeVos’ slush fund for corporate charter chains that are already amply funded by billionaires.

I would vote for Elizabeth Warren over Donald Trump or Cory Booker but is she really with us? 

LACK OF ACTIVE UFT CHAPTERS SHOULD RAISE ALARM BELLS

I am often in disbelief about how underutilized the UFT Contract is. It is a worthless document if people don't use it to exercise their rights. One of the easiest and most powerful ways to show solidarity and union strength is through the UFT Consultation Committee. Contract Article 19H3 covers consultation at the school level:

The head of the school and the school chapter committee shall meet once a month during the school year to consult on matters of school policy and on questions relating to the implementation of this Agreement.

Teachers have the right to meet in the school with the Principal regularly. The Chapter Leader can select or have an elected Consultation Committee and the Principal has to meet with them monthly. This is a contractual obligation. In these consultation meetings the Chapter Leader sets the agenda on what school policy matters need to be discussed and what problems there are in implementing the Contract. I would think that from over 1,600 non charter schools in NYC that this would be the simplest way for a UFT Chapter to sit across a table on equal footing with the Principal. However, at the UFT Executive Board the other night we learned from Arthur Goldstein's report that there are only 230 schools that filed over five reports of Consultation Committee meetings with their Principals last year.

Here is exactly how Arthur put it in his minutes of Michael Mulgrew's President's Report:

Report on last year’s consultations—1400 schools filed at least one, 230 over five. Wants at least 7 from all this year.

Let's do some simple math to see how active UFT Chapters are. The Department of Education Website says there are 1,840 schools as of September 2018. Of those 1,840, 235 are charter schools. I think some of those charter schools are UFT and subject to the Contract but for our purposes here, I'm going to exclude all 235 because I don't know who is UFT and who isn't. That leaves 1,605 schools. 230 schools had more than five consultations. 230 divided by 1,605 = .143. If we put that into percentage terms, that means 14.3% of the schools have chapters that are meeting with their principals more than once every two months. That is frightening.

I'm going to assume for our argument that less than 235 are doing monthly consultations with the Principal because Mulgrew stated that 235 did over five and he is known for painting optimistic pictures with numbers. Maybe some schools are meeting but not filing reports but any which way you slice it, this shows that the overwhelming majority of UFT Chapters are inactive at a very basic level. To be fair, Mulgrew boasts that 1,400 did file a report of at least one consultation. That is something but one Consultation Committee meeting a year is inadequate. Mulgrew's figures concede that around 200 don't consult at all or can't be bothered to file one report that the Union asked for.

If I were the President and I had this information, I would call this a school level engagement crisis in need of immediate attention. I would be directing every District Representative and Vice President to make sure their Chapter Leaders were holding monthly Consultation Committee meetings, even if they have good relations with their administrators. I would check on this every month. All of the officers would be showing up at the dead Chapters and forming Consultation Committees. I would run meetings if people were afraid to. I would go so far as to publish the list of  Chapters doing their job and maybe list the Chapters that are not. Union presence at the school level is so important and it seems to be so lacking these days.

This is not exclusively leadership's responsibility. If I was teaching, I would be working with colleagues to find out about Chapter Committee consultations. A group of us would show the Chapter Leader the Contract so nobody has to face a Chapter Leader who might be in bed with management alone. That is called organizing.  I would do that instead of anonymously commenting here. If UFT members get together, they can't all be targeted.

The UFT needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. We now have some evidence from the President to show that there is much work that needs to be done. If you want to know how far we are behind our peers in Chicago in terms of member activism, this week the Chicago teachers in their schools took a strike authorization vote and 94% voted in favor of striking. They did this while they are being offered 16% raises over 5 years.  They are demanding better teaching and learning conditions. Yes it could happen here if we rebuilt a real union from bottom to top

RANK & FILE + PUBLIC PRESSURE WORKED: SCHOOL CLOSED ON DECEMBER 23!

There was no fanfare and no announcement at last night's UFT Executive Board but the Department of Education has quietly changed the calendar for the 2019-20 school year. School is now closed on Monday, December 23rd, 2019 in New York City.

The updated calendar says this:

Dec 23-Jan 1 Winter Recess (Schools closed)-Dates updated

We can take a little bit of credit for the change as pressure from parents and rank and file teachers, which we certainly helped to motivate, convinced the UFT to keep fighting for December 23. Our April 26 blog piece and our NY 1 appearance did something to bring this issue to the public sphere where we looked reasonable by using precedent. When December 23rd came on a Monday in the past, it was always a day off going back 33 years. It will be this year too. We didn't ask to give back a day like others did either. The rest of the calendar is unchanged.

Enjoy your full Winter Recess everyone!

HOW WIDESPREAD IS THE GRADE FRAUD IN NYC SCHOOLS?

The NY Post after exposing the Maspeth High School grade scandal says the floodgates are now open and they cite our friend Chaz and another source to make their case.

This is the Saturday piece:

Maspeth Cheating Espose Opens Floodgates for other Examples of Academic Fraud
by Post Staff Report

Last Sunday, The Post exposed rampant cheating at Maspeth High School in Queens. The bombshell report triggered a Queens DA probe and reactions from educators and students across the city, many of whom claim the same academic fraud occurs at their schools.

“Have I been told in a staff meeting, by a Superintendent who is now an Executive Superintendent, that ‘You’d better not fail any of those children?’ Absolutely. Did she mean pass kids who had terrible attendance and hadn’t mastered the curriculum? Absolutely. Did she mean to go as far as Maspeth? No, but when you send that kind of message, here’s what happens.” — Jane Roth, a New York City teacher, on social media

“Some kids are like, ‘Why are you upset? They’re helping you out.’ They’re not helping me, they’re doing it for their own image. They’re trying to save their own ass. I’m not an idiot.” — current Maspeth HS student in an interview with The Post.

Maspeth High School alum's shocking admission about school's 'no fail' policy
“Can someone name a school not doing this type of so-called cheating? This is what the city wants principals to do.” — commenter on Chaz’s School Daze, a blog for teachers

“I wish someone would investigate my school, Flushing High School, where we can’t give zeros to students who plagiarize an assignment or who don’t turn it in. They have to be given 55 . . . Our principal brags about the graduation rate going up to 70 percent . . . as long as you have the numbers, that’s all that matters to the DOE.” — commenter on Chaz’s School Daze


I really want to know if these schools are the rule in NYC schools. For me, Jamaica High School was closed in part because we wouldn't play the game so we exposed an attempt at giving credits for phantom classes back in 2010. After Jamaica phased out, I then moved onto Middle College where the principal at the time questioned passing grades if students did not have the proper amount of seat time. I certainly respected that. Judging from what I see here, my experiences were a total outlier.

Please comment but leave names of school or schools where you know grade fraud/inflation is taking place. Your anonymity is assured. If you are an ATR, just tell us one or two schools you have been to where the cheating exists. Spread the word if you like.

Thank you.