Chapter Votes Unanimously to Win Back the Givebacks!!

UFT
Jamaica Chapter News
October 30, 2006

by James Eterno

CHAPTER VOTES UNANIMOUSLY TO WIN BACK THE GIVEBACKS!

As per suggestion from UFT President Randi Weingarten, the Jamaica High School Chapter did not distribute but rather we discussed the UFT’s bargaining demands for the next Contract at Friday’s Chapter Meeting in the library where there was standing room only. Even though the current Contract does not expire until October 12, 2007, the UFT is in a coalition with other unions to try to negotiate economic and some non economic matters.

After the demands were presented to the body, Debbie Saal noted that the UFT did not ask to win back any of the givebacks from our latest Contract. The Chapter seemed revolted by this fact. Debbie proposed that the UFT demand that we take back what we gave away in the last round of negotiations. These take-backs would include:

A full summer vacation, no school before Labor Day

Preferred placements in vacancies for members if a school is closed or reorganized

Right to fill a vacant position if a member is excessed

Transfers based upon seniority and/or School Based Options Committees, a majority of who are UFT members

Chapter leaders collaborate, not merely consultation with principal, on professional activities menu

Hall patrols and cafeteria duty strictly prohibited by contract

Members will be allowed to grieve unfair/inaccurate material in their files

Members will be allowed to grieve unfair/inaccurate observation reports

No member shall be suspended without pay based upon probable cause of serious misconduct or sexual misconduct (members are innocent until proven guilty)

No expedited 3020A hearings for time and attendance matters

The end to the 37.5 minute small group instruction period they have in many schools.

Eric Chasanoff seconded the motion to take back the givebacks and Bob Klugman third, fourth and fifthed the proposal. A full discussion followed with the only reservation being that we separate the economic from non economic demands since some will cost us money that could be taken from a potential pay increase. It was agreed to prioritize them. Some of the math teachers pointed out that in the last two Contracts we have added about a month's worth of extra teaching time (extended day and year) but we were never fully compensated for that time as our sick days remain at a NY Metropolitan area low of ten per year.

Mike Pallisco summed it all up when he made the following statement that could be our rallying cry: “A bad Contract is a bad Contract; let’s fix it.” You can’t get something if you don’t ask for it so the Chapter voted unanimously after the discussion to demand that the UFT take back the givebacks. Later in the day the same proposal to win back the givebacks was made by me and unanimously endorsed by the Independent Community of Educators (ICE). It should be noted that the city and the coalition including the UFT are in serious negotiations for new Contracts. More details will follow on this issue soon.

RANDI AT DA CALLS FOR CHAPTER MEETINGS TO DISCUSS CONTRACT DEMANDS

We would like to Know if your Chapter is Discussing Them

By James Eterno

The UFT has submitted its bargaining demands for a new contract, even though our current contract does not expire for about a year. We have done this because we are in a coalition with 16 unions for economic demands for the next round of bargaining. The UFT presented the demands to the delegates who approved them at the last DA.

Randi then asked us to go back to our chapters and have a meeting to discuss the demands, instead of printing them. We have heard reports that some schools are discussing the demands but many are not.

ICE urges rank and file members to ask that their chapter leaders have a meeting to discuss the bargaining demands, both economic and non economic if they have not yet done so. We will not print them so as to honor the president's request that they not be printed and distributed but we would like people to have discussions in chapter meetings. We discussed the demands at an ICE meeting as did the Jamaica HS Chapter where we had a full debate and vote.

Please tell us if your chapter is discussing the contract.

UNITY AGAIN MAKES A MOCKERY OF DEMOCRACY AT CHAPTER ELECTION APPEALS & FIRST DA

At the October 17 Executive Board and October 18 Delegate Assembly, Randi and Unity once again showed their clear biases. Randi created excuses nobody ever dreamed of to ensure that non Unity people cannot win Chapter elections on Tuesday and she stalled for so long on Wednesday that delegates were never allowed to vote on restoring union democracy in the hiring of District Representatives.

Two Chapters filed appeals of the Spring 2007 Chapter Elections to the Executive Board . Grady High School had a challenge to a Delegate election and Forest Hills High School had a Chapter Leader Election challenge. The UFT Constitutition empowers the Executive Board to settle such appeals.

At Grady the main question to be decided was how to proceed if candidates are disqualified from running for Teacher Delegate positions. For years Grady allowed two non teachers (a paraprofessional and a guidance counselor) to be Teacher Delegates. This obviously violated the UFT Constitution. What is very strange is that this obviously unconstitutional arrangement was condoned by then chapter leader Michael Mulgrew who was subsequently promoted to UFT Vice President for Vocational and Technical High Schools by the Unity machine. If a chapter leader didn't know that only teachers can serve as teacher delegates or blatantly chose to ignore the rules for years, it leads us to question his competence or his judgement. After Jeff Kaufman pointed out Mulgrew's obvious negligence, many of the members in the audience at the Executive Board were asking, "WHAT DID VP MULGREW KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?"

Interestingly, Weingarten took a Point of Personal Privilege and proceeded to shoot off a vicious personal attack against Jeff Kaufman instead of addressing Mulgrew's actions. When the body finally returned to the Grady issue, there was some interesting debate because the UFT Election Rules are silent about what to do if nominees are disqualified after an election takes place. Do the qualified nominees who had the next most votes win or is it proper to have new nominations and a new election? Unity decided to make up new rules and allow for a second election to take place. Would they have created a new rule to have a second election if the people who ended up winning election number one were members of the Unity Caucus? We doubt it. The Forest Hills High School fiasco proves our point that Unity actions have nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with pushing the Unity political agenda.

At Forest Hills, veteran Chapter Leader Barbara Kaplan-Halper ( also a member of the UFT Executive Board elected from ICE) was out sick for much of last year. Her temporary replacement was Eddie Mesadore who didn't bother to have some of the new teachers sign up to join the UFT. Mesadore was courted by Unity and had nothing to do with any opposition caucuses so the Union obviously had a favorite candidate when Mesadore decided to challenge Kaplan-Halper for Chapter Leader last spring. The first election resulted in a tie. The Forest Hills High School Election Committee on advisement from the UFT decided to run a second election on June 23. The second election was meticulously run by the Election Committee and it was another close vote (95-95) except that there was a disputed ballot that was set aside. After all the votes were counted, the Election Committee ruled that the person who had made a scribble in the Mesadore box and then a clear X in the Kaplan-Halper box had voted for Kaplan-Halper. The Committee declared Kaplan-Halper the winner 96 to 95. There were two challenges: one questioning the disputed ballot and the second questioning who was eligible to vote. The Election Committee scrupulously made sure that only union members could vote so they were not worried as they had been calling the UFT to make sure only proper UFT members were voting.

Instead of investigating if ineligible voters cast ballots and looking at the challenged ballot, Queens Borough Representative Harolyn Fritz overturned Kaplan-Halper's victory. She told Barbara, Jeff Kaufman, Norman Scott and James Eterno who met with her that she was following the election rules of the American Arbitration Association in voiding the disputed ballot that she never saw. We examined AAA election rules and there is nothing about voiding ballots that have scribble in a box. Fritz told us there were no other issues. She then ordered a third election to be run by the Queens Office and they put a notice in mailboxes while people were attending the school's graduation stating that there were irregularities in election two and there would be a third election the next day. This angered the Election Committee who had already certified the second election but it pleased the administration as Barbara is known as a strong chapter leader. One of the assistant principals gave an endorsement of Mesadore in a Department meeting. Mesadore won a close third election but many of Kaplan Halper's frustrated supporters had seen enough by then. Barbara challenged Fritz's decision to void election 2.

At the Executive Board, Randi did the best job of obfuscation that many eyes have ever seen. She talked about anything but the second election which Kaplan-Halper clearly won in order to try to make a motion for a fourth election if irregularities in election 3 could be proven. Once again she sparred with Kaufman who demanded that the disputed ballot in election 2 be counted and that Barbara's election be upheld. Two members of the Forest Hills Election Committee supported Jeff. Randi and the Unity disciples finally decided to set up a "Tripartite Committee" to examine all of the issues in the Forest Hills Elections.

What's next for Randi: Drinks with Catherine Harris to discuss stealing elections? As Barbara Kaplan-Halper is from ICE, it looks as though Unity will do whatever it takes to make sure she doesn't win.

Unfortunately, that's not all folks. At Wednesday's Delegate Assembly Meeting, Randi ran out the clock better than a football team with a small lead that wants to hold the ball until time runs out . Randi spent time allowing a number of speakers from outside to address the body and she even extended the question period. We spent about an hour discussing a resolution that had support from over 99% of the delegates. Ironically, we had two speakers tell us how important it is to vote in the November elections and another came in to plug his political party. All of this prevented the delegates from having a discussion on union democracy as the issue of electing UFT District Representatives or continuing top-down appointments from President Weingarten wasn't addressed because time ran out.

Letter-in-File Grievances, R.I.P.

One of the worst givebacks in our current contract was the right, under Article 21A, to grieve letters in the file. We have addressed this loss in the past but today, I had the rare opportunity to participate in one of the last letter-in-the-file arbitrations we shall ever see unless we win this valuable right back.

Under Article 21A supervisors can include in your personnel file letters of a disciplinary or negative nature limited only by whether they were "unfair" or "inaccurate." In past contracts any unfairness or inaccuracy would invalidate the whole letter. Under more recent contracts this was watered down to allow the arbitrator to change the improper parts.

With our new contract, of course, there is no right to grieve these letters. The principal can write anything he/she wishes without fear that a grievance procedure will change or delete the letter. When the U-rating is given the letter can theoretically be challenged but U-rating appeals are run by DOE supervisors. They will clearly not provide the forum to remove the letters that our Union has been so successful in doing at arbitrations. (According to Gary Rabinowitz, Special Rep in charge of LIF Arbitrations, the Union had a 50% success rate at arbitration).

At the time of the present contract's implementation there were a number of letter-in-file grievances at Step III. The Union and DOE agreed that these grievances would all be heard at "expedited" arbitrations. Today, I participated in two of these.

While there are some very fundamental problems in which LIF grievances are (should I say were) handled there is no doubt how empowering the procedure is to the member and the Chapter. The principal and assistant principal, who were after one member of my chapter, had to explain and testify to support what they had written. The grievant and I then explained and testified what really happened.

The grievant received a U-rating based on these letters so if the arbitrator removes or changes the letters in a favorable way she will be able to keep her job. It is difficult to predict what the arbitrator will do but at least she had a fair opportunity to confront her supervisors and demonstrate that these unfair and inaccurate letters should be removed.

I explained to my member that this arbitration existed in the "twilight zone" and that if the letters were written today she would only have the U-rating appeal to deal with the letters.

She gazed at me quizzically and said, "Why, in the hell, would anyone have voted for this contract?"

Q&A on Edwize, the UFT Blog

We were recently contacted by a member of the media to respond to questions about the UFT's blog, Edwize. The following are the questions and the answers we submitted:


Q.: According to UFT staff, Edwize was intended to be a vehicle for the UFT to join the debate about education policy. It was not intended to be a space for discussion of internal union politics. However, before and during the contract vote last year, Edwize became a forum for discussion of the contract. Is this accurate?

A.: Edwize not only supported the contract but vehemently attacked the opposition. Some of the attacks were personal.

Q.: Is Edwize a valuable resource for you and other UFTers? Why? What should Edwize be that it is not, in your view?

A.: Edwize is viewed by a handful of people since it was clear, early on, that it was an uncritical mouthpiece for the then current union policies. It is clearly partisan and those members who view it, know this.

Q.: Was Edwize an important forum for debate of the contract? What were the limits? What were the benefits? Did rank-and-file members who were not already activists talk about Edwize and content posted there?

A.:While the main posts were in total support of the contract certain comments were deleted. There was a clear agenda and they did not hide it.

Q.: Did you experience any censorship of your views on Edwize?

A.: See above.

Q.: Should Edwize be a forum for discussion/debate in the upcoming UFT elections?

A.: While the opposition does not need this forum I sincerely believe they will keep far away from election issues for fear of the LMDRA. They do not want their messages seriously questioned.

Q.: Edwize does not link to ICE-UFT, as far as I can tell. Have you asked them to link to your site?

A.: That is correct. I asked the person in charge early on to link us and other teacher sites since their list of sites seemed to be quite extensive. I was politely told that the blog was "not for partisanship." Chalk one up for anti-Union Democracy.

Q.: Any other comments?

The ICE-UFT blog was started shortly after Edwize began. We are consulted by many of our members and the media as the only clear opposition to UFT-Unity politics. We support our Union but not its leadership and all of us work very hard to force our leadership to allow the Union to become more democratic. When we question Union policy we are labeled, on Edwize and elsewhere, as anti-union. While we have a small presence on the Executive Board we are effective in raising critical issues to our members. Our blog has been a strong voice in that effort.

Executive Board Report

UNITY DOMINATED EXECUTIVE BOARD DEFENDS ITS INDEFENSIBLE POWER GRAB!
UNITY MESSAGE TO MEMBERSHIP:

"NON UNITY MEMBERS NEED NOT APPLY FOR FULL TIME UNION JOBS"


UFT district representatives provide direct services to chapter leaders and members within a particular school district. The Unity dominated UFT Executive Board after a spirited debate on Monday voted to continue the corporate style top-down system where President Randi Weingarten appoints district representatives while a newly created committee will study the issue of whether it's better for the Union to have elections for DR positions or to continue the present undemocratic hiring system.

The corporate style presidential appointment system has been in effect since 2003 when Unity used the excuse that the Board of Education was restructuring to cancel DR elections and allow Randi to appoint people to vacant DR positions. We know of no non-Unity member who has been selected by Randi for a District Rep position or any other full time Union job for pedagogues for that matter. Their message is clear that if one is not willing to sign the Unity loyalty pledge, forget about working full time for the UFT.

ICE strongly endorses elections for district representatives. Between 1969 and 2003, DR's were elected on a weighted vote of chapter leaders within a district; the more members a chapter had, the more votes the chapter leader had in the DR election. While this system was not perfect, it functioned well enough so that the accountability for DR's was to the chapter leaders who the district representatives serviced directly, not to Randi. The problem for Unity was that two non Unity chapter leaders were elected to district representative positions: Bruce Markens and then Tom Dromgoole when Bruce retired. Even though the overwhelming majority of the DR's were Unity, two non Unity DR's were too many so Unity used the excuse of the Board restructuring to cancel DR elections in 2003. (Districts still exist by state law.)

Unity sun-setted the 2003 district representative resolution every year and so they had to annually renew it. They overlooked that detail this past June and were caught off guard when Jeff Kaufman from ICE raised the issue on September 11 and told the Executive Board that the President was making illegal appointments since the end of June. Kaufman called for immediate DR elections. Two weeks later Unity had a new District Representative resolution that will continue the top-down presidential appointment process until a committee that is formed by the resolution decides how to hire future DR's or what to replace them with. ICE-TJC Executive Board members were outraged. ICE doesn't want a committee; we need elections.

The ICE-TJC reps on the Executive Board all gave passionate speeches opposing the policy of Randi appointing DR's. James Eterno, Jeff Kaufman and Arthur Colon each spoke about how flawed the current DR hiring process is. Our reps pointed out how the UFT uses a committee to recommend candidates for a district rep vacancy to the president who makes the selection. It is similar to the C-30 process that the Board of Ed utilizes to hire school principals and assistant principals that the UFT constantly criticizes. The UFT in the past created two committees to advocate for reforms to the C-30 system. One of those UFT committees recommended that the Board or Ed allow staff in a school to elect their supervisors. Ironically, the UFT when hiring DR's now emulates the Board's hiring procedures that we called unfair.
In fact, the UFT goes one step further than the Board of Ed because the Board at least allows each constituency on a C-30 hiring committee (UFT, CSA, DC37, parents, students) to choose their own representatives. The UFT committees that submit names to Randi for DR jobs are hand picked by Unity. In addition, it was pointed out in debate that the UFT made a similar power grab back in 1994 after it lost a high school vice presidency to the opposition a few years earlier. Unity then changed the rules to allow at large voting so all UFT members, including retirees and non high school personnel, now vote for the HS VP, instead of only members working in the high schools. Finally out of complete frustration, one of the ICE reps asked Unity why they are so afraid of elections?

Unity argued that things must settle down before the committee created to examine this issue could decide how DR's should be selected. This is the same argument Rudy Giulliani made when he unsuccessfully tried to postpone the 2001 Mayoral election after 9-11. A Unity member even said that he works well with the two non-Unity DR's. (Those two were elected under the old system and would never have been selected under the current arrangement.)

Randi left the chair to debate from the floor and argued that the issue was about servicing the members and how best to do it. She urged opposition members not to boycott the committee that will decide on the selection process in the future. She then tried to resume chairing the debate but was forced to sit down when ICE protested that she cannot participate in debate and then moderate the same debate. Finally, a vote was taken and the overwhelming Unity majority obeyed their loyalty oath and voted to allow the President to continue to appoint DR's, instead of reverting to elections. The ICE-TJC members all dissented.

The only way this decision can be overruled is if the Delegate Assembly uses its power and decides to review the issue. We would like to hear from any delegate who advocates for Union democracy as this is a core issue that separates Unity from ICE.

On a positive note, the Executive Board on Monday voted unanimously to donate $50,000 to the Transport Workers Union Local 100. TWU is suffering under the draconian fines that were imposed after last year's transit strike.

UFT Leadership Blinks: Still Refuses, However, to Admit Appointment of DRs Is Illegal

As reported here last week Randi could offer no explanation as to why selection of District Representatives was still being made even though the temporary resolution authorizing it expired last June. In the agenda for Monday's Executive Board meeting Randi and her leadership committee approved a resolution calling for the continuation of this illegal practice and the formation of a "bipartisan" committee to study the matter. They have no reason; no emergency; no strategy to explain why selection must continue. Rather they have to form a committee to dream up an excuse.

Study what? Whether democracy is better than autocratic rule?

The selection process for Queens High Schools District Representative is a prime example of how the appointment process passes over clearly competent candidates over a less qualifed applicant who is of course a member of the Unity Caucus. Just like the C-30 process the Union has fought to expose as a sham the DR selection process takes this bogus process one step further; there is no right for non-Unity members to take part in the process or be involved in the final decision making. Thus the "qualification" for DR becomes a competition for who is most loyal to their Unity pledge. And this is democracy?

If it weren't for Federal Law they would try to appoint all of the officers.

I am embarrassed to be part of an organization that touts democracy in other Unions and countries but shuts the door on a process that would make DRs accountable to the Chapter Leaders they serve and become more democratic.

I guess it's not hard to figure out why they want to restart the selection process.

Rikers Whistleblower Wins Small Victory in Case to Return Him to His School

What was supposed to be the first day of trial for Jeff Kaufman, Chapter Leader of Island Academy @ Rikers Island, in his bid to get his job back, became, instead, a small victory as the presiding judge ordered DOE to turn over essential documents for the case.

As you may recall Kaufman was removed from Rikers Island for allegedly engaging in “undue familiarity” as a pretext for his staunch union and organizing activities. The principal concluded that he had to be removed to protect the safety of the staff and inmates when Kaufman exposed how the school refused to provide credit for classes and other improprieties.

Kaufman requested that subpoenas be issued compelling the DOE and the DOC to produce documents which conclusively demonstrate that the principal and warden conspired to remove Kaufman from his teaching post and Chapter Leader position. The City submitted an aggressive opposition to the request which also called for the testimony of the Warden and other DOC officials as well as the Superintendent of the Alternative High School District.

Despite the opposition, all of the subpoenas were signed. The City’s delay in producing the documents has caused a delay in the trial. The next scheduled date has not been set.

Executive Board Report: 09-11-06

Randi to Executive Board “I Don’t Have To Answer Your Stinkin’ Questions About District Rep Elections.”

In a stunning show of arrogance, UFT President Weingarten refused to answer a simple question about why District Reps are still appointed rather than elected when there is no longer any legal authority for it.

A little background. Back in 2004 when the DOE reorganized the Districts into regions the UFT leadership used this as an excuse to end the practice of elections for District Reps. The resolution which passed was billed as “temporary measure” and expired at the end of the school year in June 2005.

The following year the UFT leadership still believed that elections were undemocratic and insisted on continuing the practice of appointing District Reps although there was no plausible reason to do so. A “temporary resolution” was repeated with the expiration date at the end of school in June 2006.

No resolutions were made and we thought it reverted back to elections.

WRONG!!!

Randi was asked a simple question tonight as to why appointments were continuing without authorization. A call to revoke the illegal appointments was made (Several DRs were appointed over the summer including Queens HS and several Districts). Randi blasted back with a question as to why we didn’t object last June when the Queens District Rep position was being interviewed. Easy…it was legal then. It isn’t now.

Randi, play by the rules…even those that are stacked up in your favor!

The bottom line is that appointment of DRs is clearly undemocratic and violative of the fair and equitable treatment of our members.

In other Executive Board antics that would make a spin doctor dizzy it was announced that our wonderful contract has yielded an unprecedented number of transfers and U-ratings are about the same as last year. Knowing that a principal has unbridled power to make staff life intolerable under our “wonderful contract” demonstrates that these unverified statistics do not mesh with our experience. Spin on guys but eventually you will be tossed off.

Randi made some more promises to teachers in the rubber room. What they need is proper representation not promises. Hire investigators and paralegals to help investigate the circumstances of the charges. Randi made a statement that she was concerned that there were those in the rubber room who didn’t want their cases investigated. Ridiculous.

You think it is better to be left in the dark?

Jamaica Chapter News

September 6, 2005



CHAPTER DEMANDS TIME TO SET UP ROOMS.

FIRST CHAPTER MEETING ENDS WITH A CROWD IN PRINCIPAL’S OFFICE!

The school year started off with tremendous energy as an incensed group of well over fifty teachers charged from our meeting in the library to the Principal’s office to conclude the meeting there. We were outraged because the new Contract guaranteed that part of the time in the two days before Labor Day was to be spent setting up our classrooms. However, on Friday the administration scheduled an all day “professional development” session.

Most members agreed that the development was a waste of time and taxpayer money but also teachers were irate because we weren’t given any time to plan for Tuesday’s opening. We needed to set up for the arrival of the students but were denied. Several phone calls were made to union officials demanding that we be given our contractually mandated time and a grievance was filed on behalf of the Chapter. The Principal claimed he did not know about the new provision until after he arranged the professional development but he said it would not happen again. At our chapter meeting, we discussed the issue and we were not happy with the compromises that were proposed so we voted unanimously to continue the meeting in the principal’s office.

Many UFT members told the principal about the need to set up classrooms, prepare labs, obtain materials for Tuesday and do other tasks. We needed the time. The Principal and the union eventually agreed to cut an hour off the professional development Friday to allow us some time to prepare for Tuesday. However, we did not feel this was sufficient so it was also agreed that teachers would not be held accountable by any administrators for the conditions of their classrooms during the first week of school.

While a teacher rebellion was needed to obtain what was our Contractual right, the Contract only talks about part of the day being used for classroom preparation; the exact length of time is left undefined. The money for the “professional development” was already paid for so when we decided to fight for our time, we basically received as much as we could obtain that afternoon. What we did on Friday was a success and proved once again that if we work as a group there is much that we can accomplish for our students and ourselves. For everyone who crowded into the Principal’s office on Friday I say a huge Thank You!

Joel Klein Meets the Press

by Norman Scott

In what was billed as a round-table discussion with the NYC education press corps on Friday Sept. 1, NYC schools Chancellor Joel Klein defended many of his policies that have come under recent attack. Particular attention has been focused on the high number of no-bid contracts, the most prominent of which has been the $17 million given to the consultant firm of Alvarez and Marsal, better known as corporate turn-around specialists than for expertise in the field of education.

A&M has come under scrutiny for their management of the schools in St. Louis which led to drastic cuts that included the closing of 16 schools, cut staff and charges the corporate management turn-around mentality had taken a school system in severe trouble and made it worse. A&M was also hired to manage the schools in New Orleans not long before Hurricane Katrina struck. While it is hard to judge their performance given the conditions, their main focus seems to have been on creating a privatized school system.

Klein defended the contract, which pays up to $1.7 million in salary to some individuals involved in what is claimed will lead to savings of $200 million. He said $87 million had already been saved leading to the hiring of 275 additional teachers.

There are reports that up to 500 teachers remain unassigned in addition to between a reported 1000-1500 experienced excessed teachers from schools that have closed who Klein said will be used as a reserve substitute corps. Klein defended his decision not to assign these teachers to understaffed schools because he wants to affirm the right of principals to choose their own people. This decision will cost around $5 million.

Questions were raised about the expense of the 44 unassigned Assistant Principals, who Klein said he would be forced to carry because of the contract with the Supervisors’ Union (CSA), whose head Jill Levy, has been extremely critical of Klein, claiming he denigrated the unassigned AP’s by hinting they could not get jobs because “no one wanted them.” Some have threatened a lawsuit.

Klein was asked about the expense of the Teaching Fellows and Teach For America programs where a high rate of teachers choose not to remain in the system after only a few years. He said retention rates were going up. He seemed to negate the experience factor in teacher quality when he said even if teachers do leave after 3 years the system benefited from having such high quality teachers for even a short time, pointing out that this is better than having some 20-year teachers who do not function effectively. He did not address charges from some experienced teachers that they have been systematically discriminated against, with some schools openly advertising positions would only be open to first year teachers and openly stating “They must not be a transfer from another NYC public school.” Some have surmised that the move to newer teachers is merely a cost-cutting device.

In addressing issues of the DOE having to pay numbers of teachers languishing in rubber rooms around the city, Klein said this was a matter of future contract negotiations.

He attributed many of the gains of his administration to the success of his negotiations with the UFT, which has allowed him flexibility in the placement of teachers without having to deal with seniority questions. He also praised provisions that have allowed him to pay certain teachers more based on the DOE’s needs through the creation of housing allowances and Lead teachers. He praised the UFT for its willingness to negotiate on many of the items he deems most important and expressed hope for cooperation in future contracts.

School in August Brought to You By Unity-Weingarten

ICE

INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY OF EDUCATORS

August 31, 2006

SCHOOL IN AUGUST BROUGHT TO YOU BY UNITY-WEINGARTEN

Welcome back to the first ever school year starting in August. The 2006-07 school calendar has a record 190 work days for teachers (more for several UFT job titles). The longer school year was endorsed by UFT President Randi Weingarten and the city during 2005 contract negotiations. Tens of thousands of UFT members voted against extending the school year. Keep this in mind as we slog through this interminable year because in the spring UFT members can decide who will negotiate the next UFT Contract where one of the main priorities should be to get us back a full summer vacation.

The Independent Community of Educators (ICE) is a caucus (political party) within the United Federation of Teachers. Union members join caucuses based upon common ideas. Randi Weingarten’s caucus is called Unity. Unity is an invitation only closed group that has controlled the UFT since it was founded in 1960. Unity has complete control of the Union’s policy making bodies. To join Unity, members must sign a loyalty oath that obliges them to “support the decisions of the caucus and leadership elected from the caucus in union and public forums.” In return, Unity members can receive patronage from Randi that includes union jobs, some of which pay over $100,000 a year with a union as well as a city pension. Opposing Unity does not make us anti-union. President Bush is a Republican. If you are against any of his policies, it does not make you unpatriotic. ICE opposed Weingarten’s policy to start school in August.

RANDI IGNORED ICE WARNINGS ON LONGER SCHOOL YEAR

In 2004 and 2005 there was a huge debate between the political caucuses of the UFT over whether to extend the year/day for UFT members. Randi/Unity advocated negotiating for additional time in the school day and school year as a way to settle our contract dispute with the city. ICE and Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC) said our day and year were long enough. We argued that adding extra time would not have any educational value and that we should not have to extend the day or year to get a decent salary increase. Instead, we backed educating and mobilizing the membership.

In the spring of 2005, ICE representatives at the UFT’s Delegate Assembly (the union’s highest policy making body) proposed a resolution recommending to the UFT that we reject adding days to the school year in contract negotiations. It was pointed out to the DA that NYC educators already worked a school year that was longer than many of the districts in the surrounding areas. ICE compared calendars in the city with calendars in suburbs and we found that in many Long Island districts the school year had a fixed 183 days for teachers but in the city we were already compelled to toil 185 or more days. We were working a longer school year for significantly lower salaries than educators in the suburbs earn. We saw no justification for lengthening the calendar; we argued that adding days before Labor Day was punitive.

President Weingarten took the rare step of leaving the podium to speak from the DA floor maintaining that she should be free to negotiate a longer school year. Her Unity followers agreed and several months later there was an extension of the school year buried among many givebacks in the new contract. Does anyone want her to negotiate the next contract? Don’t be fooled by the 350 person negotiating committee. It’s Randi and her Unity sycophants that make the decisions. What will they give up next?

It’s time to change UFT leadership. Support the ICE-TJC Coalition that will unite to challenge Randi/Unity in the spring 2007 UFT Election.

Welcome New Teachers

We thank you for reading our leaflet and exploring our site.

We are the Independent Community of Educators, one of the political caucuses within the United Federation of Teachers. We are made of up teachers, psychologists, paraprofessionals, social workers, retirees and other DOE staff members who are concerned that the current direction of our Union is being weakened by our leadership. This is most evident from our recent contract which negotiated away many of our rights to have a voice in the schools where we teach. Over 30,000 of our members voted against the contract.

As new teachers we understand a little about what you are going through and can help you navigate the maze of rules and regulations that engulf the DOE and the UFT. Our UFT leaders have lost touch with most of our members and have permitted the DOE to run our schools like corporations.

We ask that you keep an open mind and see what the DOE and UFT leadership has done to our schools. If you have any questions please call, write, email or comment on this blog. You need not give your name or other identifying criteria.

Good luck on your new position and drop us a line.

For those of you who did not get a copy of the leaflet distributed at the Brooklyn Tech New Teacher Conference it is reproduced below.

WELCOME NEW TEACHERS!

AN EDUCATED MEMBER IS OUR BEST HOPE FOR THE FUTURE

• from the Independent Community of Educators (ICE)

The union representing teachers is called the UFT- United Federation of Teachers.

Like all large organizations, UFT members have more than one philosophy about what the main goals of the union should be.

Members have formed parties within the union called caucuses.

The caucus of the UFT president, Randi Weingarten, is Unity Caucus, just like the party of the US president, George Bush, is the Republican Party.

If you did not support President Bush or all of his policies, it would mean you had different beliefs than him and that you might be a member of a different political party, but, it would not make you un-American.

If you do not support President Weingarten or all of her policies, it means you have different beliefs and might be a member of a different political caucus, but, it does not make you anti-Union.

Some of the decisions made by incumbent politicians are for the good of the people they represent. Some decisions are made so that incumbent politicians will be re-elected and their party will retain control of governance.

Keep this in mind as you listen to and read about what Randi Weingarten is doing. Be aware that there are other ideas about our Union. Union officials, including the president will be elected by you this Spring.

While all teachers pay UFT dues you need to sign a membership card to vote. Make sure you do.

If you want to find out more, log onto http://www.ice-uft.org/, the Independent Community of Educators’ website. We also have a web log which can be accessed at http://iceuftblog.blogspot.com/

Good luck as you begin your new career.

For more info please call us at (917) 992-3734 or email at feedback@ice-uft.org

Evening HS Obituary

ICE Warnings on Working Conditions Ignored for Years by Unity/UFT Leaders & DOE

By James Eterno; UFT Chapter Leader Jamaica HS & HS Executive Bd Rep.

The citywide Evening high school program in NYC for students who were at least sixteen years old and needed to make up classes that they failed or never had the opportunity to take in day school has been eliminated by the Department of Education. Evening schools were set up in a number of the city's high schools to serve a wide variety of students. Many of them attended classes in the day and some did not. Each evening high school in the centrally run program served students from several different day schools.

According to August 11 NY Sun, the Department of Education admitted that the evening high school program was "an abysmal failure." The Sun went on to explain that 28,000 students were referred to night school, while only 14,000 attended and only half of these passed courses. A close look at the evidence will reveal that evening high school did not die of natural causes; it was starved to death by educational neglect from the DOE and their accomplices at the UFT.

For many years teachers in evening high schools had been complaining about abominable working conditions, particularly when it came to overcrowding and lack of access to books and supplies. The DOE chronically under-funded its evening high school program. Evening school teachers spoke about a chronic shortage of supplies and books. They said that they had to use antiquated textbooks and put up with huge class sizes.

Classes were routinely packed with pupils since the contractual guidelines for class size limitations (34 students is the maximum for most high school classes) did not apply to evening school because it was a per session activity covered by Article 15 of the UFT Contract which says nothing about class sizes. Therefore, the DOE could place an unlimited amount of students into evening high school classes and not worry about grievances from the Union. The DOE routinely took advantage of this provision.

The normal procedure was to register 50, 60, 70, 80 or more students per class. It was not uncommon to have over 100 kids in a class. On the first few evenings of each semester, students would enter a mob scene otherwise known as a classroom. The lucky ones would find a seat. The remainder of the crowd was forced to fend. It was not unusual to see students in evening school standing in the back or the aisles or leaning on the window sills in the cramped classrooms. It is hardly the fault of the teachers or the pupils that so many students were not able to pass under these deplorable learning conditions. Most pupils simply gave up and stopped attending. When teachers complained to the administration or the UFT about the conditions, they were often told that they should be happy to have a per session job paying them additional income and they could be easily replaced if they didn't like it. A few fortunate instructors had their classes split but huge class sizes were normal.

Several years ago I raised the issue of evening high school overcrowding at the UFT Executive Board. UFT President Randi Weingarten asked me to provide specific information. Subsequently, a teacher took a great risk by giving me the list of class registers for Jamaica Evening High School. Class sizes were over 50 and 60 in certain classes. I was appalled. I faxed the list to Weingarten. Amazingly, when the UFT investigated they found that there wasn't a class size problem since by the middle of the semester so many students had given up and were chronically absent. Instead of being angry that the DOE was subjecting teachers and students to horrible overcrowding that forced many students to cut class, UFT leaders accused me of making stuff up. The teachers at Jamaica Evening High School knew that going to their union was a waste of time and basically resigned themselves to DOE's abominable evening school conditions.

For those that see the UFT Contract as the cause of virtually all of the problems in NYC education, the end of evening school should serve as a cautionary warning. If the UFT contract which is only moderately enforced now is completely eliminated, then day schools will become like evening high school. There would be nothing to stop administration from packing 60 or 70 students in a classroom, forcing the class to use dilapidated books and telling the teacher that he/she should be grateful to have a position. We need a stronger teacher Contract that is properly adhered to. As for evening high schools, the DOE should mend the program by fully funding it instead of ending it.


P.S. According to the NY Sun, money that would have gone to evening school will be spread to day high schools and principals will be told to offer their own AM, PM or Saturday schools for pupils that are behind so they can make up course credits. The Sun also said that principals should "combine these classes with the additional 37.5 minute classes added to the school day for struggling students under the recent teacher contract." The 37.5 minute sessions were not supposed to be for credit bearing classes. (During the battle over the contract last fall, ICE warned the UFT that the DOE would try to make the 37.5 minute sessions into classes.) Also, many high schools are already overcrowded so they don't offer the 37.5 minute sessions and don't have the space for the huge P.M. schools that would be needed to accommodate the many pupils who need to make up courses. To expect each individual school or a group of schools in the same region to offer the same diversified program that the night schools had (even in their chronically under-funded state) is unrealistic.

The losers: as usual it's the students. They will have fewer opportunities to take the courses they need to graduate.

Positive Spin on the DC 37 Tentative Raises that Don't Even Keep up with Inflation as the City Surplus Soars Disappointing!

By James Eterno, Jamaica H.S. Chapter Leader, UFT H.S. Exec. Bd. Rep.

I came home from vacation to find out that DC 37 had reached a tentative contract settlement with the city that many labor people including UFT President Randi Weingarten are not criticizing. Weingarten even took some credit for the deal because the UFT and 19 other municipal unions have formed a coalition to bargain with the City. She claims that the presence of the coalition forced the city to up its offer to DC 37. Maybe so but why not a word about how paltry the salary increases are for DC 37 when the city is so prosperous?

While the potentially precedent setting agreement is better than the pattern DC 37 established for city workers in the last round of bargaining, it still does not keep up with inflation. The NY Times described the terms succinctly: "...10 percent raise (compounded) over 32 months with no new concessions." The Times elaborated, "The agreement includes a 3.15 percent raise retroactive to July 1, 2005, the day the union's last contract expired. The new pact also includes a 2 percent raise starting Aug. 1, and a 4 percent raise starting February 1." Why are these numbers not being roundly criticized in union circles when the city now has a surplus of over $5 billion? When the city is swimming in money, unions should be able to at least keep up with inflation.

Yes, the tentative pact calls for increases that go well beyond the 0% (with a $1,000 cash bonus), 3% and 1% raises over three years from the last DC 37 Contract (an extra 2% came with productivity givebacks). That agreement set a pattern that teachers and all other city workers were forced to swallow. When the current numbers are crunched, the proposed 10 percent over 32 months does not even keep up with the annual inflation rate that according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics is now at 5.6% in the NY area and 4.7% nationally. DC 37's annual increases when compounded average roughly 3.75% a year. City workers will continue to have their standard of living significantly lowered under this deal. When it is taken into consideration that the city has a huge multi billion dollar surplus, this is an agreement that union leaders should at least be questioning. But thus far, I have not seen much negative except for some dissidents within DC 37. Meanwhile, the mayor is content.

The Times reports: "The mayor noted that the city continued to benefit from money saving concessions in the union's last contract like reduced vacation and sick days for newly hired workers." In addition, the mayor is still not ruling out givebacks.

"He added that the city and District Council 37, which represents 120,000 city workers, would set up a subcommittee to discuss pension changes and that he would urge the Municipal Labor Committee, the umbrella group for the city's unions, to negotiate savings on health coverage." (UFT President Weingarten heads the MLC; the UFT is a part of it.)

Let's understand the UFT's current situation. We now have a potential pattern settlement established by DC 37 that does not keep up with inflation while the city has billions in excess funds. The mayor will look to give all city workers including UFT members the same increases as DC 37 and history shows that if any union wants to beat the pattern, the only way to do so is with concessions in some other area. Since the 3.15% increase in year one of the DC 37 deal is already included in the final year of the current UFT Contract, our pattern would be 2% and 4% over twenty months for the next round. That translates into increases for us that are considerably lower than the current 5.6% NY area inflation rate.

Also, the pattern set by DC 37 won't help us win back any of the givebacks we surrendered in the last round of collective bargaining that include the 37.5 minute tutoring sessions each day, school starting in August, hall patrols, cafeteria patrols, lack of ability to grieve letters in our files, loss of seniority as well as SBO transfers, and more. Finally, the Mayor is still seeking to change the pension system and gain concessions in health benefits. Therefore, having us pay 1.5% of our salary toward healthcare (the Transit worker proposal) is still possible and who knows what other work rule changes will be demanded of us? Granted, we are starting out with a basic pattern from DC 37 that is better than in the last round but it clearly is not going to help us obtain anything remotely resembling a favorable settlement.

For President Weingarten to be taking any credit for the DC 37 agreement because the UFT is in a coalition of 20 unions who are bargaining together on financial matters with the city is somewhat strange. Instead, we believe she should be publicizing the city's huge budget surplus and saying how we have made sacrifices when the city had hard times and now we need to share in the city's prosperity. The UFT also should be preparing to mobilize for a real fight if we want to get a decent contract with raises that beat the cost of living without concessions, and we should be looking to initiate a major battle to win back what we gave away in the last round of bargaining.

(The purpose of this piece is not to try to influence the DC 37 ratification vote. Their internal debate is reported in this week's Chief Leader and should be read. This piece was written to explain the impact of the DC 37 proposal on UFT members and other city workers.)

Lost in a Sea of Charters

by Norman Scott

In a massive school system with about 1400 schools, not one single school is run by teachers. Some might dispute that, pointing to the UFT-run charter schools. In actuality, UFT bureaucrats run that school, not active teachers. To me a teacher-run school means a group of teachers get together to run a school, choosing the administration. This is the key point and is not part of the process at the UFT schools.

Ten years ago, I saw charter schools as an opportunity for teachers to run their own schools, hoping the UFT would take the lead by setting up an office of charter school support, where teachers could go for assistance. My experience with most school administrators from the school level on up was that they were a hindrance to education reform and that it was frustrated teachers, especially those fairly new to the system before they became cynical and jaded, who wanted to see changes. Thus, charter schools seemed a way for entrepreneurial teachers to begin to take control of schools.

All these dreams ended with the increasing implementation of high stakes testing, intensified by No Child Left Behind, that has distorted the education process to such an extent that any school started by teachers would be under the same pressures to teach to the test as all other schools or be branded a failure. (The most elite private schools in Manhattan, with extremely small class sizes and a lot of teacher input, just ignore NCLB).

The charter school movement now often seems like a wedge to undermine public schools in the mania to prove anything public is bad and privately run schools, even those for profit, somehow justifies capitalism. The BloomKlein mania for charter schools is noteworthy in that they run the public school system but promote charters as alternatives to the very system they run even though charters drain funds away from public schools since money is funneled to schools based on the number of pupils.

But if one views BloomKlein cheerleading for charters (even going so far as to toss out a school at the Tweed Courthouse DOE HQ in favor of the Ross Charter School) through the prism of anti-unionism, it all becomes understandable. Charters are not required to be run by union rules. Recently a teacher at a charter was fired for merely bringing in a salary chart that demonstrated just how the teachers were being exploited. Joel Klein has often pointed to the UFT contract as the obstacle to fixing what’s wrong with the public schools. Even now with a gutted contract, Klein still rants on. When the time comes (sooner rather than later) that the UFT sells so much of the contract that it will be boiled down to merely a salary chart, Klein will still be blaming his inability to reform the system on the contract. Klein’s goal is to establish 1400 privately run charters, kick back, relax and claim victory – victory over the union that will leave the UFT as a head without a body.

Klein has maintained that charter schools and the small public schools being set up by the DOE do not engage in creaming – choosing less difficult students to ensure a higher rate of success. Many of us suspect that this is not true but have a hard time getting a handle on how lotteries and other means of choosing students can be distorted.

So, we turned to our old friend George Schmidt in Chicago, where the school system went through a mayoral takeover many years before we did and has faced many of the same issues. George has been the editor of the alternative newspaper Substance (www.substancenews.com) for almost 30 years. (I modeled my newspaper Education Notes on the work George has done.) George wrote in an email:

Any charter school study that compares a charter school with local non-magnet elementary or high schools is biased and statistically invalid. Chicago pioneered this form of dishonesty.

Charter schools require conditions that do not apply to neighborhood public schools.

1. Charter schools require that children apply for admission. The most at risk children come from families that can barely get the information together to prove the child lives in the public school attendance area.

2. Charter schools require that students and families sign performance agreements that result in "voluntary removal" if the child or family fails to comply. Depending upon the charter school, the compliance can even include Saturday classes (for the children) and mandatory "parenting" sessions (for the family).

3. Charter schools exclude the most severely disabled children and families, either by having inaccessible facilities or by telling the families they don't have the staff to provide the services.

The first and pioneering dishonesty in these reports was compiled by Greg Richmond about seven years ago, on orders from the Chicago Tribune. Since that "report," Richmond has moved on from his job as Chief of charter schools at the Chicago Board of Education to the national charter school bureaucracy (he is currently head of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers; he was recently featured in a news story on New Orleans). Richmond's study claimed that the charters surpassed neighborhood schools, but left out the conditions I cite above. On several occasions, Richmond simply ignored FOIA requests for the data underlying the claims made in his "study." To date (more than four years after the original FOIA request), the Chicago Board of Education still refuses to make available any data used as the basis for the Richmond report. That report, like "A Nation at Risk" and similar stuff, has since taken on a life of its own, thanks mainly to the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, which simply asserts its conclusions now, as "research based."

If comparisons between charters and public schools are going to be made, at least in Chicago, the comparisons have to be between Chicago charters and Chicago magnet schools.

A study that used this standard of comparison would show Chicago charters are performing less well than Chicago public schools.

But that's not a study that will be done in Chicago, because the party line here is that charters are good and publics are bad.

One thing I've just begun looking into is the really primitive level of discrimination against children (and families) with disabilities here in Chicago, especially those with the most severe disabilities. Most Chicago charter school buildings are inaccessible to many disabled (e.g., wheelchairs). This is the result of the charter schools being an indirect subsidy to the Catholic schools. When inner city Catholic schools have been closed in Chicago, they are rented (by the public school budget) for charter schools. But the Catholic schools we're talking about were never brought into compliance with accessibility regulations, and the Chicago Board of Education is not trying to force its growing number of charter schools into compliance. This alone is a major scandal, but also reveals, among other data, how the charters cherry pick students to provide the "results" they want.

And even with all the cherry picking, they are not doing very well in Chicago when compared honestly with those public schools where comparisons can be made.

Welcome Chapter Leaders

(The following leaflet, written by Norm Scott and edited by Vera Pavone, was distributed to chapter leaders at the reception the UFT held for them on July 13.)

Congratulations on your election as chapter leader. Being a Chapter Leader is often a thankless job but one that is crucial to our Union.

We are the Independent Community of Educators (ICE) a group of rank and file UFT members, including chapter leaders, delegates and members of the UFT Executive Board. Before joining ICE most of us were independents, not affiliated with other internal Union groups.

Our History

ICE was organized late in 2003 as an attempt to present an alternative platform to that of Unity Caucus, Randi Weingarten’s political party, which has dominated our Union as a 1-party system since the early 60’s. New Action, which had been leading the opposition for many years, made an alliance with the Unity Caucus leadership, culminating in a deal to not run a candidate against Randi Weingarten in the 2004 elections. NA leaders argued that at a time of crisis we should unite behind our union leaders. We did not agree, feeling that our union leaders had played a major role in bringing about this crisis as they eagerly endorsed mayoral control and were initially enthusiastic supporters of Joel Klein’s Children First initiatives, in essence giving the DOE and its corporate media and foundation supporters ample room to consolidate and broaden their attacks on the union and the contract. Their policies quickly resulted in the usurpation of the rights of teachers to make basic educational decisions.

It seemed clear to us that the UFT leadership’s prime interest was to keep themselves in power in order to maintain their perks (large salaries and out of classroom jobs) and they would only pay attention to the interests of union members when their own interests were threatened. There was a stronger need than ever to work towards the creation of a force for change in the UFT.

The 2004 elections gave us an opportunity to raise numerous issues by challenging the Unity Caucus leadership. Due to the fundamentally undemocratic structure of our union, it would take a lot more than a citywide election to threaten the monopoly power that Unity Caucus exerts over our union. However, in cooperation with Teachers for a Just Contract, which had been an alternative group in the UFT challenging Unity Caucus for 10 years, we won six high school Executive Board seats. Unity still had an 83-6 majority on the Executive Board in addition to holding all other city-wide offices.

The Contract of 2006

The contract negotiated by the UFT and the DOE last fall confirmed our initial analysis that the UFT leadership would use givebacks of time and contractual protections in exchange for what they would call “raises.” But we don’t have to tell you that. You live that contract and breathe it every day. During the ratification process, the leadership used the same “we’re in a crisis” claim as an excuse for what they admitted was a bad contract, saying it was the best they could do. It’s clear to us that the already bad 2002 contract had more protections than the new one.

It’s not hard to get money when you are willing to sell off chunks of the contract. What next? Selling even more of the few protections left to teachers? Is it worth the money to the people who have been U-rated? Or to the senior teachers who have been hounded out of the system? Or to the helpless people packing rubber rooms who aren’t informed of the charges against them while investigators go on fishing expeditions to extract information against them?

Even worse, many Chapter Leaders are under attack as part of the DOE strategy of destroying the union from below. We have seen the growing harassment of chapter leaders through the use of U ratings, with all too many being sent to the rubber room for minor or manufactured issues. Our union leaders have been standing by allowing it all to happen despite our calls for them to add protections for chapter leaders.

U ratings used to be the culmination of a process set up to deal with teachers who were demonstrably unable to perform their jobs. Our latest contract has made it easy for all-too-many incompetent supervisors to dole out U ratings to teachers who they don’t like or who have a critical attitude to the latest educational fad foisted on them. We have seen an exponential leap in U ratings. The job of Chapter Leader will be harder than ever.

If you are a new chapter leader, you will be courted by Unity through training, meetings, promises of career opportunities and other perks. We urge you to maintain your independence because membership in Unity comes with a price. Unity members must sign an extensive obligation statement. They must “support the decisions of the caucus and the Union leadership elected from the caucus in public or Union forums” even if these are in opposition to the wishes or best interests of their chapter members.

The Unity Caucus loyalty oath and patronage system have hurt our union because Unity members, who want to be part of the spoils machine that offers free trips to conventions and full and part-time Union jobs with six figure salaries and double pensions, must owe greater allegiance to the Caucus than to the members in the schools who elected them. The result is cynicism in schools when the program of the leadership is pushed down members’ throats.

The UFT belongs to rank and file educators, not the leadership. Change needs to come from the schools and independent chapter leaders will be key to this process. Only by building a progressive alternative to Unity Caucus can we hope to strengthen and unite members in a fight back against a concerted effort to destroy both our union and public education. We look forward to working with you.

It’s the New Contract Stupid: “Insider” Hints at Reason For Increased “U” Ratings

While the numbers are not officially in, it is abundantly clear that the number of “U” ratings has substantially increased. Reports from schools around the City indicate that large numbers of senior and beginning teachers are being targeted for discipline. A person close to the Office of Appeals and Review (the office handling appeals of U-ratings) has confirmed this trend and stated that the number of U-ratings appears to be the highest in recent memory.

We all know how this trend started. It is no secret that as part of the changes in our contract the principals received an increase in the ability to select and remove their staff. We can no longer grieve letters to the file which, in the past, could tie up a U-rating for years and subject negative letters to arbitrators who might destroy the underpinnings of the unsatisfactory evaluation in their award.

Principals who, in the past, might have been reluctant to write letters to the file now order their Assistant Principals to write observations that can only be challenged at an appeal before a Chancellor’s representative, not an independent hearing officer.

No one could seriously argue that there are no unsatisfactory teachers in our system. The issue becomes, as we have said since the new contract was proposed, who decides. When a principal decides to target a teacher our new procedure makes it extremely difficult to prevent disciplinary action and eventual dismissal.

With this increase in U-ratings where does our Union stand?

I have received a large number of emails and telephone calls from recently U-rated teachers. By and large the Union’s advice to these teachers is, “Don’t worry; we’ll take care of it.”

Amazingly this advice is also given to probationers (many Teaching Fellows) who are dismissed after receiving U-ratings. Waiting can only deprive you of your day in court as the statute of limitations to challenge a dismissal in court is only 120 days after notice that you have been dismissed. You are still entitled to a U-rating appeal but winning the appeal will not get you your job back.

Is there an effective strategy to combat negative observation reports? Can you tape your own observed lesson? Can your performance be assessed by a qualified supervisor?

I hope our Union can answer these questions and provide the kind of guidance and advocacy we need. We should demand no less.

ICE to Exec Board: Show Us That You Are True Union; Don't Take the Pay Raise!

The UFT Executive Board with only two dissenters and one abstention, voted on June 19 to give UFT officers and staff the full 15% increase that ICE said they would do months ago. Many of these people already earn six figure salaries and have a Union as well as Department of Education pension.

What is the giveback that the UFT agreed to for themselves in order to justify 15%? The UFT offices will remain open one extra hour per week. ICE asks is this the equivalent of the givebacks people in the schools have had to endure under the current contract? These givebacks include working an extra tutoring period four days a week for small group instruction in most schools, hall patrols, cafeteria duty, loss of two vacation days (three in Brooklyn and Queens) resulting in the longest school year in the New York Metropolitan area, loss of ability to grieve letters in our files, restricted transfer rights, weaker tenure protections and more.

What follows is a speech that James Eterno (High School Representative and Chapter Leader for Jamaica High School) gave in opposition to the pay raises at the Executive Board.

UFT officers, Borough Representatives, District Reps, Special Reps and the staff work extremely hard; some are on call 24/7. People who work diligently should be rewarded. That’s not the issue.

The issue was framed wonderfully by President Weingarten when she was quoted in the June 16 Chief Leader talking about the unions working together. Randi told the Chief: “Given globalization and Wal-Martization and this assault on working and middle-class people, it makes a lot of sense to band together.” I agree. However, before we can create a powerful coalition of unions ready for a real fight against the city, we have to unite ourselves. If this resolution passes tonight, we will do the opposite.

If there is a full 15% increase for UFT officers and staff (5.5% in December and now the remainder tonight), as soon as someone gets home this information will be out on the net and it will be in many of the schools by tomorrow. Everyone will know and the cynics will be saying, same old UFT, givebacks for the members and salary increases for the leadership with a nominal change in their conditions.

Opening up the UFT offices once a week for an extra hour is a worthwhile endeavor, but does anyone honestly believe that it is the equivalent of what people in the schools are going through under this current contract? We’re under siege in many schools.

I recently spoke to a friend from a high school in Brooklyn who is teaching his five classes; then he was assigned small group instruction for a professional assignment and then he has small group instruction again at the end of the day and yes since he is a math teacher, his students showed up. There are similar stories of teachers and other UFT members being overworked all over the city. Many members don’t want to assert their union rights because they fear retaliation.

In the schools, we are sacrificing every day. The Union leadership could take a big step in reforming this union if tonight, this body agrees to forgo the rest of the pay raise and put that money where it’s badly needed, defending our members directly.

I would favor taking that raise money and using it to hire some paralegals, and investigators and then send them to NYSUT to do our own investigations and research as Jeff Kaufman is calling for in a resolution to be introduced later. (Unity would not agree to hire the full investigation teams that Jeff called for as they watered down his proposal at the end of the meeting so that members who are reassigned will merely receive information about their rights.)

That’s one idea. If someone has a better idea on how to use this money, I’m all ears. The bottom line is if we are truly interested in uniting this Union for a no contract=no work battle in 2007, this Executive Board should lead by example by putting short term self interest aside for the benefit of the UFT’s future and the future of the union movement. Say no to rest of the raise and yes to real change.

La Cirque de UFT

by Norman Scott

The ink wasn’t even dry on the announcement that ICE and TJC were going to run a joint slate (headed by Kit Wainer of Goldstein HS) to oppose the UFT leadership before the Unity Caucus machine was on the attack: “What a perfect couple! They (ICE & TJC) share exactly the same solitary interest – and it’s nothing so messy as say, standing up for the UFT members’ rights, and improving working conditions. Nor is it as complicated as getting class sizes reduced, securing tougher discipline measures or protecting UFT members’ healthcare benefits and hard-earned pensions.”

Let’s see now, ICE and TJC are being attacked by the very union leaders who have allowed members’ rights to erode to the point where there is barely a grievance procedure (see last contract negotiated by Unity) and members are under attack every day from vicious supervisors. Just ask the hundreds of people bursting against the walls of the rubber rooms who are not told why they are there and assumed guilty until proven innocent just how their “rights” are being protected.

Can Unity come up with even ONE working condition they have improved, say, in the last 10 years? Oh yes – the open market plan where a teacher with 30 years seniority can end up being a day-to-day sub is being marketed by Unity as an improvement. Don’t be surprised to see the leadership try to sell the 2 days before the Labor Day weekend as an improvement in working conditions. Just think – going to work before the weekend will enable you to appreciate the holiday in a more meaningful way.

Has anyone noticed any reduction in class size recently as opposed to talking about it? (In Unity parlance, public relations substitutes for real results.) Their continued refusal to put class size on the negotiating table, which they wee willing to do 35 years ago and actually won the only major protections still operating in the contract, sends a message that PR gimmicks are the priority.

As to their securing tougher discipline – excuse me, I am so shaking with laughter at this one that I can’t continue writing.

Sorry, let’s continue.

Protection of health care? When a resolution was proposed calling for no givebacks on health care in the next contract, Unity overwhelmingly TURNED IT DOWN! As for protection of pensions, these are people who meekly accepted a 4-tier pension system (with more tiers most likely to come.)

When Kit Wainer spoke on the “No Giveback” resolution he said it was clear that Bloomberg would not ask for more time but focus on pension erosion Weingarten snidely asked “How do you know what Bloomberg will ask for?” I guess Kit has a special pipeline. The NY Times reported on June 6, “The Bloomberg administration proposed yesterday that newly hired workers belonging to the largest municipal union accept substantially smaller pensions, a move that the city hopes will set a money-saving pattern for every municipal union.” How fast can you say “Tier 5?”

The Unity leaflet went on to say: “Instead [of doing all the wonderful things Unity does for its members] this lovely twosome can now pursue a single goal together: toppling our union’s leadership and grabbing all the power for themselves.”

At this point, I am kicking and screaming with pain from laughing so hard. Yes, ve vant all de power for ourselves. (ICE and TJC members are required to repeat this over and over this in their best Bella Lugosi voices.) Now, remind me which caucus has ALL THE POWER FOR THEMSELVES and whose prime directive over all else is to maintain the status quo?

Take the current elections for the retired teacher chapter where the Retiree Advocate Caucus is running against Unity, which sends its leaders all over the country on junkets to cater to the retired members, something the opposition never gets to do. No matter how many votes the RA get, Unity gets all 300 delegates to the DA instead of apportioning the number of delegates based on the percentage of votes. Even an 80-20 pro-Unity split would give Unity 270 and the RA 30 delegates, a drop in the bucket. But Unity won’t even allow that much of a dent that leads to the DA voting 80% in favor of the leadership, a number way out of kilter to their support in the schools. (In the interests of full disclosure, I am running as one of the RA delegates and my chances are – well you know all about that well-known snowball.)

Unity has used the retiree chapter and other power grabbing manipulations of the constitution (Divisional VP’s elected at-large by everyone including retirees after changing the rules when the first opposition person was elected to the Adcom in history back in the late 80’s.)

ALL THE POWER indeed!

Notice there’s no mention in the Unity diatribe of one key word – democracy. This is certainly something that the UFT/Unity leadership considers messy. When members of the opposition Unified Teachers Party attempted to present a resolution calling for the reinstatement of election of district representatives, which Weingarten eliminated years ago, they were ignored. No one knows better than those of us who have been active for years just how Unity has stacked the deck so they can keep ALL THE POWER FOR THEMSELVES. We enter the election campaign with no illusions of grabbing ALL THE POWER FOR OURSELVES.

If we accomplish nothing else, we will make sure as many people as we can reach will know exactly how Unity operates and come to an understanding that democracy in the UFT certainly is a mess.


(An excerpt from the above appeared in The Wave, www.rockawave.com, on June 2)

I will post the text of the Unity leaflet in its entirety in one of the comments so you too can laugh yourselves silly. Make some copies and share them with your colleagues (with the response above, of course.) After what Unity has allowed to happen to the schools, everyone needs a laugh.

If you are interested in supporting the ICE/TJC attempt to put a dent in the Unity monopoly, join the election campaign by running (we can run up to 800 candidates), distributing literature in your schools, sending a contribution or just plain talking to people.

To counter Unity spin every school in the city needs to be reached. One of Unity’s main efforts will be directed at new chapter leaders at the fall training where they get them for a few weekends of propaganda and food, a good combo. If you know new independent chapter leaders they should link up with others. UTP/ICE/TJC can act as a clearinghouse to get them together so they don't get swamped. Have them contact one of the groups beforehand. It would be great to have CL's there who can counter the spin.