ICE DEMANDS NO MORE CUTTING RANK AND FILE TIME AT DELEGATE ASSEMBLY

by James Eterno, UFT Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School 

We have been writing for quite some time about what transpires at Delegate Assembly Meetings and how ICE and other opposition or independent Delegates as well as Chapter Leaders are completely frustrated because we are for the most part shut out of DA participation. We call on the UFT to make a simple change to enhance union democracy. There should be a pledge from the President to no longer ask delegates for a change in the rules to eliminate or reduce the time rank and file members get to speak unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

The UFT DA standing agenda calls for twenty-five minutes per month where rank and file Delegates and Chapter Leaders are recognized to ask questions or add new motions to the agenda.  The new motion and question periods have been consistently eliminated or shortened this year. We object to this constant changing of the rules by the Unity majority. Is it too much to ask that this simple twenty-five minute period each month should not be cancelled or edited in any way unless there is a Contract vote or strike authorization vote? This return to the regular monthly agenda would be very easy to accomplish. 

As we draw closer to the April 16 DA, we ask that all Chapter Leaders, Delegates and rank and file UFT members demand that UFT President Weingarten respect the twenty-five minutes we are given each month to have our say in making UFT policy or questioning the President. This is particularly important as there is no longer an elected opposition on the UFT Executive Board. For twelve straight years there was a tiny but viable opposition, including me for ten years, who could easily get the Executive Board floor to at least raise issues. 

Let's get back the rank and file's twenty-five minutes now.

TEACHERS' GOOD DEEDS PUNISHED BY DEPT. OF ED

Under a new DOE program, those who teach lower-performing students likely will earn poor marks themselves. One Jamaica High School teacher asks: What kind of incentive is that? >

By JB McGeever

City Limits WEEKLY #632
March 24, 2008

Two times a year the New York State English Regents Exam descends on the high schools of our city, requiring juniors to compose four comprehensive essays over a period of two days. January's outcomes guided the makeup of the current semester's classes, where we're now getting ready for the next round in June. In my building, preparation for the exam begins in the ninth grade and continues right until the students enter class to take the exam.

"Hey, Mister!" a voice will ring down the hallway just minutes before the test. "Who wrote about those mice and men? George Steinbrenner, right?"

In line with the federal No Child Left Behind Act rules, everyone takes the exam in their junior year regardless of their proficiency in English. The student who's been in the system since kindergarten takes it, as well as the child who recently arrived in America and whose second, third, or fourth language might be English. Whether they have designs on going to college after graduation or going on to become mechanics and electricians, they are going to sit for that exam.

The more students a school gets to pass, the better the school looks. As a result, many schools have pushed up the date for students to take the test. Rather than taking it for the first time in June, why not usher them in five months early and see what happens? If they pass, great, if not, get ready for round two. Even better, let's start grading teachers on the results.

It came to light right around the winter Regents that the Department of Education initiated an under-the-radar pilot program where 2,500 teachers at 140 city public schools are being rated, based on student performance on standardized tests, without their knowledge. Sadly, some in the local media weighed in with typical lay comments and cliches regarding the teaching profession: "Imagine teachers treated like other professionals – having their performance monitored and quantified." But this kind of scoring just doesn't make sense.

Out of five classes taught last semester, I had one class of juniors, three groups of sophomores, and one senior elective. The juniors were an interesting bunch – bright, friendly, and respectful, one of the most enjoyable classes I've ever taught. And their results ran the gamut, lots of highs and lows. Some overslept and missed the exam, while others arrived early and pulled off stunning victories. Jamal got his 97, but Forrest received a 51.

As much as I would like to take credit for Jamal's grade, the truth is he's a self-starter who sits up front, takes good notes and never misses class. Forrest, however, disappeared around the holidays: "Going on vacation, bye." He was gone for nearly six weeks, missing a lot of Regents preparation. He was probably visiting family he hadn't seen in awhile, but should his extended holiday have any bearing on my teaching career?

There's also no need to congratulate myself when Clarissa scores a high 86. She's quiet, attentive, and likes to read. I did my job each day and she did hers. Or Victor, who managed to get himself suspended for three weeks, then recorded a 47. All four of these kids were in the same class and all four of them are responsible for their test scores.

When it comes time to give Jamal's family a call to congratulate them on their son's success, I discover that he lives in a group home. I'm taken aback. I expected to speak to the man Jamal identified as Dad on parent-teacher night, but he was really just the counselor on duty. It's difficult to explain Jamal. He defies Department of Education logic and statistics. Over a period of two mornings he left his group home, reported to a high school that's been labeled as "persistently dangerous," submitted to scanning and frisking on his way in – then sat down to record one of the highest scores in the state.

As the new school semester began, my class of juniors moved on. Many of them became friendly faces in the hallway, while a few return to my classroom. Jamal reports to an honors class, where he'll have the opportunity to take AP English next year. But Forrest is right back with me, preparing for round two. He sits up front this time, but still, his method of wiring himself for iPod use is ingenious.

Forrest has now been placed in a transitional English class, which means that every student in the room scored below 55 on their English Regents Exam. I requested this population because I enjoy the challenge of trying to reach them. Based on past experience, approximately one-third of these students will pass their Regents this June. Under the DOE's new Big Brother tactics of monitoring a teacher's success rate, why would I willingly volunteer for such a suicide mission? Shouldn't I have lobbied for an honors class full of Jamals to make me look good?

Also, the so-called "transitional" students tend to take more than one English class, so who gets credit for their success when they eventually do pass the exam on their second or third attempt? Instead of focusing on students, teachers are forced to worry about statistics and standings in their departments. That makes Forrest no longer a challenge in the classroom, but a number with the potential to make me look bad. Rather than marveling at Jamal's growth as a human being when I see him in the hallway, I might stare at him longingly, thinking, "Damn, there goes my meal ticket." The DOE's secret monitoring program is nothing more than a new way to instill fear and obtain control.

What makes monitoring or "proving a teacher's worth" even more absurd is the concept of equal playing fields for all. My building was mislabeled as an Impact School last year, which means it is now regarded as one of the most dangerous schools in the city. Once a school is branded as Impact, a script is then followed to shut the place down.

Coincidentally, before the DOE can get its hands on a school and chop it up into "smaller learning communities," it must first get it labeled as dangerous. Security is intensified. Letters are sent home to parents, notifying them that their child may transfer out of a "dangerous" building if he or she chooses, and incoming freshman opt to go elsewhere when it's time to select a school. The faculty is left to shrug and wonder where all these dangerous kids are hiding.

The crowds in the school's hallways then begin to shrink, teachers are "excessed," and the budget is cut. The atmosphere becomes bleak, like something out of an old Western. It's time to shoot the horses and circle the wagons because rations are low and the enemy is closing in.

Yet the DOE machine keeps rolling. During Regents week, my school was notified that a "brand new academy" will exist inside of our 80-year-old building next year. It will be virtually the same place, just with an imaginary border laid out. The new school will also be funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation, while what's left of Jamaica High School is systematically starved to death.

But if the building is really as dangerous as the city claims, why would it pick this particular campus to establish a brand new privately funded high school? The only answer is that the building was never dangerous to begin with. The DOE just wanted the space, so it set Jamaica up for failure.

Do Stuyvesant, Brooklyn Tech, or Bronx Science, three of the finest specialized schools in the city, have Jamaica's problems to contend with? They have waiting lists to get in, while Jamaica struggles with a two-year-long DOE chokehold. Whose secretly monitored test scores do you think will be more impressive?

One of my colleagues in graduate school recalled a recent incident in class. When she introduced herself and her school, the DOE official moonlighting as instructor explained that she was familiar with the building and that the school's fate had been decided long ago. "Jamaica High School is a warehouse," the instructor said. She then advised the teacher to stop battling the DOE, to comply with the inevitable, or transfer out.

A warehouse. Any adult who's witnessed children passing through metal detectors each morning, then frisked with scanning wands, not because they're dangerous, but for political reasons, knows what a disgraceful remark this is.

- JB McGeever

JB McGeever has been a teacher for 11 years and at NYC public schools for four. Students' names above are pseudonyms.

UNITY ON THE COUCH

by John Powers, Chapter Leader, Liberation High School

Unity at the DA is an interesting machine to observe. If it were to be rated according to the fairest and most practical methods used to evaluate classroom teaching and community building, it would undoubtedly receive an unsatisfactory rating. It rarely starts on time or ends on time. There is plenty of chalk and talk or just plain talk and no chalk. There is also no "accountable- talk" amongst delegates. Its agenda ("objectives") goes unchecked, unmet and off on tangential paths. Certain members of Unity feel comfortable hurling aloud words and moans meant to intimidate and stop others from voicing their ideas and disagreements about a given topic. All of the above, from my perspective, creates a culture that attempts to dumb delegates down, maintains the status-quo and ultimately makes it difficult to create a stronger, democratic union capable of beating back the no longer creeping, but rapidly advancing privatization of our school system.

It was no surprise then at last Wednesday's DA when Unity put much effort into not appearing to be caught off guard by ICE's resolution of opposition to the planned privatization of GHI-HIP (renamed Emblem Health). Ms. Weingarten's filibustering tactics successfully kept ICE's resolution from getting to the floor; however, with five minutes left, she allowed a Q and A session and encouraged anyone with a "burning question" to go ahead and ask it. This was a transparent invitation on Ms. Weingarten's behalf to entice someone from ICE to create an opening for her to minimize any potential blowback on the part of delegates who may have read and begun thinking about the seriousness of our anti-privatization health insurance resolution that was distributed to them. During these last minutes, Ms. Weingarten maintained that much had been said already about the topic and that the union continues to have reservations about the attempt to privatize 93% of city workers' healthcare plans.

"Much Said?" A recent look at the DA minutes from this school year reflects nothing about the GHI-HIP privatization issue. The only official union information that I could find was online at (http://www.uft.org/news/teacher/general/ghi-hip/). This report, written by Arthur Pepper, reprinted in a January issue of New York Teacher, and entitled, "Monitoring the GHI-HIP Merger," discusses the rationale behind the GHI-HIP merger and its attempt to privatize. Mr. Pepper casually states that healthcare mergers and privatizing are difficult to avoid today and that the GHI-HIP merger/privatization move will allow union members to receive quality healthcare and will create "premium stabilization." Sure it will!

"Reservations?" What reservations? None are hinted at in Mr. Pepper's report. But wait. Again, in an apparent attempt to undermine ICE's commitment to critical dialogue about such an important and sensitive healthcare issue, Ms. Weingarten unveiled 5,000 plus photocopies of a letter dated February 29, 2008 that she wrote to Eric Dinallo, NYS Superintendent of Insurance. In the letter she admits to a union "money-grab" motive regarding a pool of conversion money that will be available if GHI-HIP privatizes. She states, "both New York City and its unions must share in the proceeds since it was their assets and business that made possible the current financial viability of HIP-GHI. Any approval therefore, must make provision therefore." Ms. Weingarten and Unity plan to put union funds before workers' pockets and the quality of healthcare they receive. And to make matters worse, the letter also reveals an ominous sign that something might have changed between the unions and GHI-HIP (Emblem Health) from the time of Mr. Pepper's report in January and Ms. Weingarten's subsequent letter to Superintendent Dinallo. She admits that as of the date of the letter, both CEO's of GHI-HIP have not responded to her request that city unions share in the conversion proceeds. This should shock no one because CEO's do not care about workers; they care about money and profits.

What will Unity do now? How will they sell this to us if the privatization maneuver goes through and they receive a huge amount of money? How will they sell this to us if the privatization maneuver goes through and they do not receive any money? Like so much else about Unity, we will wait and see. They make the decisions, not us.

Last I want to thank Ms. Weingarten and Unity for feeling compelled to show delegates in attendance such an important letter. This type of transparency is a welcomed relief. However, as of this writing, there is still no mention of the letter on the UFT website. How could there be? Too many people would have access to it and might question why our union is behind the privatization of 93% of city workers' health insurance in exchange for filling its pockets. By the way, almost all of those 5,000 plus letters to Dinallo sat near the podium untouched after the DA ended. This is not surprising. So with that, let me ask Unity to lay down on this couch right here. That's it. Relax. Lay down. Close your eyes. Good. Relax. I'm going to count down from ten and you are going to become sleepy. You will listen very carefully to some comments and questions. These are comments and questions that a strong and democratic union might ask in regards to an attempt to privatize workers' health insurance. Ok. You are getting sleepy.

 

10

 

9

 

Good. You are getting sleepy. Sleep is good. You are good at sleeping.

 

8

 

7

 

We must not sell out to a healthcare corporation. Say it. We must not sell out to a healthcare corporation.

 

6

 

5

 

When you sell out, there are no guarantees except profit motives. We must not sell out. Say it.

 

4

 

3

 

There are many questions to ask. Yes. That's right. It's ok to ask questions. It's ok to ask all the workers you represent what they think about an issue. I know that's tough work. I know it's messy work. But it's good work. It's democratic.

 

2

 

So here are some questions to get you started. Here are some questions to help you initiate union democracy. Many of these questions can be found on the internet. It took only a few minutes for me to find them. You have a few minutes. Don't you?

 

What is the value of nonprofit assets?

 

Will the privatization preserve the assets for nonprofit purposes that will enhance the health care of New Yorkers in the long-term or serve as a one-time budget fix?

 

Who will reap the windfall when the privatized company issues its IPO? Will it include any union leaders or executives?

 

Will premiums be raised? Are there any guarantees they will not?

 

Will the privatization increase the number of uninsured in NYC?

 

Will the new privatized corporation be flipped?

 

Will regulators be asked to commission an independent health impact study to answer questions?

 

Will there be more public hearings at times that are convenient for workers. One time on January 29^th at ten in the morning is not good enough?

 

Will privatization reduce competition?

 

1

 

WAKE UP!

Merit Pay Proposal Defeated in GED-Plus

By Marjorie Stamberg, Teacher, GED-Plus, Manhattan Hub

The merit pay proposal in GED-Plus has been solidly defeated--ballots were counted on March 6. Many chapter members worked very hard to express their opposition, at site meetings, borough meetings and chapter meetings. Since we are divided into 80 sites and borough hubs, it was quite a task to reach everyone so they could make an informed decision. I am very pleased that we can join the list of other UFT chapters who have had the courage to vote this down.

As a strongly advocate to vote down merit pay, I am personally very relieved that our chapter made such a strong statement. Merit pay is highly divisive -- it puts us in competition with each other, instead of fostering collaboration. It also hurts our students. In GED-Plus, as a D79 GED Program, we are particularly dedicated to working with the neediest students, and we are already working to the best of our ability. If our pay goes up or down, depending on which students come to school, or how well they do in tests, there would be a strong tendency not even to admit these students to the site.

However, our chapter leadership, and the UFT officials have stated they intend to float this again early in the next school year. It keeps on coming back like a bad penny, no matter how many times, and at how many meetings, we express our strong opposition. So we will have to keep up the struggle -- against merit pay, charterization, privatization, and all these schemes to chip away at public education for all.

DA REPORT: ONE BIG YAWN OF A RANDI LED FILIBUSTER

by James Eterno, UFT Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School

Many of us came home on Wednesday wondering why we keep attending Delegate Assembly Meetings. The two periods during the regular agenda that give rank and file delegates a chance to ask questions to the President or make new motions have been consistently eliminated or cut short in many of the this year's meetings. Many delegates sitting near me including those from Jamaica, close friends and my wife, were asking me why they were here. They were tired of Randi Weingarten's filibusters and now filibusters from people brought on stage. Unfortunately, they had a point. We constantly urge people to attend union meetings but frankly this is becoming embarrassing. The business that was transacted could have been accomplished in about a half hour tops and left plenty of time for people to ask questions, raise motions and vote on everything on the agenda. However with the strong Unity majority at the DA, it is a very depressing experience as the agenda now means next to nothing and changes at Randi's whims are rubber stamped by her supporters.

Randi announced, before my wife and I arrived, that she would be deciding in six to eight weeks whether or not to be a candidate for the soon to be vacant American Federation of Teachers presidency. She said that she would continue on at the UFT even if she took the AFT position. This information was reported to us when we arrived. Randi doing both jobs at the same time is not a surprise and was predicted in a recent ICEblog post. Randi also did her monthly promotion of Hillary and some Obama bashing. We'll see where the National Education Association goes on the two Democrats soon.

We also found out more about the 55-25/55-27 retirement legislation that the governor signed recently. Randi reported that if someone opts in and then decides to stay past 25 years, they can get 1/2 of their 1.85% contributions back with interest if they last until they are 62, providing they are in service six months prior to retirement. This is a major victory according to Unity. You can get half of your contributions back if you decide to stick it out until you're 62. Why not everything because under the current system you don't have to make the 1.85% contributions if you stay to age 62 or work 30 years and are 55?

Even though ICE has pointed out on this blog that there are winners (Those close to age 55 or over age 55 who started service between ages 26 and 36 with no break in service and with 25 years in the system can retire soon without paying much for it.) and losers (Those yet to be hired who will have to work 27 years to retire and be at least 55 and under the new law they will have to pay 1.85% extra in pension contributions for their entire careers. Most new hires will pay more and receive no added benefit compared to the current system.), Unity put out an open letter from Jeff Zahler saying that the ICE blog piece pointing out the good and the bad of 55-25/55-27 is a "smear tactic." Now, we're not even allowed to point out the facts of a questionable deal or we're criticized. We offered to retract a story on 55-27 if our Unity friends could prove we were wrong. Needless to say we have not had to retract a word. According to them, if we don't line up behind Randi and show blind faith, we are divisive. We call that corporate style unionism.

It is not a smear to tell people 55-27 is a de facto new pension tier for yet to be hired teachers who won't be eligible for the 55-25 that was promised for them as well as those already in service in the giveback laden 2005 Contract

It is not a smear to tell our members 55-27 is not cost neutral but will save the city hundreds of millions of dollars. That's not an attack. Jeff Zahler, the Unity Chair, in his letter critical of ICE says we can only cite two sources who wanted to remain anonymous. That's totally untrue. Actually, the city's chief actuary is quoted in the Chief Leader. His name is Robert C. North and this is what he told the Chief: "The change is expected to reduce the average long term cost of the plan." Anyone with a calculator and a brain can figure out how the city wins. When an older teacher leaves the system, he/she can be replaced with a younger teacher at about half pay. However, Randi's people quite correctly argue that the city now has to pay the health benefits for the retiree and the new employee in addition to the salary and pension so it should break out about even. What they don't mention is that the city no longer has to pay the payroll tax (the employer's portion of the social security tax) for the retiree and they get the additional 1.85% contribution for 27 years for the new hire(a de facto pay cut for the unborn). You don't have to be a financial expert to see how this adds up to a healthy saving for the city and it gives them another reason to push the senior teachers out.

It is not a smear to tell our constituents that in exchange for a pension deal that nets the city extra money and penalizes most of the unborn, we agreed to school-wide merit pay.

Mr. Zahler's title needs to be scrutinized closely. It is interesting that he calls it an open letter. That's exactly what Jamaica High School's letter to Randi was called on our blog. Can't Unity even come up with original titles? Oh well, imitation is the best form of flattery and we do want to say hi to all of our readers from inside 52 Broadway. Feel free to use our titles; we won't be like Hillary and call it plagiarism.

In other DA news, Randi said that anyone who wants to take Holy Thursday for a Religious Observance day should cite the Joseph Griffin grievance decision (We don't know if we spelled that right as we are going from Randi's remarks.) and apply for the day as a R.O. or personal business day. (For R.O. you pay for the substitute but for personal business you lose a day from the sick bank.) She also brought up people from PS 345 to talk about how they fought harassment in court to have file letters removed. She bought a Chapter Leader to the podium who was a whistleblower and had his U rating overturned. In addition, people from Unite Here came to the podium to talk about their campaign against Aramark and we unanimously supported them. Also, a teacher spoke in support of the teachers in Puerto Rico who have been on strike and a general resolution supporting teachers in Puerto Rico was passed. We also heard from VP Michael Mulgrew and a chapter leader and principal as well as Abe Levine on how important it is to have a student removal process. An amendment on not criminalizing student behavior that Joan Heymont introduced was rejected but a resolution was passed on having a student removal process in every school.

Between all of these speakers, Randi of course spoke and Staff Director Leroy Barr also tried to inspire people to bring out their members for the March 19 rally against the budget cuts. We want to point out to Jeff Zahler that we support the rally and are fighting budget cuts too. Michael Shulman also spoke in favor of a rally against the Iraq War scheduled for March 22.

All of these matters could have been done in ten or fifteen minutes as there was no opposition that we could see, however all of the filibustering meant there was no new motion period again and the question period was cut short. John Powers did bring up some of the pitfalls of the GHI-HIP merger. Randi had a letter to show the delegates that the unions are concerned about this issue and she stated that the unions want a guarantee that we do not lose any benefits if the health plans merge and go to for profit status. Other matters such as the UFT's legislative program, a resolution on closing schools and a proposal on career and technical schools never made it to the floor.

I could go on filibustering all day and all night but ladies and gentlemen this was a meeting that took two hours to do what could have been done in twenty minutes as there was not much to debate and we felt bad that we could not speak on motions that were important but never made it to the floor. Maybe at some point the DA will start following Roberts' Rules of Order again and not having Randi change the agenda every fifteen minutes to suit her whims.

55-25/55-27 SIGNED BY GOVERNOR; BUDGET EXPERTS AGREE WITH ICE

55-27/55-25 SAVES CITY MONEY;
YET TO BE HIRED TEACHERS PAY THE PRICE

Now that 55 years of age and 25 years service in the system retirement buy in is a reality after Governor Elliot Spitzer signed the legislation last week, we would again like to briefly point out who should consider buying in, who should probably not buy in and who wins and loses. Please consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any retirement decision as this blog contains our opinions and not official pension advice.

Anyone who started service betwen the ages of 26 and 36 could benefit from opting in for the new benefit and someone who started service earlier than age 26 but took a break for a restoration of health, maternity or some other leave could also benefit.

Everyone who started service at age 25 or younger and works straight through can only benefit if they want to retire early but not receive any payment until they are 55. It's also interesting to ask this question: If someone is eligible and opts in during the six month opt in period, can they get their additional 1.85% contributions back if they decide later to change their mind and work the entire 30 years one needs to work to receive a full 60% of final average salary pension?

Persons yet to be hired will have to be 55 and work 27 years and pay pension contributions for that entire time unlike current teachers who only are compelled to make pension contributions for ten years. In the Contract, the UFT agreed that it should be 55-25, not 55-27, for "all current and future members of the TRS..." Fiscal experts and the city's Chief Actuary cited in the Chief Leader have confirmed our analysis of the deal in the February 29, 2008 edition: The Chief's in depth article by Merideth Kolodner pretty much backs up what ICE has been saying about 55-25/55-27.

"The United Federation of Teachers' early retirement plan, despite reports of heavy costs to the city, will easily pay for itself and potentially result in hundreds of millions of dollars in savings to the city in the long run, according to fiscal experts."

Here's the part that really caught our eye. "Two fiscal experts who requested anonymity, estimated that the city would save money in the long run, up to $300 million over 25 years. That's because most of the cost of the plan is carried by the unborn, who will eventually pay more into the system than they take out in added benefits. The same was true for the Correction Officers Benevolent Association in 1990 and District Council 37 in 1996 when they got the retirement age reduced for their members."

Selling the unborn? We thought the UFT refused to do that. And in exchange for selling out the unborn on pensions we also agreed to schoolwide merit pay.

We recommend you pick up a copy of the Chief Leader to see the details explained by budget experts and read an explanation from Randi as well as quotes from James Eterno.

An Open Letter From the Jamaica HS Chapter

Jamaica High School UFT
167-01 Gothic Drive
Jamaica, NY 11432


February 11, 2008


Ms. Randi Weingarten
President United Federation of Teachers
52 Broadway
New York, NY 10004

Dear President Weingarten:

Jamaica High School is suffering close to one million dollars in budget cuts for the current spring semester. We have thirteen fewer teachers than we had in the fall. Our funding has been slashed because of declining enrollments caused mainly by the Department of Education and New York State wrongfully labeling us as an impact school and a persistently dangerous school because of misuse of data. We have been hit with a second punch due to the recent citywide budget cut. We can no longer function properly as a comprehensive high school and the DOE has reacted by forcing us to share our space with another school in the fall.

On Monday, January 28, 2008, the faculty and parents of Jamaica High School were surprised to hear that a College Board School would be placed inside of our building in September. We are only beginning to learn about the College Board’s vision for secondary education and we harbor no malice toward the program or its schools. However, to place a new separate school with its abundance of resources from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation on our premises while we are struggling with outlandish budget cuts from the New York City Department of Education is extremely unfair.

Jamaica High School was chartered in 1892. We have a 116 year history of which the staff and students are extremely proud. There are numerous distinguished alumni who have graduated from Jamaica High School. Gateway to Higher Learning, Academy of Finance, Law, Engineering and Computer Science Institute are educational programs that attract many fine students. We also do our best with many students who enter high school unprepared for the academic rigors of our challenging curriculum. In spite of this, it is quite common for even our students with the greatest needs to be successful at the high school level and fully prepared for higher education and beyond.

Most educators in this building feel as though we are links on a long chain that is Jamaica’s storied tradition. We believe we have been handed an almost sacred trust by the professionals and students who toiled here in the past to keep Jamaica moving ahead into the 21st century as a viable educational institution. However, our mission has become increasingly difficult mainly because of factors that are way beyond our control.

Commencing in 2003 there was a spike in reported disciplinary incidents in the school. At that time the administration started a zero-tolerance discipline policy that helped keep our hallways clear but it led to many more misdemeanor incidents being reported. Inevitably, suspensions and arrests increased. Subsequently, the Department of Education mis-labeled us a “priority school” and then an “impact school.” Inaccurate newspaper articles about the labels further tarnished our reputation. Our contesting the designations with the New York City Police Department and the Department of Education were to no avail. In the fall of 2007 the state misinterpreted our statistics to wrongfully label us a “persistently dangerous school,” a label that has had dire consequences for us.

In September the New York City Department of Education sent an official letter to the parent of every student in our school telling them Jamaica High School had been labeled “persistently dangerous” (though the school is not unsafe and never was) and offering to transfer their children out of our school. In the fall semester 173 parents took the opportunity to transfer their youngsters to other New York City schools. The Department of Education reacted, not by offering to help us to recruit students in order to preserve the integrity of Jamaica’s programs and ease overcrowding in neighboring schools, but by slashing our budget midyear, citing declining enrollments. As a result, we can no longer function properly as a comprehensive high school.

We now have eleven teachers who are in excess. Termed Absent Teacher Reserves (ATR’s) by the Department of Education, they are only permitted to cover for teachers who are out for the day, not teach a regular program.

On the first day of the spring semester, one of our teachers walked into an honors economics class of 39 students. Chairs from other classes had to be brought in to accommodate the students, and ultimately a number of students had to be dropped because there were too many students for one class. Meanwhile, a licensed social studies teacher (one of the ATR’s) is not teaching classes. Another social studies teacher is instructing music classes out-of-license, while the licensed music teacher (another ATR) has no classes to teach. The administration was compelled to close all but one of the swimming classes this term (though our pool is one of Jamaica High School’s great assets) because there is no money for the smaller classes swimming courses demand. We have been forced to slash innovative programs such as our two-teachers-in-a-class program for students having difficulty in math. The pupils are being short-changed in the classroom.

Other cuts we have suffered over the last few years include: the elimination of Summer Institute Pre-High School program for incoming Gateway students and the cancellation of the Advanced Placement government class as well as off-track classes for pupils who have failed a course and need to catch up. Also, classes outside the regular day are only available for graduating seniors. How can our students succeed when we cannot provide most students with what they need academically?

In addition, students are not offered the extracurricular choices that are often the hallmark of the high school experience. After school clubs are basically now volunteer activities since there is no money to pay for faculty advisors. The Odasete Dance Team, the Caribbean Club, the Spanish Honors Society, the Cheerleaders, the Bengali Club, and the Drama Club have all been dropped. The Step Team, the Animate Club, the Key Club, the Haitian Club, the International Club, the Teen Ambassadors, the Science Club and the Tennis Club are all supervised by teachers for free because there are insufficient funds to pay advisors for these programs. Teachers and other staff had to volunteer their time to set up and run our third annual Cardboard Boat Race where students apply what they have learned in physics class to build and race in boats in our swimming pool. Teachers volunteer for all of these activities because of their commitment to our students.

Furthermore, the budget for school secretaries has been cut; our secretarial staff has been reduced by attrition. The remaining secretaries are being overwhelmed with tasks that were once performed by a larger crew. Inevitably, services for students as well as staff deteriorate.

The Department of Education has reacted to our plight by bringing in hordes of armed police officers, school safety agents, surveillance cameras and metal detecting equipment for a school that does not have a weapons problem. To top it off we now learn that in September the DOE will be opening up a new College Board school at Jamaica High School with their own principal and staff.

The College Board School students will assuredly get every advantage that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Michael and Susan Dell Foundation have to offer while Jamaica’s traditional pupils will suffer with even more cuts as our enrollments decline and we are squeezed out of various wings of the building. Working under ever-worsening conditions, we will be blamed when our students fail to do well.

The College Board website indicates that their schools are unscreened, but will their new school take on special education pupils or students with limited English proficiency, as we do, when it starts in the fall? As the resources are provided to the new school, those in need of greatest help will mostly likely remain in the regular Jamaica High School.

Deprived of the resources we need to survive, we feel we are being set up to fail by being slowly suffocated by the DOE. How could we not fail when we are a comprehensive high school that cannot afford to run a comprehensive program?

We know that the UFT has taken a position opposing the horrific midyear budget cuts that have been imposed by the Mayor and Chancellor. The Union has our unqualified support in this battle. Our situation certainly can be highlighted to show how placing a school within this school with its own principal will compromise educational opportunities in this building. The students here deserve greater assistance, not greater competition for what limited resources there are.

Sincerely,



The UFT Chapter Committee Jamaica High School

James Eterno Social Studies Department UFT Chapter Leader
Debbie Saal Math Department School Leadership Team Member
Gustavo Medina Science Department School Leadership Team Member
Dena Gordon Social Studies Department UFT Delegate
Tiffany Young English Department
Judy Reuben Guidance Department
Kathy Reynolds School Secretaries
Irma Segovia Second Language Department
Rose Slaymaker Physical Education Department
Calvin Whitfield Special Education Department

MEMBERS SHOULD DECIDE WHO REPLACES UFT PRESIDENT

by James Eterno, UFT Chapter Leader Jamaica High School

All of the speculation about Randi Weingarten replacing Ed McElroy, who is retiring soon as AFT President, is rather sad and indicative of what our union has deteriorated into. The UFT has fully transformed itself from a labor union into what one time AFT President David Seldon termed in his book, The Teacher Rebellion, an insurance company. The Union functions like a giant corporation as opposed to a democratic organization.

There is all of this palace intrigue reported on in the NY Sun and on some blogs about who will be selected by Randi to be her anointed successor. We believe the guessing about who will succeed Randi is basically irrelevant to those of us who toil in the schools in New York City. The rank and file should demand that if she decides to take the AFT presidency and resigns as UFT President (the former is likely, but the latter is not at this time), then there should be a member election to decide on her successor. What a novel idea! Let the UFT members decide who should replace Randi by voting.

Most likely, Randi will hold onto both the UFT and AFT presidencies until after the next UFT election. She will appoint a successor when she is good and ready which might be years from now, but it will almost certainly be in the middle of her term so that the heir apparent can have some time as the president. The new leader will then be fawned over by the NY Teacher newspaper and ultimately get to run as an incumbent for reelection.

The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter that much who leads the UFT because as long as the top-down Unity Caucus (political party) machine remains in control, there will be very little change at the Union. The President's job will be to maintain the institution of the Union and the Unity Caucus as a main priority. The loyalty driven corporate style patronage machine will carry on and those who want to advance to higher UFT positions will have to publicly spew the party line to members on virtually all Union issues. Real dissent will not be tolerated. Anyone who thinks substantial change will occur when Randi leaves is probably delusional.

We would love to be proven wrong on this but as long as the membership doesn't demand and work for fundamental reform within the UFT, it's very doubtful that anything will be very different, regardless of who the president is.

CLOSE LOOK AT CITY BUDGET PROVES ICE RIGHT ON 55/25-55/27 GIVEAWAY

by James Eterno UFT Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School

When the punitive 2005 Contract was released, one of the main benefits was supposed to be a 55-25 retirement incentive. The actual language in Article 4C says that the pension legislation should be enacted "without any cost to the city." To us that means that it should be revenue neutral meaning the pension deal should not cost the city anything or save the city any money. Now as the final bill is working its way through the State Legislature and the City released its budget proposal, it is clearer than ever how the city wins while only a small fraction of UFT members gain anything and many lose including all new hires.

In the latest city budget on page E-117, there is a category called "55/25 Program Savings: Savings generated by increased retirements as a result of the new age and experience retirement policy." For fiscal year 2009 the city will be saving $43,100,000 because of 55/25-55/27; for fiscal year 2010 that will jump to $68,600,000; for fiscal year 2011 it spikes to $87,500,000 and for 2012 the city will be saving $101,000,000.

The city saves over 100 million dollars because current teachers who want to take advantage of 55/25 will have to pay into the system to fund their early retirement while new hires will be required to pay pension contributions for their entire careers, not just the first ten years. The added contributions amount to a 1.85% pay cut for employees not yet hired and they won't be able retire after 25 years of service at age 55 as the contract says they should be able to; they will need 27 years. What did we get in return for allowing the city to save this huge sum of money with their de-facto new pension tier? School-wide merit pay.

In exchange for hundreds of millions in savings, couldn't the UFT have at least won back those two staff punishment days in August as days off so we can get a full summer vacation before we have to take it on the chin every year?

Challenge to our Unity readers: Please find something in this piece that shows our numbers are wrong instead of launching the usual personal attacks or saying we just complain. If you can show we are in error, we will gladly retract the article.

DA REPORT

UFT DECLARES THERE IS NO INCREASE IN LETTERS FOR THE FILE

UNION WILL FIGHT BUDGET CUTS

UFT WILL BATTLE DOE'S PLAN TO EVALUATE TEACHERS BASED ON STUDENT TEST SCORES

by James Eterno; UFT Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School

More evidence that the school system where most of us inhabit is not the same place where UFT leaders work was presented at the Wednesday, February 6 Delegate Assembly. For the last two months, ICE has attempted to ask that the contractual provision concerning letters in the file be reopened as per a letter labor Commissioner James Hanley sent to Randi back in 2005 when we were giving away many of our basic rights. We wanted to introduce a resolution seeking to revisit only the letter in the file provision, not the entire Contract, that we were not able to raise at previous DA's.

To her credit, Randi Weingarten declared that there must be a new motion period at the February meeting. We are happy to report that our blog pieces are required reading at UFT Headquarters as Randi made several mentions of our blogs. However, when the new motion period came, Randi did not call on ICE to present its case. Instead, she called on VP Michael Mulgrew to raise a watered down version of our letter in the file resolution that does not even acknowledge that there has been an increase in letters to the file. The actual wording of the resolution signed by five UFT officers says that "with the exception of one school, there were no reports of an increase."

There you have it dear readers, only one school since the new Contract came out acknowledged an increase in letters for the file. Everything is just fine everywhere else. All of that 36% increase in Unsatisfactory ratings last year that the Chief wrote about must have just occurred out of the blue. The 39% increase in tenured teachers receiving U ratings was not supported by any unsatisfactory observations or any negative letters. To believe that requires one to willingly suspend disbelief.

Unity's resolution further weakened the original ICE motion when they resolved to make yet another effort to determine if there has been an increase in letters for the file. How will they gather information? By asking Chapter Leaders for data? Guess what, Chapter Leaders won't find out about letters in many cases because we can no longer grieve file letters and nasty observation reports. Therefore, many members don't even bother going to their Chapter Leader when they get a negative letter. Why tell the Union when the first line of defense, a grievance, was taken away in 2005?

When Michael Mulgrew rose and started talking about what a great Contract we have when he was supposed to be reading the resolution, I couldn't take it any longer and had to rise to a "point of order" as according to UFT rules, attempting to add a motion to the current month's agenda is not debatable. Randi acknowledged the point as subsequently Mulgrew simply read the resolution which of course easily passed the Unity dominated DA. We withdrew our motion as even a weak resolution is better than nothing and I suppose we should be content that we are helping to set the UFT's agenda.

However, we have to ask one question particularly to the Unity people who so closely read this blog: If there was not an increase in file letters, how do you account for the substantial spike in teachers receiving unsatisfactory ratings in 2006-07?

There was other important business discussed at the DA. The delegates nearly unanimously pledged to fight the city's budget cut of $180 million now and $324 million scheduled to be slashed in September. A resolution called for the UFT to actively participate in a "coalition with parents, community groups, and political and civic leaders to lobby against the cuts." We have no problem with this proposal. Some of our friends wanted to amend this motion to call for a massive rally which would include students on February 14 or at another later date. This amendment was rejected by the Unity majority after one executive board member after another spoke against it.

The DA also voted overwhelmingly to oppose the DOE's pilot project to rate teachers based on student test scores. Julie Woodward from ICE did get an amendment passed which talked about the folly of rating teachers based upon test scores if the teachers teach a subject where there are no standardized tests . She made a solid equity argument.

Finally, Mona Romain was nominated to serve another term on the teachers' retirement board. The vote was made by acclimation based on a motion made by Jeff Kaufman.

ICE Initiates Phase One of Plan to Fight Back: Win Back the Right to Grieve Negative Evaluations & File Letters

Since December, ICE has been trying to raise a motion at the Delegate Assembly calling upon the UFT to reopen the Contract so we can win back the right to grieve material in our files. Unfortunately, in December the motion period was taken up by another resolution and in January Randi didn't get to the new motion period.

It is essential now that everyone who reads our blog support our call to win back the right to grieve material in our files and to have the right to challenge supervisory judgment. We would like to bring this up at the February 6 DA. It would need a majority vote of delegates to be placed on the UFT DA agenda in March.

Below is the actual resolution and what follows is our rationale in support of our plan.

Independent Community of Educators (ICE)
February 6, 2008 motion

Letters in the File Grievances: Resolution to Reopen the Contractual Provision
For the March 2008 DA

WHEREAS, in selling the 2005 Contract to the members, UFT President Randi Weingarten answered objections to the removal of the right to grieve letters in the file by claiming the Contractual provision eliminating grievances for unfair and inaccurate letters could be reopened if there is a spike in letters to the file; and

WHEREAS, The Chief Leader reported recently that there was a 36% increase in teachers receiving unsatisfactory ratings in 2006-07 (the first full year under the 2005 Contract), a 39% increase in tenured teachers receiving U ratings, a fourfold increase in the number of teachers forced to extend their probation and a doubling of teachers denied tenure; and

WHEREAS, the UFT reported that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of teachers resigning compared to just a few years earlier; and

WHEREAS, it is reasonable to conclude that the spike in unsatisfactory ratings and resignations would not have been possible without a huge increase in negative letters to the file; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the UFT reopen the Contract provision on letters in the file so it can be modified to allow members to grieve negative material in a timely manner and include the right to contest supervisory judgment to an impartial party, in addition to demanding that any material removed from a file can never be used in any proceeding of any kind against any UFT member.

Rationale
NY Teacher stated the following in the October 20, 2005 issue: “City Labor Relations Commissioner James Hanley wrote to the union that the city agreed to negotiate on the issue (reopening the letters in the file provision) ‘if there is a disproportionate increase in the number of letters to the file.’” The evidence is in and for the first year under the new Contract it is not a pretty picture:

1,333 Unsatisfactory ratings in 2006-07 compared with 981 in 2005-06. (U rating increase of 36%; Source: Chief Leader)

918 tenured teachers rated U last year up from 662 the year before. (U rating increase of 39%; Source: Chief Leader)

The number of teachers denied tenure more than doubled last year compared to the year before. (Source: Chief Leader)

The number of teachers forced to extend their probation increased almost fourfold in 2006-07 compared to 2005-06. (Source: Chief Leader)

The UFT’s own figures show that 4,606 teachers resigned last year, up from 2,544 who resigned just a few years earlier; it is sensible to conclude that many of those 4,606 were forced to resign.

Chancellor Klein in 2007 created a “gotcha squad” of lawyers and retired administrators to help build cases against tenured teachers.

There had to be a disproportionate spike in negative file letters to support all that increased discipline. We have to fight back now. The November 26, 2007 candlelight vigil was a good start but it was not enough. Let’s demand a letter in the file grievance process that is better than what we had before so we can challenge supervisory judgment. This Delegate Assembly should take a giant leap toward winning back our rights by putting this resolution on the DA agenda for February. Tell Hanley and Klein we mean business. Klein’s “gotcha squad” makes it “open season” to hunt teachers; we say close the hunt down now!

Please tell Chapter Leaders, Delegates, District Representatives and the Union officers to support the proposal to reopen the Contract so we can fight unfair file letters.

PS We are fully aware that if a letter stays in the file for three years, you can take it out of the file if disciplinary charges haven't been filed. However, the DOE still keeps a copy and can still try to use it. In addition, three years is too long to wait. Material that is over three years old is not normally admissible in 3020A cases against tenured teachers and the DOE doesn't wait three years to go after us. Finally, non-tenured teachers can easily be terminated at any point in their first three years of service and having a grievance procedure for unfair letters was their only hope for fighting back against abusive administrators.

DOE's Secret Plan for Merit Pay...Without the Pay!

by Marjorie Stamberg, GED Plus, D79

Naturally they had to do it in secret.

Today's front-page New York Times article has caused quite a sensation. It may not have swept the nation, but it sure shook up the world of education in New York.

The Times revealed that that the DOE has a program in which 2,500 teacher in 140 schools across the city are being evaluated on the basis of their students' test scores.

Did you know about this? Of course not. Becaue they've kept it under wraps.

"The move is so contentious that principals in some of the 140 schools participating have not told their teachers that they are being scrutinized based on student performance and improvement."

There are actually 280 schools participating in the program. In 140 schools, teachers are being measured on how many students in their classes meet basic progress goals. In a second group of 140 schools, principals are "subjectively" evaluating teachers, to see how the results match up!

This is really fishy--it flunks the smell test. It proves what we have been saying all along, that the "school-wide bonus pay" is just a wedge to open the way for Mayor Bloomberg calls "performance pay." If these programs go through, it will be a mortal blow to the union and put every teacher at the mercy of the principal or higher-up.
The Time's article saw the connection of these secret program to school "bonus pay" as well. "A new bonus program for teachers and principals, as well as the letter grading system for schools unveiled last fall are all linked to improvement in schools."

The Times said that Randi Weingarten and the UFT knew about this secret program for months and said nothing to the teachers! In a quote, Randi said she could not reveal it because she was told "confidentially" by the DOE and did not know which specific schools were involved. She said she "had grave reservations about the project and would fight if the city tried to use the information for tenure or formal evaluations or even publicized it." (So now it's public--I wonder what she's going to do?)

It's even more outrageous: The secret program is being administered by Chris Cerf, who is deputy schools chancellor. Cerf was hired by the DOE last year. He used to be head of the Edison Schools, the largest for-profit outfit in the country. The Edison schools made an attempt to open up shop in NYC a few years ago, but was defeated by a campaign of the UFT and concerned parents. So Bloomberg and Klein hired Cerf to be deputy chancellor. It's called privatization from within.

So, this brings us to the vote underway in GED Plus on "school wide bonus pay." We are being told by the D79 UFT reps that this is free money, and "why turn down $3,000 for work you would do anyway?"

We have argued that this money ain't free, it's a bribe, it's divisive and it blames teachers for the dire situation of students in NYC. We said, "It's letting the camel's nose in the tent." Well, it's hard to picture Joel Klein as a camel, but more than the nose is now in the tent!

This just underscores how important it is to vote down bonus pay.

But we should all ask our UFT reps what they knew about this secret plan and when they knew it.

As members of the UFT executive board, and as district UFT reps, were they informed about the existance of this program before today? Did they know about it when they were asking us to be part of this agenda? Or did Randi keep it from them as well?

They can't duck this one.

Teachers throughout the system, in every single school, should ask the principals of their schools whether they are part of it and have been secretly evaluated.

Now Randi has a statement out (on the UFT website), calling the secret program misguided and claiming it is in contradiction with the "committment...to collaboration and working together.. in the School Wide Bonus Program." No, there's no contradiction--this is all part of the same program and the UFT leadership has acted as enablers.

Hopefully, there is so much outrage now that we, the 130,000 members of the UFT, can stop this privatizing, corporatizing anti-student union-busting now.

January Delegate Assembly Report

Hillary Speaks to DA on the Phone
Teachers will Fight Excessive Paperwork
DA Calls for No Reduction in Parking Permits
UFT Fighting Principals in Need of Improvement
DA Unanimously Endorses ICE Amended Resolution on School Leadership Teams

By James Eterno, UFT Chapter Leader Jamaica High School

That last headline is not a misprint. In a move that surprised a great many people including the maker of the amendment: yours truly, the UFT Delegate Assembly voted unanimously to support an amendment we wrote asking the UFT to support a parent who has filed a class action appeal to State Education Commissioner Mills demanding that the Principals not be allowed to unilaterally make the final determination on school budgets on School Leadership Teams. Any chance of collaborative working environments was lost in December when Chancellor Joel Klein issued a new Chancellor's Regulation A-655 that gives principals the final say on the work of the School Leadership Teams, thus ending shared decision making. A parent appealed saying this violated State law and now with this amendment the UFT has joined onto the appeal. State law calls for shared decision making between parents, teachers and school administrators.

Hopefully, the teacher-parent coalition that came together last year will unite again so that we can bring to pass true shared decision making at the school level. We'll see what kind of mobilization the UFT puts forth to help the parents on this issue. Also, we would like to thank the UFT leadership for recognizing that this was a necessary amendment to add onto their resolution to make SLT's truly collaborative in every school. We've said it before and we will say it again: when the UFT leadership does the right thing, we have no problem giving them credit on this blog.

In other DA news, Hillary Clinton called Randi on her cell-phone and addressed the delegates from Nevada. Her call was played on a speakerphone at the main microphone so everyone could hear Hillary clearly. The technology was impressive. One delegate jokingly remarked that we were listening to god through those speakers. The Union is clearly making a strong pitch for their endorsed candidate: Hillary. ICE has not taken a position on the Democratic Primaries so further comment is not called for here. Comptroller Bill Thompson also spoke live to the Delegates in favor of Hillary .

Additionally, a resolution was passed calling on the DOE to eliminate repetitive paperwork and another was approved calling for the UFT to be able to find ways to increase the number of educator parking permits, not have them decreased as the Mayor wants. President Randi Weingarten reported that all issues with the 55-25 retirement bill have been worked out and she expects a bill to be passed by the State Legislature this month.

Finally, the Union announced its Principals in Need of Improvement program. This was introduced by new Staff Director Leroy Barr. He called up to the podium multiple members from three schools who told horror stories about principals from hell. The schools were Acorn High School for Social Justice, Susan Wagner High School on Staten Island and PS114 in Brooklyn where a remarkable forty UFT members showed up at the DA. We salute those UFT members for standing together and fighting back at the school level.

Chancellor's Regulation A-655 Changed in Violation of State Law

Parent Complains to the State Education Commissioner

On December 3, 2007, Chancellor Joel Klein released a revised version of Chancellor's Regulation A-655 that effectively ended legally mandated Shared Decision Making at the school level on School Leadership Teams by adding this clause to the regulation: “The Principal makes the final determination on the CEP (Comprehensive Education Plan) and school-based budget.” If the Principal makes the final decision on the School Leadership's Team's work, this renders the SLT powerless and directly contradicts State Education Law and Commissioners’ Regulations that call for “Shared Decision making.” So much for collaboration on School Leadership Teams.

The UFT's reaction to Klein's blatant power grab for principals has been to ask for the DOE to be nice and please collaborate with us. We need to see more done. One parent has taken her case to Commissioner Richard Mills by filing an appeal that the new regulation is illegal. Parent activist Leonie Haimson describes her case below.

We have no idea why the Union is not taking the lead to re-empower our members and our parent friends.

from Leonie Haimson...

On Dec. 31, Marie Pollicino, a parent and Community Education Council member from Queens, filed a class action complaint with the State Education Department on behalf of all NYC public school parents. Her petition says that the new regulations adopted by DOE that strip away the rights and responsibilities of School Leadership Teams to decide on school-based budgets and Comprehensive Education plans are unlawful and unwarranted, and should be reversed.

Her petition also points out that the process of amending these regs was contrary to state law by not involving CECs or any other official parent group, and she asked for a stay, so that the previous regulations that provided real decision-making authority to SLTs should be retained until the Commissioner determines the propriety of the amendments.

Her petition is posted here; it makes a very compelling case. It follows an earlier letter to the Commissioner from the NY State Assembly Education Chair Cathy Nolan, who made several of the same points.

Please contact the State Commissioner, Richard Mills, with a copy of your email to the Regents, Assembly Member Nolan, City Council Member Robert Jackson, Chancellor Klein and the Mayor, as well as your own elected reps in the Legislature and City Council – whose emails you can easily gather by plugging in your address here.

Why is this important and why is this relevant to class size?

Given more resources and authority delegated to the school level, and the huge pressure put on principals by this administration to raise test scores and spend nearly all their discretionary funds on data analysis and test prep, to the exclusion of nearly everything else, it is more crucial than ever before that parents be able to provide a countervailing force to see that resources are invested properly – on reducing class size and improving learning conditions in our classrooms.

This regulation is yet another insidious way in which the administration is systematically trying to strip any ability for parents to have a voice in the way their children are educated.

Do Teachers Feel the Love?

Randi Says We Don't or Maybe She Says We Do!

The Chief Leader Civil Service newspaper in their December 21 issue did a long "fluff" piece/interview with UFT President Randi Weingarten. Richard Steier's glowing admiration allowed him to revise history by increasing the positive vote to 70% for the disastrous 2005 Contract. (In reality, 60% of teachers and 63% of UFT members overall approved that Contract. )

Steier did ask some good questions and there were some valid points made about Randi's roller coaster relationship with Bloom-Klein. Randi is even quoted criticizing Chancellor Joel Klein for not creating an education culture that respects the work teachers do. She stated, "The most frustrating and infuriating thing is the infantilizing and disrespecting of Teachers, both in New York City and across America."

However in vintage Weingarten fashion, toward the end of the interview, Randi made a statement that contradicts her earlier statement. To avoid quoting her out of context, she was referring to the needs of newly organized home day care workers compared to teachers when she said: "Teachers are more respected than they've been at any time since I've been in education." What Randi? If you can figure out where she really stands, please let us know.

What we do know is teachers are leaving the profession in huge numbers and often cite a lack of respect as a main reason for departing.

In order to clear up our confusion, ICE asks the following question to the educators who read this blog:

Do you feel more respected as a teacher than at any time in the past two decades?

ICE would like to know.

Do Community Based Organizations Hold the Keys to Small Schools?

Pick up today’s Daily News and you might get the impression that community organizations that sponsor small schools can basically decide whether those schools survive or not. The first article, Bushwick parents and kids celebrate exit of embattled Acorn High principal, Rachel Monahan describes how the ACORN School of Social Justice, with their CBO, ACORN, was able to oust a principal who was blamed for the school’s poor performance and a DOE letter grade of F. The school was obviously saved from closing with a change in leadership despite its poor grade. ACORN was willing to continue to help the school although it is unclear what they were doing to allow the school to take such a precipitous decline.

In another article, Slow death for Brooklyn high school, Carrie Melago, describes how the CBO, East Brooklyn Congregations pulled out of EBC/ENY High School for Public Safety and Law and left the school to be placed on DOE’s death list of closing schools. The school was making some improvements but without CBO support and other political considerations the Chancellor decided to close the school even though the school received a letter grade of D.

While only a mile apart physically, both schools are light years away in how they were treated by the DOE.

Are the differing CBOs the reason? Perhaps. But it is only a part of the story.

CBOs have been making inroads on public schools for many years. Some involvement has been limited and some has been more extensive. What is clear in most situations is the natural tension among the participants. Each stakeholder has its own goals and the political interplay will generally determine how the school functions.

A Case In Point

The Second Opportunity School and Suspension Schools have long operated with CBO involvement. The school for long term suspended students spanned four boroughs and at one point had 6 CBO’s working with its students. While it was never clearly defined collaboration was emphasized. What collaboration meant was the turnover of particular school functions to non-public entities under contracts. The CBOs were responsible for all counseling and group activities yet each CBO took their responsibility differently. What remained the same, however, was the displacement of DOE personnel in school functions, especially in mandated areas.
At the Manhattan high school site the CBO tried to maintain the site despite fierce opposition by the school’s administration. The site suffered from total mismanagement and the fact that the CBO hired well meaning but uncertified personnel did not help. Salaries for some of the CBO staff performing counseling and providing some IEP services were 1/3 of their DOE counterparts. It did not work.

At a meeting toward the end of the year the principal asked the DOE staff whether they wanted CBO involvement and most of the staff could not believe their ears…were they really being consulted on such an issue? Not long thereafter the school was shut down and reorganized. Most of the staff, DOE and CBO, went elsewhere.

EBC/ENY and EBC

At EBC/ENY it was clear that the abandonment of the school by the CBO was one of the reasons that the DOE decided to close it down. What happened?

East Brooklyn Congregations, a CBO whose parent organization the Industrial Areas Foundation was founded by Saul Alinsky, received approval for its new high schools as a way to build community involvement in education in East New York, Brownsville and Bushwick. Ironically they worked with a branch of the Manhattan Institute, the Center for Educational Innovation, a conservative think tank and DOE support organization for 55 schools.

At the time of the school’s founding EBC was involved in housing projects in the community and, as time went on, devoted more of its energies and resources to housing than education.

While EBC involvement with the school was minimal at best it was clear that when the school was placed on the SURR list three years ago it served as an embarrassment to both the organization and its senior education director, Ray Domanico.

Domanico, who became president of the Public Education Association (which later merged with the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Educational Innovation) was known for his ultra-conservative views of public education. Appearing on Bill O’Reilly’s “Factor” Domanico stated in response to O’Reilly’s question about why Catholic schools do better than public schools, “We think there's a couple of reasons. The Catholic schools know what they do well, and they stick to that. They have a very focused and basic curriculum. For example, an immigrant student comes into the public school system in New York City and, often, the public school will keep that child in bilingual education for six years, not teaching them in English. In Catholic school, they'll pray with you in Spanish or in your home language, but they are going to teach you English in the first year.” (THE O'REILLY FACTOR, Fox News Network, Friday, May 18, 2001.)

Given his background it was no surprise that he was quoted in Elissa Gootman’s New York Times article that it was the fault of the school’s leadership that the school was being closed. Nothing about EBC’s changing priorities.

There were other factors which led to the school’s demise including the fact that EBC/ENY elected to become an empowerment school as opposed to one of CEI’s schools.

While we can speculate about the school’s closing what is abundantly clear is the need a full assessment about school closings and small schools. We have been calling for this for a long time…is it ever coming?

Randi: 14 Schools Closing is a UFT Victory

December 12 Delegate Assembly Report

by James Eterno UFT Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School

In over a decade as a Chapter Leader and Delegate and in ten years on the UFT Executive Board, I learned one indisputable fact: the UFT never loses no matter how bad conditions are in the schools or how many rights are given up in a Contract settlement. The UFT according to its leaders, has the same undefeated record as the Harlem Globetrotters or Perry Mason.

This unbeaten streak continued at the December 12, 2007 UFT Delegate Assembly. President Randi Weingarten reported that 14 schools were going to be closed. She admitted that 14 schools closing was 14 too many. However, instead of condemning Chancellor Joel Klein's decision to close any schools since the UFT has a policy that the Department of Education should refrain from closing schools until we can have a study done assessing the impact of school closings, Randi went in full spin mode implying that 14 schools closings is another UFT victory because Klein threatened 150 schools that received D or F report card grades but because of UFT pressure, only 14 were closed.

The UFT threatened a lawsuit because schools have to be closed using Federal and State guidelines. Therefore if we went to court, in the discovery process the UFT would've received information on the criteria on how schools are rated. With that "intense" Union pressure on him, Klein backed down and pulled a bunch of schools off of the list of schools to be closed. Randi wouldn't tell us which schools the UFT saved.

We need to talk about the status of the members in the over 100 schools that received F or D report card grades and were not closed Are UFT members in these schools going to be pushing to defend their union rights with the sword of a possible closing hanging over their heads? Why is the UFT not commissioning that study to assess the effectiveness of school closings on impacted schools and on neighboring schools? We didn't hear anything about this at the DA.

As for the members from the schools that are closing who will become Absent Teacher Reserves (full time teachers with full pay and benefits but no regular class), Randi said that the UFT is negotiating so that people who want to be placed will get a position.

In case you've been blinded by the spin here is the condensed version: 14 schools are being closed and over 100 others are being threatened with closing; the ranks of ATR's proliferate but it's a UFT win.

In other news from the DA, Randi reported that there may not be a special session of the State Legislature this month so 25-55 retirement plan might have to wait until early next year. She added that this isn't so bad either since if the bill passes later, then members have to pay less in contributions. She also told us that the war over whether to reduce class sizes has been won at the state level because of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity Lawsuit. The question now is whether the reduced class sizes will be an average of 20 for grades K-3 and 23 from grades 4-12 or will there be caps at these numbers in the next four years? She talked about the court cases on the letters for file as well (see the previous article for more on this issue).

Randi was away at a rally when the meeting started so she was not there when a number of resolutions were passed. These included the UFT examining the Unsatisfactory rating appeal process, actions to protest Klein's "gotcha squad" of lawyers who are going after tenured teachers; support for the environment; and support for transgender people.

Finally, a motion to have a UFT strike in sympathy for Local 32BJ was defeated.

All things considered, just another run of the mill great month for our Union. Hope all is well in your school too.

CAN’T GRIEVE A LETTER TO YOUR FILE: SUE

In a series of decisions by several different Justices in New York Supreme Court four teachers have gained what our Union gave up; the right to have negative letters removed from our files. As we all may recall our Union leadership saw fit to give up our precious right to grieve letters in the file as well as a step in our grievance procedure in our sellout contract a few years back. We have seen a precipitous increase in letters to the file, U-rated observations and U-ratings. This was no coincidence.

What our leadership gave away, however, might be partially saved if you decide to file a lawsuit. Joyce Sticco and three other teachers at P.S. 345 in Brooklyn did just that…and won.

The facts of Sticco v. BOE, Supreme Court, New York County, Index 105477/2007, decided 11/28/07 are, unfortunately, all too familiar. In April 2006 Sticco was questioned by investigators from the Special Commissioner of Investigations’ office (Condon’s office) about allegations of inappropriate touching of female students by a fellow teacher, Gregory Michaelides. In his report Condon found that Michaelides had engaged in the conduct and that Sticco and three other teachers either witnessed or gave inconsistent or inappropriate statements about Michaelides’ alleged misconduct. Condon recommended that Michaelides be terminated and that Sticco and the other teachers receive “appropriate disciplinary action.”

The appropriate disciplinary action was a letter to each teachers’ file indicating that they had “show[ed] a willful disregard for the welfare of children” when they failed to report Michaelides’ misconduct. With no way to contest the finding or the letter the teachers started a proceeding in Supreme Court.

The Courts found that the teachers’ due process rights were violated. Under New York State Education Law tenured teachers are entitled to hearings whenever the DOE contemplates disciplinary action. This law, Section 3020-a has certain procedural safeguards to make certain teachers don’t get the treatment that the principal of P.S. 345 gave to Sticco and her colleagues. Disciplinary letters to the file which come after a principal’s conference and without due process protection must be expunged.

The Court found that there are two types of letters to the file; those that are disciplinary and those that are critical administrative evaluations. Ever since 1981 in the Matter of Holt the Court of Appeals has held that this distinction is critical in the determination of letters which violated teacher due process and those that did not. For the last 26 years the “Holt letter,” (ironically the principal in Sticco is named Wanda Holt but, it is believed, she has no relation to Jon Holt the disciplined teacher in 1981) as it became known allowed school administrators to place letters in teachers’ files that were evaluations. Thus observations and “instructive” letters were ok without a full hearing. However, letters which were disciplinary in nature must be taken out of teachers’ files.

At the Delegate Assembly last Wednesday Randi announced the Sticco victories but was less than enthusiastic about its implications or application to other teachers. At the Executive Board meeting last Monday a form entitled “Disciplinary Letters in the File” was distributed which recounted the 4 court cases and gave some guidance as to whether a letter was “disciplinary” and thus available to be removed by Court intervention. While the form indicates a procedure to evaluate whether particular letters are disciplinary, the form does not indicate where the letter should be sent for evaluation and possible Court action.

What’s going on? School administrators have been placing disciplinary letters in teachers’ files for years. Don’t you think our Union should at least try to make up for giving away our grievance rights with aggressively fighting these letters in Court and telling us how to do it?

ICE DISAPPOINTED IN UFT RESPONSE TO SCHOOL CLOSINGS

by James Eterno, Chapter Leader, Jamaica High School

The Department of Education announced the closing of six schools on Tuesday and threatened that others will be closed later this month. The UFT's response was incredibly weak asking only that "everyone affected is treated with care, dignity and respect." The UFT added, "that staff members who choose to stay on during the phase-out years should have opportunities to work in other schools." Hundreds of more UFT members are about to be displaced from their schools and that's all the UFT has to say?

There is nothing in the UFT's statement even criticizing the DOE for continuing to close schools, even though the Union has passed resolutions saying that the DOE should refrain from closing schools until we can have an independent study done assessing its educational value.

The UFT's statement is more evidence that what the UFT leadership does at Delegate Assembly Meetings and at rallies is mere show for the members but when it comes right down to it, the Union does not oppose the wholesale closing of schools and displacement of even more teachers and other UFT members into Absent Teacher Reserves status (day-to-day substitute teachers with full pay and benefits but no regular class).

Where's the outrage from the Union leadership? We thought the Union opposed this policy. You wouldn't know it by their lame reaction.

Issues and Proposals in the GED-Plus Chapter Elections

By Marjorie Stamberg, GED-Plus Teacher, Manhattan Hub

Underlying the current election for chapter officers in GED-Plus are some important issues of broader significance. A crisis was opened by the “reorganization” of District 79, announced last May, in which more than 300 teaching positions were eliminated. The fact that hundreds of teachers were then thrown into Absent Teacher Reserve, instead of having the right to transfer to other positions, is a direct result of the union leadership’s giving up of seniority transfers in the 2005 contract.

Now in 2007, the union has agreed to introduce “merit pay.” Whether it’s called “school-wide bonus pay,” as UFT president Randi Weingarten prefers to call it, or “performance pay” as Mayor Bloomberg prefers, it sacrifices a fundamental union principle—equal pay for equal work.. This is a union-busting measure, for it will set one teacher, or one group of teachers, against another, competing for management’s favor. It’s also very bad for the students, particularly those in under-financed and minority neighborhoods, and where second-language and Special Ed students are struggling for an education. Do the math—basic economics dictates there will be pressure on teachers to drift to higher-performing schools if the pay is higher.

A third major element is the slashing of budgets for alternative education, whether for high school “drop-outs” (or more accurately, “force-outs”), adult education or other programs. In the fall of 2005, the DOE cut $5 million from the $30 million adult ed budget in NYC. In 2005-06, they cut $6 million and $8 million from the evening high school and GED programs. In 2004, Auxiliary Services for High Schools (ASHS) had 50 sites around the city. In 2005, this was cut to 19 centers; in 2006, it was cut back to 6 centers, and all nighttime programs were eliminated. And now the whole of D79 has been “reorganized”, slashing roughly 40 percent of the teaching personnel, while illogically claiming they were improving educational offerings. This has occurred while the overall budget of the DOE has gone up by 50 percent.

These three elements—elimination of seniority, introduction of pay tied to test scores, and the systematic elimination of alternative education programs are not isolated events. They are components of a master plan for “reforming” the public school system by corporatizing and partially privatizing the system. “I am a capitalist and I am in favor of incentives for individual people,” Mayor Bloomberg remarked at a press conference introducing the “bonus pay.” But kids aren’t widgets, and schools are not production lines, churning out “products.” Yet this is the agenda of Bloomberg, the Chancellor, the U.S. Department of Education and those who are dictating the lines of educational “reform” today.

A key part of this program is the replacement of public schools by “charter schools.” This is being pushed by Democratic Party governor Elliot Spitzer as well as Republican President Bush and is clearly aimed at busting teachers unions. Teachers are being made scapegoats for the problems of an educational system that has systematically under-funded and re-segregated inner city schools. The London Economist (November 10) just ran a special article praising New York City school reform in which it reported: “On November 5th, the Mayor and his Schools Chancellor, Joel Klein, announced what is in effect the final piece in their grand plan to charterise the entire city school system.”

That “final piece” is the school “report card,” which will be used to close down scores of public schools. And where are the students to go? Charter schools or vouchers for private schools. Can they do this to an entire city school system? They already have—in New Orleans. As part of the “ethnic cleansing” following the Hurricane Katrina man-made social disaster, the schools were closed down and replaced by union-free charter schools. There are 5 regular public schools left, compared to 40 charter schools and 34 “recovery schools” run by the state! The NCEE’s “New Commission on the State of the American Workforce (of which Joel Klein is a member) wants to cut back the public schools to a core, cap them at the 10th grade (!!). The rest would be jobbed out to private contractors.

A briefing paper on the restructuring of the DOE’s alternative high school programs prepared by the Committee on Education of the New York City Council (November 14, 2007) ominously stated, “It may be the case that DOE intends to phase out D79 altogether.”

So if you think your job may be in jeopardy, you’re right. The entire UFT is as risk. Yet, rather than fighting against this threat head-on, the Weingarten leadership has made concession after concession, give back after give back, so that it has become an enabler for dismantling the public schools.

We need to see the big picture, and understand what we’re up against. The whole restructuring gimmick is a standard corporate take-over tactic in “leveraged buy-outs”: shut down the company, then re-open it as a new “entity”, while having canceled all the union contracts, and laid off half the staff.

I have emphasized that the present election for Chapter Leader is an opportunity for us to pull together as educators (teachers, paras, and staff) against the onslaught from the Department of Education we have faced over the past six months and continue to confront. My main opponent, Michael Friedman, has been running on a one-point program: “experience.” The problem is, his experience did not lead him to play any role whatsoever in fighting against the elimination of hundreds of positions in the chaotic “reorganization” of District 79.

Instead, Mr. Friedman has waged a vindictive personal attack on me, releasing a stream of frantic e-mails in which he accuses me of being “ignorant,” “angry,” “negative”, a “demagogue,” someone who “rants” and “raves.” (Where have we heard that before?) He wrote: “Her platform is anger and negativism…” “Do we want to be represented by someone so negative and angry…” “a one note, negative campaign; a call to just say no.” “Ms. Stamberg, like so many demagogues who want to rant…” “angry people who rant and rave…” Ask yourselves, who is ranting and raving here?

After some longtime D79 teachers (including a former chapter leader) wrote to him to cut out the abusive personal attacks, Mr. Friedman has fallen silent. But in the course of his rants he deliberately distorts my position, as well as getting his facts wrong. He writes: “Ms. Stambergs repeats the oft quoted comment that the ‘Union gave up seniority’ and then tries to attach it to what happened in the 18D process. Neither is true.” What he is doing here, in order to confuse the question, is conflating two different criticisms I made of the UFT leadership. It’s called creating a straw man in order to knock it down.

Concerning seniority, what I wrote in my statement was “In 2005, the union ‘traded’ seniority—a fundamental union protection-for a wage increase.” And at the candidates forum, I said that we wouldn’t be in the situation we are in today with hundreds of teachers thrown into ATR status, except for the fact that the union leadership gave up seniority transfers (and SBO hiring) in the 2005 contract. That ‘s an indisputable fact.

When a school was reorganized, if teachers were not rehired at the replacement school, they would have the right to be hired anywhere in the city, to any position for which they were licensed, according to seniority. Now they get thrown into the limbo of ATR land as “substitutes.”

This not only affects educators in D79. I used to be a mentor, and the entire mentor staff was ATRed, numbering more than 300 citywide, including some of the most experienced teachers in the system. How many of our members are in ATR status? We haven’t been able to get a straight answer. At one point it was said to be 1,000 or more. Meanwhile, the DOE hired between 5,000 and 6,000 new teachers, and now they’re saying they will use the Campaign for Fiscal Equity Funds to hire 6,000 more—while some of the best teachers in the system are still ATRd!

Mr. Friedman defends the elimination of seniority transfers by arguing that “more senior teachers succeeded in getting transfers under the Open Market Plan last year than in any given year where the Seniority Transfer ran.” Again, do the math. Because so many more teachers are being excessed than ever before, it stands to reason there are more “open market” transfers! This is a pseudo-statistical flimflam.
So if you are in ATR status, without an appointment, it is because of the giveback contract that Mr. Friedman defends, and that I voted against.

On the 18-D staffing provisions of our contract: At two heated union meetings in June, members demanded that all positions in the restructured school be filled by D79 teachers. Our union bargained hard for this and won this important concession, but with one proviso: the teachers had to be deemed “qualified” in interviews conducted under the 18D clause. That turned out to be a trap.

And here is where we needed to just say NO. Over the summer, as interviews were being conducted, it turned out that many colleagues who had never gotten a “U” rating in their careers, including some of the most talented and qualified educators – math teachers, teachers with PhDs – were been deemed “unsatisfactory.” We began to get reports of this in mid August. As soon as it became apparent there was a hatchet job going on, the UFT should have put its foot down and stopped the whole process.

There are various ways to do this. Union leaders could have taken a couple of egregious cases and announced they were grieving them on the spot. They could have insisted that in view of the chaos – where teachers were not notified, the criteria for selection were not properly communicated to them, some “interviews” consisted of a few minutes on the phone – all interviews had to be stopped. They could have gone to the press, TV and city council to publicize the fact that the DOE has carrying out a massacre of experienced teachers. We, the members, did this, my opponent didn’t.

So now with the election for Chapter Leader under way, we have to prepare for the coming months. Particularly in this giant local, with hundreds of teachers, paras, social workers and staff located in six hubs and 80 “spokes” spread over all five boroughs, the key is active involvement of the membership. We should set our key priorities in a chapter meeting at the very beginning of the new year, for which the preparation must begin now. Here are some proposals:

· For ATRed teachers, I have actively supported their demand for a functional chapter to discuss issues they face. We must also insist they have all rights within the school where they are placed.

· We need monthly chapter meetings to keep our far-flung unit informed and involved. These meetings should rotate between the different hubs, making it easier for all the teachers in the borough to attend.

· At the hubs, the site representative should be assisted by site committees that get together frequently. These committees should meet periodically with the AP to work out local problems as they arise. These committees should coordinate with UFT chapters in other schools at their sites.

· For the smaller CBO sites, a committee should be formed to discuss particular problems that arise and keep members at nearby locations in touch with each other.

· Although the DOE claimed it had set up an “easy-to-navigate referral system for students who have fallen behind in traditional high schools,” in fact they lost touch with many contacts. An outreach committee should discuss ways of reaching more at-risk youth and bringing them into the program.

· A committee should be formed to seek to restore enrichment programs that have been canceled and to raise proposals for curriculum improvement. This will be crucial if there is in fact a drive to shut down D79. If the DOE doesn’t have a program for educating at risk students, we do!

· A special effort must be made at the beginning of the year to ensure that each site is adequately supplied with materials and books.

· Concrete proposals should be formulated in collaboration with the school administration to respond to the lack of computers, libraries and science labs facilities. Sometimes this may involve sharing with other schools at the same location.

· A chapter-wide safety committee should be formed to deal with issues such as lack of medical personnel, chalk board dust (replace blackboards with whiteboards), etc.

· Some hubs have excruciating problems such as lack of hot lunches for the students and lack of phones which should be immediately resolved.

These are only some ideas. Let’s hear yours.