Today, as it became clear to all observers that the contract would be ratified, ICE leader and Executive Board member Jeffrey Kaufman published an attack on the honesty of the vote, the UFT and the American Arbitration Association on the ICE blog.
At the October 17th Executive Board meeting, Kaufman raised general concerns about possible improprieties in the contract ratification process, but said he had no specific allegations of wrongdoing. After that meeting, UFT Secretary and Director of Staff Michael Mendel sent a letter to Kaufman, both by e-mail and registered US mail, in which he expressed the utmost priority the UFT gives to a secure and honest ballot. Mendel specifically asked Kaufman, fellow ICE leader and Executive Board member James Eterno and any other ICE member to immediately report any instance of voting irregularity or other impropriety to him, so the UFT could act to correct it immediately. On October 24th, Kaufman sent the Mendel letter via e-mail to the internal ICE listserv of the entire ICE membership.
Not ONE allegation of a specific impropriety or election irregularity has been made by Kaufman, Eterno or any other ICE member to Mendel, to President Randi Weingarten or to any other officer of the UFT. The only complaint that the UFT has received regarding the voting was from new teachers who told us that chapter leaders opposing the ratification of the contract were pressuring them to vote ‘no’ against their wishes.
Now, as the contract vote is trending positive, Kaufman levies charges of irregularities. First he says that “‘secret ballot’ envelopes were hardly secret as votes were easily seen, leading many to conclude that negative votes were discarded.”
In fact, the actual voting procedure involves two voting envelopes, an inside ‘secret ballot’ envelope without any identification and an outside envelope on which the voter identifies her/himself as a UFT member entitled to cast a ballot. Once he or she has voted, the UFT member places the ballot in the ‘secret ballot’ envelope and seals it, and then places that envelope inside the second, identification envelope, and seals it. The election official in the school receives the ballot inside both sealed envelopes. Given this procedure, the only way that ‘no’ votes could have been discarded as described by Kaufman is when they were in the possession of the American Arbitration Association, after their officials had certified the member as entitled to vote and after their officials had removed the ‘secret ballot’ envelope from the outside envelope.
Second, Kaufman charges that “information was provided to Chapter Leaders to allow for the easy voter tampering by submitting votes for members that were absent or refused to vote.”
In order to submit a vote for a member who was absent or refused to vote, a chapter leader would have to forge the signature of the member. Such a forgery would be a criminal act of fraud. If there is any knowledge of such a fraud on the part of Kaufman [an attorney who is an ‘officer of the court’], Eterno or any other member of ICE, it should have been reported not only to the UFT, but to the legal authorities. No such report has been made.
Third, Kaufman charges that there was “systematic violation of Board of Education rules and grievance precedent in preventing opposition caucus members from distributing literature in staff mailboxes.”
The Department of Education rules Kaufman cites involve elections for union officers, not contract ratification votes. In a contract ratification vote, only authorized UFT representatives and UFT members themselves in the schools are allowed to place literature in staff mailboxes. Unauthorized outsiders, from any caucus in the UFT, have no right to enter a school to place literature in mailboxes.
Finally, Kaufman charges that there is something amiss with the fact that “providing school tallies would be ‘impossible’ because of the nature of the voting process.” Given the procedures described above to secure the secrecy of every member’s ballot, there is no way – nor should there be any way – to ascertain how UFT members in a particular school voted.
While ICE leader Jeffrey Kaufman is publishing these accusations of election irregularity and impropriety, ICE leaders have been reporting on their internal listserv that “the feeling now is that although many people talked up a storm against the contract, they actually voted for it… [The] feeling now seems to be that it will go through.”
The UFT has a long and proud history of union democracy. Every ballot we hold – for the election of union officers, for the ratification of a contract and for strike authorization – are counted and certified by the American Arbitration Association. We have used the exact same procedures for this contract ratification vote that we have employed in every contract ratification vote, including the 1995 contract when our members voted not to ratify a negotiated contract. To call this vote in question, without a single allegation of specific wrongdoing, does a grave injustice to that tradition of union democracy.
196 Comments:
1 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 4:18 pm
Well, I don’t want to get into a pissing match, but our UFT rep flat out told us to vote “yes” and even did so to a teacher while he was checking/filling out his ballot. She asked him to reconsider before he checked “no”. I didn’t know we could file a complaint. I will certainly let the teacher know he has that option.
2 firefly
· Nov 3, 2005 at 4:35 pm
Well, my UFT Chapter Leader made it very clear, especially to new teachers that “NO” was the only way to vote. He spent alot of time talking to them privately about the horrible things that would happen if the contract was ratified and never once presented the benefits of a “YES” vote. For every Chapter Leader leaning towards yes, I’m positive there was one pushing no.
The bottom line is that were all supposedly educated individuals who can read the actual proposed contract and make our own decisions. It was certainly available to read. It seems to me that if you really “needed” an interpretation of what was a very clear proposal, you have some difficulty reading the English language, and I thought that was a requirement for a NYC Public School teacher. (well, perhaps not anymore…things change so rapidly)
Whether the contract is ratified or not, this was a completely fair vote. And, aren’t those “ICE” people the same goons who were screaming at people outside of the Delegates Meeting on Oct 11? I was there and they were very poorly behaved to say the least…an embarassment that I found completely insulting. I personally would not believe anything ICE has to say…they are misinformed and have some personal agenda they’re trying to push. Give it a rest ICE people.
3 paulrubin
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:09 pm
I’m no fan of the contract and my chapter leader presented both sides of the argument rather eloquently. But the bottom line is nearly 1/2 the people who voted have less than 5 years in the system. Many don’t even understand some of the ramifications of a yes or no vote. Predicting how all these newbies are going to vote is an exercise in futility. Remember they’re making around $40K a year which is around $2K in takehome a month. Half of that will go for a small apartment leaving nothing to live on so money is WAYYYYY more important than work rules to these people. I suspect the vote will break down more over each teachers’ perception of their school’s administration than the specifics of the contract. If they feel their administration is relatively pro teacher and publically views the ROCs and Central as the enemy, they’re more inclined to vote yes. Whether they realize that supervisors come and go in this system is probably not a factor.
4 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:23 pm
I’m surprised to read the contract is “trending positive,” not becausee of the trend, but because I was fairly certain I’d read the votes were to be counted today.
Why don’t we know the results yet?
5 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:30 pm
I believe the count will be fair. It was in 1995 and I think it will be again.
What worries me is the outcome. In my long 28 year career, I don’t recall feeling so anxious about the outcome of a contract vote. I’m not sure why that is. Perhaps, its because I feel strongly that we are being so disrespected with such a contract.
Will my fellow UFTer’s stand up and say “NO – we deserve better” or are they going to go along and hand this Mayor and Chancellor a victory?
This is what I’m anxious about…
6 paulrubin
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:36 pm
Bloomberg essentially has his victory. He’s going to win this election 2:1 regardless of how we voted. We vote yes, he simply gets what he’s agreed to. We vote no, we get bashed for not taking deals “similar” to what everyone else is accepting of late and what is better than what “our” fact finders wanted to give us. And think about the ramifications of a NO vote that comes in at say 55-45 or 60-40. Such a situation will not lend itself to a strike leaving us with 7 years of zilch. I don’t like this deal one bit. And I blame the leadership of the UFT for agreeing to it. Once they did they put us in a terrible position.
7 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:45 pm
Firefighters are getting $15,000 in backpay as did the NYPD and Corrections officers. That’s almost $10,000 more than our most senior teachers.
Amazing that they get so much when their “maximum” salaries are a lot less than ours. Oh, of course – I forgot – they get “real” overtime! And they got 5% increases instead of 0% for six months and 2% for the following 12 months.
Imagine how we would have been treated if our reading/math scores had plummeted!
8 Jeff Kaufman
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:50 pm
Ratification Vote Results
Teachers
Yes 39728
No 25962
School Secretaries
Yes 2455
No 618
Paras
Yes 1325
No 538
Total
Yes 54473
No 32144
Total Votes Scanned 86847
This was released at 5:03 PM. The breakdown is approximately 60% Yes and 40% No for teachers. More analysis will follow.
9 institutional memory
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:51 pm
NO WHINE BEFORE ITS TIME?
The aggrieved cries of Jeffrey Kaufman and ICE (tell me that’s not a good name for a doo-wop band) are sounding more and more desperate. This is hardball, and they don’t like being brushed back.
You lose. Live with it.
10 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 5:55 pm
Institutional Memory
We ALL lost today….
11 jesse
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:02 pm
Spinning till the end, by my count it’s 63-37 if your numbers are accurate.
12 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:06 pm
I don’t see how any self respecting human being can claim this as a victory.
13 jesse
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:08 pm
Are there only 2,000 paras?
14 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:09 pm
While we’re on the topic of union democracy–Unity changed the constitution in 94 so that all teachers chose all VPs, effectively depriving high school teachers of their chosen VP, as their votes are now drowned out overwhelmingly by Unity-supporting elementary teachers.
It’s time to remedy that. It’s time to get our own representation, and if that’s not possible, our own union.
Regardless, no one should be in power for 50 years. It’s time to send Unity packing.
15 dismayed
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:10 pm
I can’t wait for all those who voted YES to start complaining as soon as the reality of what they voted for takes effect.
Then, they will have to live with it.
16 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:15 pm
Unfortunately, we ALL have to live with it.
17 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:16 pm
I think I put the wrong word in CAPS.
18 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:20 pm
Does anyone know who I need to contact to stop my COPE contribution?
That’s a serious question. I’d like to do it asap.
19 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:23 pm
(Spinning till the end, by my count it’s 63-37 if your numbers are accurate.)
Jessie – the key word in his post was
APPROXIMATELY
Stop being so smug, will you?
20 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:25 pm
I’d advise against stopping COPE contributions. As angry as I am with Unity, I think that’s directing your anger at the wrong place.
COPE doesn’t pay the propagandists who write the threatening nonsense posted on Edwize, and it’s mostly used for worthwhile purposes.
21 dismayed
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:26 pm
Ask your Chapter leader to get you the form to opt out of COPE – I did it years ago.
Be prepared for a nasty letter from the UFT for doing this.
The chapter leader cannot prevent you from doing this – although they like to have 100% contributors.
Good Luck!
22 R. Skibins
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:27 pm
The only grave injustice is that people were stupid enough to vote for this piece of s*** contract. We will all have to live with this. What’s in store in 2007? Will we lose February break? A week in July? Tenure? An even linger day? Will the newbies be happy with lunch duty and potty patrol?
Randi, if you are reading this, resign. May you rot in hell!
23 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:31 pm
I contributed to COPE for 28 years.
As the City will now be “supporting” the
UFT in getting a 25/55 pension, why should I continue my contribution?
So I can help those who voted for this contract?
I think I’ll pass…
24 tott84er
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:32 pm
It’s been 2.5 years. Every thing has gone up. It comes to 44 hours extra a year.
25 Jack
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:38 pm
As a newbie (less than five years in the system) and a No voter on this piece of crap that to call a contract would insult teachers everywhere I cannot wait until I hear the first of MANY complaints from all those who voted yes. I will have NO sympathy for them and as for COPE contributions I would sooner die then give the UNITY party which is as crooked as a corkscrew anything! I will pay my dues and NOTHING else! May Randi rot for this piece of S@#$ sell out she got for us!
26 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:42 pm
Hey Jack!
Unfortunately, we have no one to blame but ourselves. The membership IS the Union and the Union voted in favor.
What a bunch of J***Ks!
27 paulrubin
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:44 pm
If people want to do something constructive, they should encourage teachers to put the retroactive monies and a portion of the raise aside as a strike fund for 2007. Cause it’s money in the bank that there will be no new contract under Bloomberg without a strike so this 15% is really a 7 year deal. Does the union’s leadership have the balls to do at least that much? I doubt it. We’ll probably go 4 years without a new deal now falling further behind the suburbs who still get more than we did without time for money nonsense. And lest anyone think otherwise, we’ll be working more days than almost any suburban district in the region and they get half days up the whazoo for things like open school nights, etc. Maybe I should give all my students 95 on their report cards rather than risk the one nut case who does nothing and tries to railroad me with a charge of sexual molestation that I won’t have the money to defend against because I won’t be getting paid even if I’m totally innocent. Thanks guys.
28 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 6:49 pm
Of course we’ll get a new deal.
http://nyceducator.blogspot.com/2005/10/unity-visits-your-school-october-2009.html
29 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:04 pm
Seriously, PR, you’re absolutely right.
30 realitybasededucator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:08 pm
Whoo-Hoo!!! I’m gonna get two grand in back pay and about $3,700 a year after taxes, union dues, and Randi’s limousine allowance!!!
Whoo-Hoo!!!
And all I have to do is teach a sixth class four times a week and duck plates and half-eaten hamburgers in the cafeteria!!!
Oh, and also lose my rights to seniority transfers, grieve a letter in my file, and stay on the payroll if some kid makes a false accusation against me.
Oh well, I still love my 14.25% raise over 52 months!!!
What a stupendous victory for NYC teachers, particularly given the vast array of anti-union forces stacked up against our brave union leadership!!!
But wait!!! Didn’t the Fire Dept get 17%? Didn’t the Sanitation Dept. get 17.5%? Didn’t both of those departments give fewer concessions to the city for these bigger raises?
But those facts don’t play well with the UNITY propaganda displayed by Leo Casey, Peter Goodman, and the rest of the UNITY cronies, paid propagandists, and Randi-Andy’s here at Edwize.
So forget that the firemen and the sanitation workers got bigger raises for fewer concessions and believe the bullshit Leo, Pete and the rest of the Newspeakers keep telling us: Randi is great! Randi is great! Randi is great!
Pathetic. But the 40% who voted against this contract should give Randi and her hacks pause. There is a lot of disgruntlement out there and when teachers realize just how bad this piece of shit contract is, the resentment against Randi and UNITY is only going to grow and grow.
Randi better get some Diebold machines for the 2007 presidential election if she wants to remain “El Presidente For Life.”
31 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:11 pm
I just simply feel betrayed. Betrayed by the leadership. Betrayed by some of my colleagues. Betrayed by people who don’t have any sense of decency.
32 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:19 pm
BTW When is the next Union leadership election?
33 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:23 pm
2007
34 NYC Educator
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:24 pm
How much does Leo Casey make, anyway?
35 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:24 pm
I just read the email I received from the uft.org site informing us the contract was ratified. The email included a message from Randi.
I actually felt nauseous reading it.
I will never see her the same way again.
36 everyman2
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:29 pm
Chapter Leaders/Delegates will be running for office this June, 2006.
37 Frank48
· Nov 3, 2005 at 7:34 pm
We have to get Randy out. Piece of shit contract.
38 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:01 pm
Sometimes in life you win but you lose.
That’s how I feel about those who supported this contract, including the Union leadership.
They pushed hard for the membership to
vot Yes. They won.
But I know they also lost a great deal..
39 DJHarkavy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:02 pm
Whether you were in favor of it, or against it, it passed.
So let’s be practical. When do we get the back pay, and when do the new positions start?
40 Bklynteacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:14 pm
I had heard we would be getting the back pay in December, just in time for the holidays. As far as I know,the extra time goes into effect in early February.
41 Chaz
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:40 pm
We have met the enemy and the enemy is us. Of course Leo Casey and the other Randi stooges who fought hard for this very dangerous contract can celebrate with Klein as the beating intensify on the classroom teacher.
With union representatives like Leo Casey the classroom teacher is in serious trouble.
42 mshalo18
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:51 pm
Can’t speak for other schools, but the tyranny of this new deal has already begun.Teachers are getting written up right and left in my school- why? By writing lots of letters prior to the contract being ratified, no one can turn to our administration and say, “look, something’s wrong, you’re abusing the non-grievable LIF clause” because they have already established that they write teachers up constantly.
This is a terrible day for NYC teachers. I don’t even know if that last paragraph is coherent I’m so upset. I wish all of you who had the courage and wisdom to vote “no” the very best of luck. To the rest of you short-sighted souls who chose to vote “yes”- remember, YOU helped put us in this position.
43 MichaelB
· Nov 3, 2005 at 8:57 pm
I don’t think my chapter leader tampered with the vote, nor do I suspect widespread fraud. However, I felt a bit funny dropping my envelope into a taped shoebox rather than something a bit more official and tamper proof.
I figured this contract would pass, but I was hoping a closer vote would put the union in a stronger bargaining position at the next negotiations. It seems we’ve sent a clear message to the mayor that Randi will have an easy time selling us givebacks in exchange for a moderate raise.
I think it’s outrageous that we don’t have access to the vote totals for individual schools. What kind of democracy is this? Can you imagine not being able to find out which neighborhoods voted for Ferrer or which states went for Bush? Who is responsible for this – the AAA or the union? What’s the motivation? How can this have anything to do with secrecy, as Leo claims? Isn’t Unity interested in knowing how well its message is getting out?
44 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:00 pm
I voted NO and I am very proud of myself for that. However, these are such horrible times. The 45 year roof to my house started leaking in the October rainstorms. I need over 9K for repair. Over the past week, I began hoping that the contract would pass because I am so broke. Sadly, I am at maximum. I enter my 30th year this winter. Still I voted No because I didn’t want to hurt others. I am sure there are many people equally confused, ie people who voted yes, but now wish they voted no, etc. etc.
45 SOC ST TEACHER
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:10 pm
Well, one thing is now clear. The nastiness, venom, and sheer viciousness which the likes of R. Skibins, NYC Educator, Chaz and Reality Based Educator have brought to these comments represents… who they are, and not who NYC public school teachers are. Little surprise, then, that we are for another venting of their spleens on this occasion as well.
46 HS SHOP TEACHER
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:20 pm
It looks like the teacher of New York City have spoken, and that voice carries more weight than the scores of tirades and temper tantrums we have seen in these comments. Not content to piss all over the union and the leadership, now there are pissing all over the teachers as well. I just feel sorry for the students who have them as teachers, and the teachers that have them as colleagues, if I may use the term loosely here.
47 Yankee4Life493
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:24 pm
I hope to see the day when Middle and High School teachers could have their own union. For the second time most of the teachers at my school voted against a contract and it passes overwhelmingly. Should any of the other factions need volunteers during the next elections you could count on me.
48 frogmugsy
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:45 pm
I actually would be proud to call those who voted “no” my colleagues.
Knowing that their values and principles cannot be bought.
Knowing that they will pass those lessons on to their students.
Knowing that they would never accept the excuse “It’s the best we can do”.
We all could use the money. It made it that much harder to vote “no”.
49 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 3, 2005 at 9:58 pm
I am not an expert here but doeen’t this contract have a rather large no vote? I mean 63 per cent…. don’t they usually pass by larger margins, much larger? Didn’t we no voters send a signal? I know we would like to have gotten the yes vote down to say just low 50′s or better yet total defeat, but still isn’t this something?
And we can still go vote for Freddy!!!!
50 Peter Goodman
· Nov 3, 2005 at 10:04 pm
I have been disappointed that twenty or thirty folk dominate the discussion – and much of it quite nasty – when I ask teachers why they don’t join the discussion many tell me they are turned off by he angry, oftimes nasty odor of the comments. Rather than convince folk of the rightness or wrongness of the contract they have succeeded in “turning off” a significant cohort of younger teachers. And remember, it’s those “newbies” who will be running the union down the road when the Bloomberg’s of the future decide that retirees don’t really need health plans …
51 Peter Lang
· Nov 3, 2005 at 10:10 pm
It didn’t take much to turn the ever present crew of the masters of negativity –small enough to be counted on my fingers and toes — against their own colleagues, now did it? Of course, if they had any capacity for self-reflection and any ability to see the world from the point of view of others, they wouldn’t have conducted themselves the way they have for the last month and a half here. They behave here the way the crude boors behaved at the Delegate Assembly. And if I spent too much time listening to them, I would be ashamed of being a teacher.
52 R. Skibins
· Nov 3, 2005 at 10:12 pm
It’s amazing how the Weingarten puppets on this blog have the gall to say that we speak with nastiness, venom, and sheer viciousness when it is they who hurl insults and lies like a Karl Rove clone. Granted, I did tell Weingarten to rot in hell. She deserved it for selling us out to further her own political goals for the future. Rest assured, she will get some higher position just before the 2007 UFT election to save herself from an embarassing defeat.
To those of us who fought so valiantly against this piece of garbage contract: only 63% voted for it. Imagine what we (TJC, ICE, et al) could have done with unlimited funds at our disposal like Unity, a built-in propoganda newspaper to spread a one-sided, heavily slanted argument like Unity, and had been in cahoots with the mayor, who controls the local media. And our COPE contributions paid for it all!
Randi, you have succeeded in destroying the UFT.
53 Chaz
· Nov 3, 2005 at 10:46 pm
To Leo’s Lap Dog,
Let me remind you that this started with Leo Casey’s thread blasting opponents of the contract. It’s too bad he cannot be a gracious winner. If your going to insult classroom teachers, you can expect an equal and hostile reaction. So stop crying about the nastiness since it was your master that started it.
Maybe you should follow the example of Kombiz, Peter, Goodman, and institutional memory and show some class
For what it’s worth, I do believe the vote was fair but I would like to see a breakdown of the vote by schools.
54 HS_ teacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 11:36 pm
As it clearly said in several responses here, it bears repeating what I’ve said before to “NYC Educator”. Although most of you who seem to claim that your dislike of the contract provisions is because of our member’s rights, it is really about the 2007 UFT presidential election and not about this contract. People should go back and read previous threads dating back before today’s election and see how often “NYC Educator”, “Frank48”, “realitybasededucator”, “Bklynteacher”, “mshalo18”, or “R. Skibins”, talked about “voting Randi out”, “UFT election”, or “Randi should resign”. Their focus has been election, election, election – but it wasn’t about this contract it has been about the UFT presidential election of 2007. Like good political operatives they justify their actions in using retirees WHO WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THIS CONTRACT to influence us active members (which they barked AGAINST at Delegate Assemblies and Executive Board meetings) with “even though the election [last presidential election] is over” I guess you just plan for the next one at all costs. I’d love to hear a response since so many of you have avoided it before to pontificate about your gripe.
If any of you are Chapter Leaders or Delegates, as the members you represent begin to get their retroactive pay in the next few months and their salary adjusted to meet their higher salaries, I hope you are ready to explain to your members how and why you didn’t want them to have it.
Look carefully boys and girls almost 2/3 of the voters approved.
55 HS_ teacher
· Nov 3, 2005 at 11:39 pm
Hey “R. Skibins”,
COPE dollars, by law, can only be used for politcal action with actual politicans (not other union memebrs who beleive they are political pundits or operatives). But nice try although you failed again.
56 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 4, 2005 at 12:32 am
Hey,
Let’s not forget all our teachers who vote Republican. I personally think they are much more responsible for this contract than Randi.
57 madmatt151
· Nov 4, 2005 at 1:02 am
I voted NO, I tried to convince the newere terachers to do the same, mainly because they are so overloaded and we got NO information about the contract. I think the people on here are frustrated and that is why there are some venomous comments being posted. I am frustrated and feel betrayed by my union and coworkers. I also feel like there is a reason why we let this happen. Most teachers I am meeting are not in this job because they care anymore. No, we did not get into this job for the glamorous lifestyle or large pay, but I am meeting more and more people who are starting to teach because they cannot get another job or any other lame excuse. This job is for special people who want to help students achieve golas and better their lives. I have met some extraodinary poeple in my 12 years in the system and have been honored ot know them. Unfortunately we have others who don’t feel like this job is to help people and they should leave. They are not affective and hence venomous. I do not hope that they suyffer form voting YES, because we will all be suffering. I hope that the union is right and I was wrong about the LIF’s and the other grievance issues. I also hope all the hardocre Democrats stop telling people that they are to blame for not voting Democrat! Who has the democraatic party run for any election that has been worth voting for. I am definitely NOT a republican, but can seem to stomach the cast of characters the Democratic party has been shoving at us! Democrats are the ones that allowed Republicans to put forth all the policies which we so much hate! Where were they for the votes? It is timne to really come together and rethink our sacred political parties. Are they really representing us? This contract go tvoted in because poeple were too busy trying to hear themselves rant and rave, on both sides, instead of trying to come together and make a worhtwhile agreement. I am sure the mayor would have given us a little raise with no givebacks. Yes it would suck to have less oney than all of the other unions, but at least we would not be working all thsi time more with LESS rights!
58 madmatt151
· Nov 4, 2005 at 1:04 am
Sorry for the massive amounts of typos, its late and I have a bad keyboard
59 Kombiz
· Nov 4, 2005 at 1:34 am
Chaz,
Again, I appreciate the kind words about me personally, but I think I would rather be one of the people who the venom is shot at. Leo makes a case here that I think is irrefutable. I’ve been with this union a short time, but in the process of the contract negotiations I’ve seen some amazing rumors fly that even I know are completely false. I’ve come into the comment section to answer people’s questions when I can, or I’ve emailed answers to people.
A blog is an opinion site, but it cannot be pravda, or a propaganda machine if it allows comments. Over the last few months I’ve spent about 16 hours a day, every day attached to the blog because I’ve been afraid that a single over the top comment, or spammers would destroy this experiment. I’ve seen people I know compared to communists and nazi’s and the contract compared to the holocause in vivid detail. I’ve also gotten plenty of emails from teachers turned off from the tone of some of the comments. I’ve deleted some comments that I think have personally attacked other commenters on this board because I’d rather see a discussion rather than a hate fest. I’ve been unable to stop that, partly because we haven’t moderated every comment as most other administrators who run sites like this would do, and partly because we’ve allowed people to comment anonymously. This blog isn’t as large, or as influential as many people appearently think it is, but it has the ability to shape public education issues in the future. In the near future the blog is going to focus on those issues, where many of the people reading have ideas to add to the future of public education. We couldn’t avoid talking about the contract, but in those discussion I will do my due dillegnce to make sure the comments stay on topic. You are always welcome to get in touch with me at blog@uft.org; and for the people who’ve said that their administrators have gone wild already and are issuing LIF’s, please email me immediately, with the school you’re in and I’ll get working on it in the morning. I know enough to know that shouldn’t be happening.
Finally, I don’t have the proper figures on hand, but the last I saw there were more than 13,000 Para’s who voted, so those numbers posted in these comments aren’t accurate.
60 Bklynteacher
· Nov 4, 2005 at 5:48 am
HS Teacher
For the record, I voted for the UNITY slate in every leadership election. I am not a member of ICE/Other group.
What I am is “disgusted” with our new contract. I have the years and the right to voice my opinion. If I choose to hold the current Union leadership responsible for these losses (our rights and our pockets),
what gives you the right to mock me for it?
Good luck to all in the years ahead.
I’m out in three…
61 firebrand
· Nov 4, 2005 at 8:11 am
Institutional…you are so right. WE ALL LOST.
As for someone else’s earlier comment on a new teacher in his/her school being told to reconsider before voting no…and others being told flat out to vote Yes…that’s disgraceful.
Our boro rep sent someone to my school because she thought that we(Chapter leader and delegates)wouldn’t tout the “yes” side enough. She also made a point of sending two reminders stating that we couldn’t tell anyone how to vote. I am proud to say we didn’t tell anyone how to vote….unlike the double pension collecting Union stooges. It just goes to show how badly they wanted that horsepuckey to pass.And it has…
I think I have to leave the Unity party. I really do.
62 husbandofteacher
· Nov 4, 2005 at 10:02 am
I am the husband of a teacher who voted no, on this contract. I am also the son of a former chapter leader who also voted no. The teachers who voted yes have helped start the process of busting up the union. How can a union which should be the most powerful in the city give back so much and get so little? The UFT leadership by using scare tactics that this is a good deal should resign. It is a discrace that 63% of my wife’s co-workers in the city voted for this deal. My wife is a young energetic teacher who is going to look for a teaching job in the suburbs where they get paid a decent wage, and get the respect they deserve. Only then when the young good teachers leave the system for the suburbs will the city understand, that you can’t treat professionals this way.
63 Civil Servant
· Nov 4, 2005 at 10:21 am
God Bless Tier 1 and the TRS.
This contract is an insult to all fair minded people and an insult to all former teachers who worked so hard for so little to earn these lost benefits.
64 SOC ST TEACHER
· Nov 4, 2005 at 10:44 am
Kombiz writes:
“Again, I appreciate the kind words about me personally, but I think I would rather be one of the people who the venom is shot at. Leo makes a case here that I think is irrefutable.”
Want to know how I figured out Kombiz is right?
Not one of the usual negative commenters — not NYC Educator, not RSkibins, not Chaz, not Frank48, not RealityBasedEducator — even tried to refute it. They just started right in with the usual personal attacks and ad hominems. Makes one think that they learned their craft at the feet of Karl Rove.
65 eumenides
· Nov 4, 2005 at 12:19 pm
A comment on the argument that the Sanitation and Firefighter contracts were superior to this one. NOT TRUE!
The money package in those contracts WAS incrementally better, but the givebacks were severe, even punitive. Sanit workers will now work in one-crew trucks. That’s not only arduous, it’s dangerous. It was also not popular with the members, and was a major concession, something even Giuliani couldn’t wheedle out of them. Firefighters gave up something big, too. There’s now a substandard wage for entry-level firefighters. The dollars senior workers won will come out of the starting salary for novices. It’s called “sacrificing the unborn,” and you can smell the burning flesh. Who’s mad at that? Paddy Lynch, for one, who heads up the PBA. A common civil-service career track is for cops to transfer to the fire department; now, you can hear the howling all the way from 1 Police Plaza.
As a rule of thumb, in the private sector senior workers are not served by creating a substandard entry-level wage. It just encourages employers to look for reasons to terminate higher paid, senior workers. It’s not so easy to terminate city employees with civil service and union protections, but it’s still an unfortunate precident. I’m not going to second-guess those unions and their negotiators. I’m just saying they had immense pressure on them, too, to give and to take. They gave plenty. And in the case of the firefighters, their leadership went so far as to endorse Bush in 2004. NY fire union big Steve Cassidy even stumped for him in the battleground states, all to secure a long-denied contract. Seventeen percent after whoring for George Bush? (Is that putting it too strongly, Kombiz? Sorry) Virtue comes cheap.
NY has suffered through 12 years of mayoral administrations that believe every nickel in raises, whether cost-of-living or actual salary improvements, has to come out of productivity adjustments. Even Dinkins was no union bud, though he preferred layoffs to concessions, if memory serves. But since Giuliani, and to the delight of the right-wing Manhattan Institute, it’s productivity concessions that set the pattern. And it’s come from beating up on DC 37 and other unions made up of low-paid city workers who feel–rightly or wrongly–that they can’t fight City Hall alone.
Wanna see the bad guy here? It’s Bloomie. He’s running for re-election. Freddy Ferrer is running against him. Do the right thing on Tuesday. And don’t stiff COPE. That’s cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Did the UFT leadership do everything it could to fight back? I think so, but I also think that unless we take the big picture into account, we can’t even begin to say whether the right or wrong thing was done, or why. Talking about a “sell out” is addled. Talking about preparing for new UFT leadership in 2007 is any member’s right, though I think it is incredibly myopic. It would be nice if what stood between teachers and dignity at work was solvable by addressing alleged internal union problems. It’s not. It’s the big picture that comes first. It’s talking about the sorry state of collective bargaining and solidarity among NYC unions–and what to do about it. That is the beginning of wisdom.
66 Civil Servant
· Nov 4, 2005 at 1:13 pm
As a Husband of a Teacher I am very aware how this new contract impairs our end of Summer and Labor Day plans. We have already cancelled a flight and I was wondering how many other teachers and UFT personnel have been impaired.
I guess nothing is sacred any longer.
I feel very bad for those who have summer jobs that are impacted.
God Bless Tier 1.
67 Peter Lang
· Nov 4, 2005 at 1:33 pm
Civil Servant:
You have flights reserved for September ’06? This must be some airline, which will guarantee cheap seats a year in advance. Care to share the information with the rest of us?
68 NYC Educator
· Nov 4, 2005 at 3:32 pm
HS teacher,
The fact that we opposed the contract means just that–we opposed the contract.
If you are somehow suggesting that I did not genuinely oppose this contract, you are absolutely wrong. I think it’s a terrible contract, and working teachers will rue the day it was passed.
You’re right about one thing–I now vigorously oppose the people who made this deal. That, however, is a consequence of the contract.
Your apparent conclusion tha I opposed the contract as some sort of pretense to oppose Unity is simply preposterous.
SS teacher,
I do not speak for Jeff Kaufman, nor do any of those you mention. I have no idea whether Mr. Casey’s claims are true, since I haven’t heard the other side.
I do, however, subsidize this propaganda sheet, and I do pay Leo Casey’s salary. I resent that it’s being used to tell me a sixth class is not a sixth class, merit pay is not merit pay, that I deserve a contract full of givebacks that fails to keep up with inflation, and that I should rejoice about my severely degraded seniority rights.
It is Mr. Casey who actively engages in demonizing and vilifying his opponents, and that is indeed a Rovian tactic. He certainly uses it to his advantage, as he and his party have a monopoly on the front page of the union blog.
If the staff at Edwize really cherished democracy, as they claim, they’d offer the opposition space on their one-sided front page. They will not do so, because they are cowards.
In any case, Unity has long had its own peculiar style of democracy, so who are they to talk?
http://nyceducator.blogspot.com/2005/10/democracy-uft-style.html
69 Civil Servant
· Nov 4, 2005 at 4:17 pm
I have read these posts on the Contract with much interest. One area that is very troublesome to me is the feeling I get that teachers are numbers, fungible, non human, who can be offered up indiscriminately, for the purpose of getting a raise.
All of the givebacks, and especially the time givebacks represent a throwback to an era in which public employees are considered to have NO LIFE.
It is as if you are perceived to be at the bottom of a barrel looking for a handout, and are willing to do anything to get one.
I find this to be very sad, and I hold your leadership accountable.
In an election year like this, with Bloomberg needing labor peace, you gave it away for nothing.
There was no basis for this contract issue to extend this far.
Last June, an ultimatum should have been given, no Contract, you do not see me in September, or if you do, it will be with a modified sick leave job action. The parents would have gone Crazy and the Bloomberg administration would have rushed to resolve this impending crisis.
Thank God for Tier 1.
70 northbrooklyn
· Nov 4, 2005 at 5:34 pm
Gee Whiz-I ‘m not sure I’ll be able to speak to everything that has been said but here goes!
It is a shame that we don’t have a demographic breakdown of the vote. There is no reason for this and should be rectified now.
Those who voted for the contract will learn the hard way. How the old teachers tried to protect them by not accepting the lowering of the salaries of the newbies.
The big shock is going to be when they find out much the principals and LIS and RIS etc. are going to make on their contract.
The next big shock will happen when they find us-the grey beards-fighting to protect them because they don’t have tenure and will be terminated.
Then, they will realize how much time/money it takes to develop a program for 10 students they don’t know very well, on a subject that will be new to them.
Spring 2007 should be very interesting…
71 Schoolgal
· Nov 4, 2005 at 5:53 pm
Dear Leo,
Well I got home late last night after going out to dinner (and having a martini), so the news was easier to bear.
However, the vote is over, and now we have to focus on making sure all aspects of the new contract are carried out fairly.
I asked this question in another category, but haven’t check on the responses so I will ask you.
I know you told me only 10 students can be with one teacher the last period, but can an admin make a teacher hold her whole class and assign an outer classroom teacher to that class, or is every teacher supposed to be working with 10 students with no doubling up?
The teachers in my school are concerned about this because many times OTPs get out of their coverages to do “special” things like decorate the school building.
72 mshalo18
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:01 pm
HS teacher-
For the record, I never once mentioned the election for UFT president in any of my postings. Do I think Randi sold us down the river? I sure do. But quite frankly, I could care less about what Randi does next. I’m more worried about what life under this new contract will bring. We lost 2 teachers this week- one resigned after receiving an inane LIF, and the other was removed. Morale is at an all time low. We are treated worse than the kids-in fact, WE would be removed if we spoke to the children the way we are spoken to by administration. And what’s most upsetting to me is that even the kids seem to sense it- they are being surprisingly well-behaved, as if they too can feel the somber mood that has pervaded the school.
If Klein, the RIS’s, the LIS’s and administration thinks by beating us into submission with letters will make us work harder or better, they are sadly mistaken.
73 mshalo18
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:05 pm
Civil servant-
I’d be damned if I would have cancelled my trip- I would have stuck those tickets under my principal’s nose and said, “sorry, have plans already” and let him or her write you up. I for one would personally come to your school and help set up your room so it’s ready for 1st day of school 2006.
74 HS SHOP TEACHER
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:09 pm
It has been said before, but it is worth pointing out here once again. NYCEducator, and the rest of the negative vooices, have had the free rein of this blog, even though they clearly don’t represent the majority of teachers, and many on the ‘no’ side would not want to be identified with their negative personal attacks. But that is not good enough… No, NYCEducator won’t be happy until he can shut up everyone who he disagrees with, especially if he or she happens to work for the UFT. Thank god it is not he, and folks like him, who run the UFT and this blog.
75 paulrubin
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:21 pm
How about some specific answers to specific questions now that the deed is done:
(1) when do our checks reflect new salary structure
(2) when do we get our retroactive money
(3) do we still have Monday faculty conferences starting 37.5 min. later than regular school day?
(4) what happens to after school activites since many kids won’t hang around for nearly 40 minutes to first stay for another hour or two and teachers probably can’t make their schedules work for that either
(5) where there are a lot of kids arriving by school bus, how will kids get home if they do stay late
(6) can administrators put 20 in a room with two teachers?
76 NYC Educator
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:32 pm
HS Shop teacher,
You’ve got an absolute right to your opinion. While I disagree, I would never tell you to shut up. So go ahead, enjoy lunch duty. Enjoy your sixth class. Have fun if some kid falsely accuses you. You’ve got every right to adore this contract.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and you’re mistaken–I do not tell anyone to shut up. Leo Casey, who will not be joining you in the cafeteria, is well-paid to spout Unity propaganda, and I’m just letting him know what I think about it.
37% voted against the contract, and that’s up from 10% on the last. All of us pay UFT dues. We are not represented on the front page of this blog, nor are our views represented in the Unity propaganda in our mailboxes, though our union dues support it.
100% of Edwize’s front page advocates Unity policy. You’re entitled to admire that. In fact, I sincerely hope as this contract progresses, and teachers find out what Klein really had in mind, they keep ignoring us.
No, I absolutely don’t want them to shut up. They’re going to have to dance awfully fast to keep up with this cahncellor, and I want to watch.
77 Bklynteacher
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:36 pm
>>>
NYCDOE website
I think the key words here are,
“At the discretion of the Chancellor”
78 Bklynteacher
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:37 pm
At the discretion of the Chancellor, this additional time shall ordinarily be used for tutorials, test preparation, and/or small-group instruction for students most requiring this assistance with a teacher-student ratio of no more than 1:10.
See my post above
The quote was left off
79 Kombiz
· Nov 4, 2005 at 6:51 pm
mshalo18 – As I mentioned above, there’s an email in your inbox from me regarding your comments here about the letters in the file. Like I said above please email me your school name so that I can get someone to help your chapter leader. My email is blog@uft.org
80 Chaz
· Nov 4, 2005 at 8:29 pm
Kombiz,
Thank you for the nice words. I don’t have a problem with others who disagree with me such as yourself. However, I do resent those people who insult, attack, and ridicule my opinion and evade important questions. Therefore, I will respond in kind to those people with the very same nastiness that they are using.
My main concern is how, as a classroom teacher, I will live through this contract and the disrespect that Tweed shows us.
81 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 4, 2005 at 8:45 pm
I understand that 40 per cent of teachers voted NO on this contract. Paras and school secretaries helped to bring the average up to the higher 63 per cent. With no numbers that high all negative comments that are respectful should be given strong attention if not heed.
82 Leo Casey
· Nov 4, 2005 at 8:52 pm
Schoolgal:
The new contract is quite explicit that:
1. the 37 1/2 minutes begin after the dismissal of school — a class can not be “held over”;
2. that this is to be small group, informal instruction with a ratio of no more than 10 students to the teacher; and
3. that violations of these provisions will go through an expedited arbitration, with monetary damages if the DOE violates them.
If you have any problems in your school, please contact me personally at LCasey@UFT.ORG, and I will make sure the problems are addressed immediately.
83 Leo Casey
· Nov 4, 2005 at 8:56 pm
Shouldhavegonetomeds:
I agree with you that respectful comments, of any opinion on the contract, should be carefully listened to, and I know that I am not alone at the UFT in this regard. It is crucial now that we implement this new contract in ways that protects the rights and the interests of our members, and we began that work today. If you wish to communicate any ideas on how we move forward, please do so. You can do so publicly here, or you can e-mailme privately at LCasey@UFT.ORG if you prefer.
84 Leo Casey
· Nov 4, 2005 at 9:16 pm
Paul Rubin:
We have begun discussions with the DOE on when the increase and the retroactive will be paid. We will be able to report soon an exact date, which we expect will be sooner as opposed to later. But with the DOE, we need to be completely certain of a date before we announce it to members. We do not want to be in a position where we declare a date that members rely upon, and then have the DOE not fulfill the promise. As soon as we know for certain, we will let you know on the web.
The current time schedule will continue for the remainder of the fall term — through January 31. The new schedule will begin with the spring term on February 1.
There will no longer be the hour long professional development periods on Mondays. There will continue to be the two conference days a month, October through May, just as there was in the old contract.
A principal who is acting in the best interests of students will find ways to incorporate after-school activities into the 37 minute periods. There is no contractual impediment to doing that. For those of you with such principals, you should begin conversations on that very subject now. Principals who are not reasonable will simply destroy after school activities.
There are immense practical problems to making the 37 minutes work for students, and busing is clearly at the top of the list. I do not expect that even if the DOE wanted to assume the cost of running two bus schedules they would have the numbers of buses which would them to do so, so what we will almost certainly see is that students who take buses will not be able to use the 37 minute period. The DOE insisted that they should not have to sit down with teachers and the UFT to arrive at something which would work well for teachers and students, so they are now going to figure out such problems all by themselves. Expect them to fall flat on their face.
The contract does not envision team tutoring of 20 students — it is quite clear that is a small group of not more than ten students. If they violate that understanding, we will grieve ASAP.
85 HS_ teacher
· Nov 4, 2005 at 9:56 pm
Hey NYC Educator, although you claim not to have a political “pretense” you seem rather insistent to talk about an election for 2007 or “removing” the current UFT leadership which happens to have been won by the Unity caucus. This enrages you so that you feel that leadership then should NOT lead because you want Jeff. . . . oh , I know you don’t “speak for Jeff” but your blog is prominently displayed on his blog and that, along with many comments here . . . happens to coincide in what ICE and TJC say – although you are not political. You are right, Jeff or Nick Licari are great leaders of example we see that at meetings. But moreover the policies of the UFT are set by leadership of ALL caucuses (and non-caucuses) by the Delegate Assembly and the Executive Board and it seems to eat you up that the other gentleman’s destructive statements (and sometimes outright lies) are not taken as seriously.
Although “37% voted against the contract” and you feel you “are not represented on the front page of this blog” the leadership from delegates and chapter leaders executive board and the officers are chosen by the membership and they are the LEADERSHIP. So this blog and the NY Teacher are managed by leadership but serves its members (as mentioned several times on this site, you can give your input or write something also). Why aren’t we all serving the membership, too?
86 Schoolgal
· Nov 5, 2005 at 12:59 am
Leo,
Thanks for your email.
Just to clarify:
Are you saying that “after dismissal”, an admin CAN put 20 students in the same classroom with 2 teachers?
87 R. Skibins
· Nov 5, 2005 at 1:38 am
A few observations:
1. I noticed that an earlier post was deleted. It was in response to one post that commented on my comment about COPE being used against us, stating that “COPE dollars, by law, can only be used for politcal action with actual politicans.” The deleted response stated that if that was true, then why didn’t it go to help Fernando Ferrer? There was no reason why that should have been deleted.
2. The UFT should demand that those two extra days in August be used solely to set up the classroom and prepare for the first week. The mayor and Randi thought that it was okay to extend the year, in part, because many teachers come in that week anyway to set up. Now, as we must endure PD in 90 degree heat, some teachers may come in a day or two earlier to set up. Does that mean an entire week in August is in store in the next contract? I urge teachers NOT to come in earlier. If your room isn’t ready, and you get a LIF because of it, file a harassment grievance and/or a lawsuit.
3.As with the last contract, the extended time has not been logically thought out. Did the sellouts thing about what happens when little Junior must stay the extra time, but his sibling doesn’t? Do the parents go home with the sibling, then come back? Or does the sibling roam the halls? What about when, as in my school, a few dozen kids remain as much as 30 minutes after dismissal because their neglectful parents forget to pick them up? What about materials? Will the DOE provide them, or will we be forced to buy materials with our pitiful Teacher’s Choice stipend?
4. HS Teacher: Get a life. First you blast us because we refused to be lambs for the slaughter, then you blast us because you think that are arguments have a political nature. So you are saying that we can’t criticize our leaders and want their ouster? Then criticize those who pledged their support for John Kerry a year before his nomination because they wanted to ouster a president who was out of touch with what they want. Our criticism of Randi Weingarten has more to do with her knack for working out contracts with givebacks that would have even nauseated Sandy Feldman. In my school, an elementary school in Brooklyn, a petition is being circulated asking for Randi Weingarten to resign. Ninety percent of our staff wants to get rid of her and this lousy contract. And you thought that the elementary schools loved Weingarten! I dare Randi to set foot in my building. The obscenities flying would rival, if not outdo, those of the Unity stooges who tell Jeff Kaufman and anyone else who speaks the truth.
88 redhog
· Nov 5, 2005 at 6:36 am
I’ve from time to time seen evidence that R. Skibins’ mind has not yet entirely atrophied, but it does go into freeze mode when he endeavors to exercise it. He is at his absolute worst when he fulminates about Randi and the leadership generally. In any election, a candidate would regard 63% of the vote as a mandate, if not a landslide. If Skibins’s staff would be abusive to Randi as he claims, probably unreliably, then they would be showcasing only their own infantility, incivility, and imbecility. Maybe they should find a common period during the day to meet as a support group to address their arbitrary anger and the moral holes in their collective character.
89 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 5, 2005 at 7:58 am
Frankly aren’t there elections and elections? I am not expert here but isn’t 63 per cent very low for a contract ratification? Furthermore, actual teachers only voted for the contract by 60 per cent!!! This is far less than any new contract I can recall. Again, I am not assaulting anyone here…..but? Furthermore, indubitably, this contract garnered some yes votes from those within sight of retirement who don’t actually see themsleves working under its rules and regulations for two long.
90 Leo Casey
· Nov 5, 2005 at 7:59 am
Schoolgal:
What I was saying was that the 37 minute period begins only after dismissal, AND that it is governed by the limit of no more than 10 students. There is no language in the contract which would allow an administrator to impose team tutoring.
Leo
91 NYC Educator
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:09 am
Propaganda Minister Casey chooses his words carefully. There is, apparently, no language that would explicitly forbid it, either.
And Mr. Casey, who will not be teaching the class, claims elsewhere 37 minutes in a room teaaching 10 kids does not constitute a class.
The 37 minute class is an unwieldy. problematic mess. The only neat resolution logic suggests is a full sixth class, five times a week, by typical overcrowded NY standards. Look for that in the next contract.
Teachers will complain, and Unity will break into their theme song.
“It was the best we could do.”
92 mshalo18
· Nov 5, 2005 at 9:02 am
Kombiz-got your e-mail. Will talk to my chapter leader on Monday and have her contact you directly.
If anyone thinks that subject area teachers won’t be teamed up with teachers of minor subjects to increase the amount of kids who can be “serviced” in 37.5 minutes, they are sadly mistaken. I can envision it now- the band teacher puts his feet up in the back of my room while I do all the work. The contract doesn’t “envision” team teaching, but you can be sure every administrator in NYC DOES.
93 R. Skibins
· Nov 5, 2005 at 9:21 am
By Redhog’s standards, we should not be angry at Mayor Bloomberg or President Bush. To criticize them would be, in Redhog’s words, “showcasing only their own infantility, incivility, and imbecility.” You think that we should shut up and accept things as they are. They said that to my family in Germany about 70 years ago. This is a democracy, and we have every right to question, ridicule and oppose our elected officials on ANY level. You Unity types remind me of the right-wing “America, love it or leave it” types, and the Bushies who question the patriotism of anyone who criticizes him. In the words of Frederick Douglass, “Agitate, agitate, agitate!”
94 Schoolgal
· Nov 5, 2005 at 9:24 am
Dear Leo,
Now I understand. Because the wording isn’t specifically stated, an admin would be in their right to assign a double amount of students and claim the 10-1 ratio. (as long as it is after dismissal).
Instead of telling me that there is no wording in the contract, please answer if the possibility exists. The fact that wording of this contract leaves open so many options, we need to know what these options are before we get hit with them.
If the doubling is grieved, the DOE can still rule in favor because the contract isn’t clearly written on how this is to be implemented. Am I correct in this?
In the meantime I will tell the teachers that she can do a 20/2 ratio after dismissal because the contract doesn’t state that she can’t.
New Question:
Also, I would like a copy of the SBO provision that I remember reading that stated teachers could select their Staff Development topics on Monday and even work with their grade if they wanted.
I have endured 3 horrible Mondays because the principal would not allow our ideas, and our DR still hasn’t got back to us since September about the legality of this. If we still have 6 more extended days left, can we grieve the fact that the principal has been forcing us to do what she wants????????? If so, I will email you with those details.
95 Chaz
· Nov 5, 2005 at 10:26 am
TRUST!
It is a real pity that it has come to this that I no longer trust the UFT unity educrats to protect the classroom teacher. I truely believe that our leaders have lost touch will the people they are supposed to represent. However, now that the contract passed only time will tell if my fears are realized (i hope not).
What’s done is done. Therefore, I have the following questions that I would like answered.
1. Will the per sesson retroactive pay be included in the retroactive check or will it be seperate?
2. Are paid coverages included in the retroactive pay or will there be a seperate check?
3. Will teachers in the schools that are not assigned to the classroom be included in the 37 minute tuturing program?
4. Will gym, art, music, and other minor subject teachers be included in this 37 minute tuturing program and what will they do?
5. How will afterschool activites, (school sports, clubs) be affected by the extended day? Students going home after dark?
If anybody has answers to my questions please feel free to respond.
96 Leo Casey
· Nov 5, 2005 at 11:42 am
Schoolgal:
I do my best to be clear as I can, and I do my best to answer sincere questions from individuals on this comment board. But I am only responsible for what I say, and not for the words that someone else would like to place in my mouth for their own purposes.
First, the 37 minute period begins after dismissal — after the end of the school day for students. It can not be a continuation of a regularly scheduled class.
Second, if the language of the contract is quite explicit that the 37 minute period can only consist of small groups of no more than 10 students, than a principal can not mandate larger groups to be team tutored. When I say there is no language in the contract which would allow him or her to mandate such an arrangement, I am saying that he or she has no authority to do so, and that it would be in violation of the plain language of the agreement. When a contract lays down a general principle in unequivocal language — “no more than ten students” — that principle can not be broken unless express authority to do so is granted. That is why, for example, the contract lays out explicitly the limited exceptions to the class size rules.
If a principal mandates team tutoring with groups of 20 students, it should be immediately grieved.
If anyone tells members in a school that team tutoring can be mandated in groups of twenty students, he or she is doing so in explicit disagreement with what I have now stated here three times. Please make it clear that I have stated the opposite.
SBO [School Based Option} provisions are, by their very nature, school specific. There are hundreds of SBOs around the city. It is impossible for anyone to provide materials unless they are told what the school is and what the specific SBO involved.
97 Leo Casey
· Nov 5, 2005 at 11:58 am
The questions I can answer are these.
All members, without exception, will do the additional 37 minutes. The DOE has yet to issue a directive on the use of the time.
Given the great variation among the situations in schools [eg, the numbers of students who are bused], it is hard to conceive how the time could be implemented other than by giving discretion to individual schools. As I have previously noted, there is no reason why after school activities could be integrated into the 37 minutes, and reasonable principals will attempt to do so.
I do not know the answers to the questions about per session pay.
98 NYC Educator
· Nov 5, 2005 at 12:41 pm
I read this with increasing interest. A principal cannot mandate a class to be team tutored. The language above, however, specifies only the ratio, not the placement.
And even if it didn’t, why couldn’t a newly all-powerful principal simply have two teachers share a classroom, ostensibly to facilitate cleaning, or whatever? Then, supposedly, they’d each have ten individual students.
The bottom line? Ten or twenty, we’ll all be stuck after school teaching an unprecedented sixth class.
Except Mr. Casey, of course.
99 Leo Casey
· Nov 5, 2005 at 1:14 pm
I will answer questions, but I am not going to spend the weekend of my wife’s birthday playing games here with NYCEducator. Please direct further questions to me at LCasey@UFT.ORG.
100 NYC Educator
· Nov 5, 2005 at 1:27 pm
My goodness, Mr. Casey. What a crass characterization. Frankly, I’m stunned, particularly after the many times you deplored personal attacks.
I must agree with you once again. I’m afraid they do nothing to further the discussion.
Perhaps you should take a pill or something. Frankly, it’s not my fault you’re unable to construct an affirmative defense of the way you and your tired, entrenched party have managed to degrade the profession to which I’ve devoted 20 years of my life.
101 paulrubin
· Nov 5, 2005 at 1:38 pm
We really need to move on here. Most teachers in the system including those who voted for it recognize that this is in essence a 6th class. There will probably be much less preparation time involved. And many of us will be tutoring (I hardly see how tutoring and teaching aren’t the same thing) things that we don’t know much about let alone how to do it well. But this battle is over for now. The majority has spoken and if the minority can’t live with that, then you either work towards changing the union’s leadership or you splinter off into obscurity.
I know that when we voted on a contract that included a 0-1 as the first two raises I was outraged. I know that when they added this 10 minute slop and then mishandled its application I was outraged. I know when they gave a raise at the 22 year mark essentially cutting me off from max for two more years and leaving me with a pathetic bit of a raise when some teachers got 16%, I was outraged. I’m disgusted by the UFT’s willingness to roll over again and again and again. But as long as the majority of my colleagues vote for contracts, I’ve resigned myself to living with their mistakes because fundamentally my job is really about what goes on inside the walls of my classroom and to date I’ve been left alone to pursue that end. Luckily I’m close enough to retirement to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
The people in charge will do as they see fit and we’ll have year long grievance proceedings leading to inadequate solutions. That’s the nature of the game under dictators. And as bad as this is going to be, it would be just as bad to sit around for 4 more years with no raise. For a teacher on max, this is worth some $12,000 a year. When Bloomberg is gone, we’ll have earned nearly $55,000 more than had we not settled not including any future raises under the balance of his mayoralty. For most teachers who are living paycheck to paycheck, the decision was to make the consessions for the money. And until our colleagues grow a set of balls and prepare for a 2 month long strike with 4 months of lost wages, all this handwringing is an embarrassment. There’s no sentiment to strike amongst the majority here. They’d rather slowly give up rights and take modest raises, teach their classes, and retire. Perhaps a few more years dealing with the maniacs running the assylum will convince them otherwise. I view that as doubtful. The sentiment in the U.S. is anti-union and our newest members tend to be rather apathetic about the union.
I would suggest that the UFT take a poll before the next contract and ask what percentage of the teachers in the system would rather have a bigger raise and twice as much retroactive money next time in exchange for a short term cut (a few months) in starting teacher salaries. We’d probably find that number to be 80-95%. Personally I’d rather have our union’s leadership worry more about meeting the current member’s needs and leave recruitment to the city and DOE. Retention is rightly a union issue but not recruitment. I don’t want one dime of my union dues being spent on recruiting replacements for retired teachers. And don’t put words in my mouth either. I’m not advocating that step 2, 3, etc not get their fair share of future raises. Those are current colleagues with the same rights as myself and they deserve equal treatment. I’m talking about people who haven’t contributed one dime to the UFT who for all intents and purposes don’t exist yet. Watch what happens to the police, fire, etc. They’ll either have no recruitment problems because potential recruits are smart enough to look at the entire package of their career ladder OR they’ll have recruitment problems and salaries will be increased at the bottom. Either way it’s a city issue for a future time.
102 BronxTeacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 2:24 pm
At my school I keep hearing that the raise will appear in our 12/1 checks, and that the retro will be paid by 12/16. I hope this is true. This is what my chapter leader is hearing from the regional offices.
103 Schoolgal
· Nov 5, 2005 at 2:32 pm
Dear Blogmaster,
Did you remove my last letter? I remember seeing it after the submission.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY MRS. CASEY.
104 Kombiz
· Nov 5, 2005 at 2:49 pm
Schoolgal, No.. Is it this one?
105 NYC Educator
· Nov 5, 2005 at 3:13 pm
“I know when they gave a raise at the 22 year mark essentially cutting me off from max for two more years and leaving me with a pathetic bit of a raise when some teachers got 16%, I was outraged.”
Actually, their original plan was to cut you off for five years, and it was only reduced to 2 after we voted it down. You probably recall Unity making precisely the same arguments they made this time.
“It’s the best we could do.”
“We can’t possibly do any better.”
As for the new contract, I absolutely believe this was the best Unity could do, and that they couldn’t have done any better.
Other municipal unions, lacking Unity’s much bandied-about limitations, did much better than we did.
106 Chaz
· Nov 5, 2005 at 4:19 pm
Thank you for your response Mr. Casey.
I totally agree with paulrubin. As we look into the future, the only giveback we should consider is selling out he newborn. It is the city’s and DOE’s problem when they will need to attract and retain new teachers. It is certainly preferable than teaching a sixth period, working additional days, and extending the work day.
The UFT must make a priority of representing the classroom teacher, not appeasing the city and DOE.
107 Schoolgal
· Nov 5, 2005 at 5:04 pm
Dear Blogmaster,
No. I will try to rewrite it.
Dear Leo,
Your second responses was much more concise than your first because I and others found the first response confusing. And, I mean no disrespect in telling you that if confused, we should have the right to ask clarifying questions or make clarifying statements. Your last response is what I will be telling my teachers. I am surprised that it is being left to the DOE to decide on how we should use it. That usually doesn’t turn out to be a good thing.
Many teachers are not in a position to grieve because of the culture of their schools. This new contract is now ratified and I respect that, but that doesn’t mean that members need to have a brick fall on their heads because admins are already planning ahead. I know when my principal returns from a Principals’ Meeting, we hear all new ideas. Obviously the admins are planning what they could do with the wording (or lack of wording) in this contract. I can only hope the UFT is also proactive and not leaving it to the members to report violations. (I won’t even get into my admin’s ideas for lunch duty.)
For instance, why are principals getting away with calling lunchtime meetings. Even if they call it “voluntary” it really is a free get-out-of jail card for them. This is something Randi can stop right now since the contract does state Duty Free Lunch. It should not be up to us to file this grievance when all is needed is an edict from Klein that no principal can do this. Randi talks about renegotiating the LIF issues, well what about this issue?
Why is it always the teachers on the front line who have to fire the first shot and suffer the wounds from the return fire? That is why it is important for the UFT to protect us top down instead of bottom up.
On the SBO Monday matter:
This was an important city vote and I was given a position sheet by the UFT which stated that all PD will be pro-teacher.
I would never have voted YES otherwise.
Now you tell me you don’t know which position I am talking about when the UFT published it and the UFT conducted the voting. You must have a copy of that position paper which gave us all the possible voting options and explained what we were voting on. I clearly remember reading that teachers would be able to select topics. I also remember reading that Carmen Farina said this would be the case.
As for the future, I agree that there will be a divide between new teachers and teachers with 10 or more years. Many new teachers go along with the mandates even when rights are violated. If this trend continues it will not be good for our school and for the children we service.
108 redhog
· Nov 5, 2005 at 6:03 pm
I agree with R. Skibins about the vileness of Bloomberg and foulness of Bush, but maybe he and I have both been too quick on the draw with holocaust references.
And we are also polar opposites in our characterization of Randi.
109 paulrubin
· Nov 5, 2005 at 6:43 pm
The 25/22 year thing wasn’t the part that bothered me. The part that bothered me is we have a history of skewing various contracts to the benefit of various members of the UFT population, typically those near retirement and those near the bottom. How about skewing the next contract to those who actually work for the system instead of those currently sitting in some college somewhere. If the city is willing to allow it, let them. 4 years later they’ll be begging us to agree to raise the starting salary but in the meantime everyone else in the system benefitted.
110 Bklynteacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 6:58 pm
Mr.Casey
I want to be clear about something.
As a tech cluster teacher, can I propose to my Principal that “my” 37 1/2 minutes be devoted to a M-Th Afterschool Tech Club?
111 NYC Educator
· Nov 5, 2005 at 7:06 pm
PR,
I don’t know if it’s happened to you, but wherever I happen to be on the pay scale, the largest gains have always gone to someone else. Maybe I should have started a year earlier. Or a year later.
However, I reach max a year from February, and I’m very glad I won’t have to wait another three years.
112 Bklynteacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 7:51 pm
NYC Educator
What you’ll find out is once you hit maximum you have nowhere to go. The last two year and a half years while everyone else was getting their step raises, differentials and longevities (under the old contract), I was getting nothing.
Why do you think I am so upset with the initial 0% 6 month increase, 2% for the next 12 months and 3.5 for the following 11 months.
What it meant for me (and others like me) is that for the 29 months I waited (with no increase of any kind), I got a total of 5.5% in increased salary.
So reaching maximum is not all its cracked up to be. It just means you won’t have any more increases until Bloomberg leaves office (assuming he’s re-elected).
113 paulrubin
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:00 pm
Look, we should have reached max at 15 years, 20 at worst, like the rest of the tri state area. But that’s another example of our union caving in. What’s clear is that there are firemen who are getting $15,000 retroactive checks. The biggest retroactive check we’re getting is $5700. Do the math. Something’s not right there and the most popular response we hear is that the UFT doesn’t want to “eat its young”. We shouldn’t be hurting anyone. There’s justification aplenty to raise salaries at every part of the salary scale. But the reality is that our union’s most important duty is to maximize the raises of all existing members AND where possible, get the biggest possible raises at or near the top since most teachers tend to retire off that number. If the city is stupid enough to reduce starting salaries, we should be letting them. Let the salary scale go from 30K to 110K for about 3-4 years and the next thing you know Bloomberg’s successor with be BEGGING us to allow the city to pay starting teachers more money and we’ll end up at 50-120K. It is NOT the job of the people whose salaries are paid by MY union dues to consider in any contract negotiations the needs of the system to attract more and/or better teachers. THAT is the job of the NYCDOE and now apparently the Mayor. The UFT’s job is to take those new teachers and make their salaries and working conditions as professional and pleasant as possible. AFTER they’re in the system. NOT before. And as long as retired teachers paid and pay into the UFT coffers, it’s also their duty to make pensions as lucrative and secure as possible.
One has to wonder why the union and city haven’t come back with a 30 year longevity increase and an increment for a PhD or EdD. Teachers with 30 years and a doctorate should get $100K. Nobody would be getting it any time soon but then both sides would crow about the $100K max salary which would sort of be a lie. But you know what. Eventually people would get there. That needs to be the attitude of the union. Concentrate your efforts on long range goals which means salary increases aimed at the middle and top. New teacher salaries are retention issues and those are rightly UFT issues but we’re talking about steps 2 and up. I honestly don’t prioritorize first year teachers. That’s my opinion and I”ll stick to it. I do prioritize 2nd year teachers. Once someone actually survives NYC and decides to stay, they need to be nurtured. They’ve survived trial by fire and earned the right to a good standard of living.
114 paulrubin
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:10 pm
I should add to my above thoughts that the UFT didn’t hesitate to sell its young when it tolerated the introduction of Tier 4 pensions that most of us are screwed with. That one impacts our lives from when we retire to how well we retire. We’re talking years. Looks to me like what the other unions did is take its untrained newbies and cut their salary for 3-6 months. For the rest of their 20, 30 and 40 year careers, they’ll stand to benefit as well as through retirement due to higher salaries at the top. This isn’t Walmart. We’re not taking the job based on whether we’ll earn $7 an hour or $8.50. This is a professional long term career situation where you look at the entire package from day one through retirement and death. Whenever there’s an opportunity to raise the top salary by whatever means necessary, it needs to be taken not because it benefits the teachers at the top but because everyone in the system at all levels or who will be in the system in the future has the opportunity to spend years at the top and retirement based on the top.
115 Bklynteacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:17 pm
Correction to my prior post:
You (those on maximum) will have one more increase (3.5% in Oct.2006) and then probably not have another increase until Nov. 2009 (going on the negiotiation history of the last 2 administrations. The good news is “term limits” prevent Bloomberg from buying another election.
116 Bklynteacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:23 pm
Oops, I was too generous!
It’s actually a 3.25% increase, not 3.50%!
117 Bklynteacher
· Nov 5, 2005 at 8:29 pm
Paul
Thanks for saying so well what I’ve been saying to my colleagues for years. The more money you give the top, the better it is for anyone who plans to retire from this retirement system someday – whether it be 2 years or 15 years years from now.
118 R. Skibins
· Nov 5, 2005 at 9:35 pm
I agree with Paul Rubin. When I graduated from college over 20 years ago, I would look at what the top salary was, and the salary when I would be getting married, not the starting salary. It didn’t kill me to live with my parents while starting pay was $18K. Within a year we got a decent contract, and I was up to $25K.
119 Schoolgal
· Nov 5, 2005 at 10:04 pm
Guys,
I went for 30 above my masters a few years ago in hope that the new contract would acknowledge the extra credits for those of us on Max. It didn’t.
When I was just five years away from reaching the 20th year max, the contract was changed to 25 and then 22. Also, there will never be another early retirement incentive like those of the past. So I have always been on the short end of the stick. I will not get to retire at the new max salary because I will leave a year before I worked under that amount. I know most teachers would stay the extra year, but I am at the point of counting down the days.
I can tell you that not all soon-to-be retired teachers voted YES. And many new teachers in my school voted NO. In fact I would say over 80% voted NO. My friends tell me there is a light at the end of my tunnel, but for some reason the days are dragging. That’s because teaching is no longer about creativity, it’s all about the tests. Maybe after March the pressure will be off and teaching will be joyful again.
120 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 12:23 am
Most in my school voted NO as well.
Of those who didn’t, some were newer teachers and 2 were retiring this year.
I suppose I can’t blame those retiring this year for voting YES. After all, they are on Tier I and their pension is based on this year’s salary (with that 5.5% increase).
I’m sure the City knew that would happen. Otherwise, why not spread the increase out over the previous 29 months?
Less retro pay to pay, the most senior teachers out…A win-win situation.
121 NYC Educator
· Nov 6, 2005 at 8:26 am
One of the problems, I think, is the city, despite all its bluster, doesn’t give a damn who teaches, or about the qulity of education. This accounts for the lowest standards, and salaries in the area.
That’s why the UFT needs to talk about attracting teachers. No one else will. The News and the Post, even the Times and Newsday revel in being able to vilify the awful teachers that find employment here. They regularly write of the “powerful teachers’ union,” as though it were an epithet. Never mind that each contract manages at best to keep us 25K behind our suburban colleagues.
In the face of a 30 year, ongoing teacher shortage, the city did all it could to defy the law of supply and demand–800 numbers, and intergalactic searches for foreign teachers who ran back home once they found out how much it cost to live in NY.
Still, I agree it would’ve been a good idea to consult the membership before agreeing to this contract. When you have a party in power for 50 years, corruption, arrogance, and supreme indifference become par for the course, though.
The tiers, I’m told, are statewide, and not entirely the fault of the UFT. A colleague tells me that state legislators fall under this plan as well, and are thus motivated to improve it. Up to now, independently wealthy, UFT-endorsed Governor George Pataki has declined to sign such legislation.
122 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 9:29 am
Guys,
Let’s get off the subject of the money and pension and get back to a much more important issue.
Log onto today’s Daily News to see what I am talking about. It’s our union’s way of saying there might be problems with this contract. (YOU THINK!)
123 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 10:05 am
Well, I can’t say I agree with you that the article in the DN is more important than the money and pension, but I will say it is important.
While we can’t do anything about this contract, it will expire in Oct. 2007, which is not that far off. Anything we can do to get better financial terms in the next contract is worth every word we write here.
We should not sit back prepared to wait another 4 years for a new contract. Otherwise, we will have learned nothing from this experience.
124 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:10 am
What can be done about the money now?? Are you going to discuss this matter to death?
If the new 20/55 pension goes through, does it come out of my pocket?????
I have been contributing to Cope for over 25 years and there was always talk of real pension reform. At this point I don’t believe in the Pension Fairy.
You guys talk money when teachers at my school lose their lunch period. Sorry, but I think at this point the issue is what is happening and going to happen now
regarding our contractual rights.
As far as the next contract, any raise will be contingent on more givebacks.
Write your assembly and state reps about the pension issue because it’s not going to do you much good writing about it here. Did our writings about voting NO defeat this contract?
I understand your need to blow off steam, but I would like my issues addressed also.
I am dealing with here and now issues that effect my daily life at school.
I am still waiting for Leo to get back to me on the Professional Development topic issue since no one else here wants to help me. I am not as lucky as Ms. Frizzle who seems to work in a real professional community where teachers are asked what their needs are. Obviously one school knows about the SBO mandate.
125 Kombiz
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:45 am
Schoolgal,
I would also email Leo your questions as I’m not sure he’ll be around a computer till tomorrow. I’ll also try to get answers for your questions.
126 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 12:53 pm
I don’t have a problem with discussing your issue, Schoolgal.
I was responding to your comment:
“Let’s get off the subject of the money and pension and get back to a much more important issue”
Discussing “your” topic should not preclude us from continuing our discussion on the money/pension.
I think I explained my position pretty well as to why we shouldn’t let this go. Two years will fly by quickly
and I don’t think we should find ourselves in the same situation.
Frankly, I find your comment of talking it “to death” shall we say, insensitive.
As for your teachers losing their lunch periods, that is their choice.
No teacher has to work their lunch period. All should stand together and
inform the principal that meetings must take place on a scheduled
common prep.
Our literacy coach pulls the same crap. She calls them “Power Lunches”.
Well, once again, teachers have a right to say NO. I have always advised new teachers to take their lunch periods. Whether they do or not , is their choice.
127 mshalo18
· Nov 6, 2005 at 12:59 pm
A few questions:
1) Our school has an SBO for homerooms, and I have been assigned one for this year. Can administration now assign us to bathroom duty, lunch duty, etc?
2) Can we contractually refuse to attend lunchtime meetings without fear of being written up for insubordination?
3)Have the principals already been trained re: how much they can drain out of us under this new contract?
4) Does the same “4 in a row” rule apply to coverages? (in other words, if assigning me to do a coverage will give me 4 or 5 teaching periods in a row, can I refuse?)
These are but a few of the questions that come to mind- I’m sure I will think of more- can anyone answer these in the meantime?
128 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 1:02 pm
Schoolgal
BTW I’ve contributed to COPE 28 years and I could care less about the 25/55 pension.
129 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 1:03 pm
Thanks Blogmaster!
You’re a doll. Nice to know that someone is looking out for me.
As for the pension thing. I understand your concerns. I had these concerns 15 years ago and decided to forgo expenses like vacations and computers etc, and starting investing in mutual funds and Roth Iras. I am begging my family to start doing the same since pensions in the business world will go the way of the dinosaur.
Many teachers I taught with at the time also did the same thing.
I am also hoping my Social Security check will still be in existence.
Maybe the Blogmaster can get a blog going about pension reform and another about contractual concerns so I do not have to go through all your comments looking for answers to my questions as well as the answer to when our retro and per session retro checks will be coming in.
130 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 1:11 pm
mshalo18
You are obviously not an elementary school teacher (as I am)
The only question I can answer is #2. You are entitled to a duty free lunch period. Administrators may not write you up for insubordination for not attending a lunch time meeting.
I think the important thing here is how well you and your colleagues stand together on this issue. Obviously, if most staff members attend the lunch meetings, you will be singled out.
But they can’t write you up.
Over my 28 year carrer this came up several times. I ALWAYS took my lunch
period. In the end, administrators will respect you for it.
131 NYC Educator
· Nov 6, 2005 at 4:14 pm
“At this point I don’t believe in the Pension Fairy.”
Funny, Schoolgal!
132 paulrubin
· Nov 6, 2005 at 4:14 pm
>
That’s a nice thought but irrelavant. The parents put these bozos into office and if they thought attracting better teachers was truly important for their kids, they’d put the right people in charge. Instead, the parents that care have moved out of the city into the surrounding suburbs where property taxes eat up $500 to $1000 a month or more and teachers make more money at every end of the salary spectrum.
You might be able to fool all the idiots out there but I’m not easily fooled. All the efforts at raising the starting salary is a joke. All a reasonably intelligent person has to do is look at steps 2 through 5B to know that those efforts were a mirage designed to get more warm bodies into the system. Quality people would look at the better starting salary sure but then when they realize they’re looking at no raise for the next 4 plus years while that’s not the case anywhere else and they laugh and move on.
Again, it’s not our union’s business to worry about finding new teachers. It would be great in fact if school principals used their staff to help determine who’s going to be hired but that’s clearly not the future. All that matters is what the entire salary scale looks like from top to bottom.
133 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 5:40 pm
Dear NYC Educator,
Still love ya NYC Educator (but I really hope you are not an ICEberg).
BTW, cute kid-braces and all.
I tried to comment on your site, but now you have to log on. Please go back to the old way. It’s so much easier and this blog is all the logging I ever want to do.
I still find it funny that the UFT now has a special email called:
iamharassed@uft.org
I would have called it:
youscrewedmeagain@uft.org
It’s nice to know that some people get what I am saying. BKTeacher thinks it’s easy not to attend lunch meetings. If it was that easy, I wouldn’t be writing about it and neither would Mshalo18. His responses were entirely “insensitive”.
From now on BklynTeacher, I will no longer comment on your comments and stay the hell away from mine.
(Blogmaster: Am I allowed to use the word “hell”? If not, can I use the F word instead or better still, use some good old Italian phrases?)
134 mshalo18
· Nov 6, 2005 at 6:09 pm
Schoolgal- you and I both know it is very easy for someone not in a particular school to say “just don’t show up” for a lunchtime meeting. There are always a few butt-kissing sycophants who will do anything and everything an administrator asks them to do. Couple that with the newbies with no tenure, and some spineless whimps, and that leads to problems. And let’s face it-administration knows all of this and takes advantage.
FYI, our PD hasn’t been much better than yours-
PD #1- An informal faculty conference, followed by a brief literacy meeting-then everyone was sent back to their classrooms to work.
PD #2- A 100 minute long bitch and moan session (sorry blogmaster) about bulletin boards.
PD#3- Marking the practice ELA.
135 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 6:29 pm
Hi Mshalo18,
Nice to meet you.
I am still waiting to find out about PD.
I am on the PD Committee (the spinning of the wheels) and my principal nixed all ideas. We will mark the ELA all day Tuesday and I guess tomorrow is another training session. The practice ELA was a joke to begin with and now I hear we have to fill out an individual assessment on each student (that’s what Princeton is for). I am spending this weekend doing report cards because I only just received them. I wonder how your school’s bulletin boards will change after Feb. 1?
My school is not very union because everyone looks out for #1 instead of the whole, and my rep leaves a lot to be desired. I, like you, do not want to be put into the position of the only one filing a grievance. That is why I believe Randi and the powers that be do something about it. Sometimes my principal announces she wants to meet with a grade at lunch for “a few minutes” which means 20 minutes.
Randi,
Please call the Region 3 Superintendent and put a stop to lunch meetings. And call Mishalo18′s Region too.
136 mshalo18
· Nov 6, 2005 at 7:21 pm
Interesting about the report cards Schoolgal- you are the 4th person who has told me (all in different schools) about how late you received report cards-with an unreasonable time frame in which to return them. The powers that be essentially FORCED us to do them at home this weekend (got mine Thursday, MUST have them in tomorrow AM).
137 Schoolgal
· Nov 6, 2005 at 8:03 pm
Mihalo18,
This is so typical of the DOE. There was no reason why report card distribution could not be postponed until Friday.
I will stay up very late tonight rather than miss an episode of Desperate Housewives.
I also have to add more categories to my cards, such as “Effort” for each subject area as well as # of books read.
Hopefully Leo or the Blogmaster will get back to me about the PD issue.
On a happier note, I got my TRS Annual Report and in 2 years from now, I am out the door!
Years ago, the 2 years would have flown by. Teaching was much more fun then. Now the State tests are so early. I am giving my first one in 2 weeks. I remember a time when I would be preparing for an assembly program and working on holiday projects. Those days are gone.
138 Bklynteacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 9:05 pm
From now on BklynTeacher, I will no longer comment on your comments and stay the hell away from mine.
Whoa- Schoolgirl..temper, temper.
First, first your facts straight!
I’m a “she” and not a “he”.
And my responses are based on what I KNOW, not what I THINK. I’ve always had the guts to stand up for myself when I knew I had the contract on my side.
Not to worry, I won’t repond to your posts any longer. I can take a hint….
“Ms. Insensitivity!”
139 BronxTeacher
· Nov 6, 2005 at 10:58 pm
Does Randi have an email address? I really really want to know when we’re getting the pittance coming to us. I’m working three jobs here, and it would be nice to be able to scale back.
When will the union make an announcement?
140 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:32 pm
school girl,
On a practical note treat yourself to a TIVO or a DVR. you may not have much retro money coming, but you have enough for that. You deserve it.
141 jd2718
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:42 pm
As of last Wednesday, DoE had not told us when the new salaries would be reflected in payroll, nor when retro payments would come, nor when retro on per session would come. (That last amount will generally not be very large).
After the last contract, we got lumps (some sort of $$, maybe a bit more than half what was due, to get some $$ into our hands fast), but then the full retro didn’t arrive until early the next Fall.
But that doesn’t mean it will happen the same way this time.
Can we expect an e-mail to chapter leaders and a front page post at UFT.org when the timing information becomes available?
Jonathan
142 jd2718
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:48 pm
When 50 of the old 100 minutes were dedicated city-wide to small group instruction, many middle school and many many elementary schools put 2 or 3 teachers in a room with lots of kids.
Why wouldn’t they do exactly this again, maintaining a 10:1 ratio? It looks to me like this meets the new contract language. A D9 principal who lives in my building indicated that she intends to do exactly this, and that several of her colleagues do as well.
Will Chapter Leaders be instructed to grieve 30 students with 3 teachers? Bravo if we are going to try, but better contract language would have helped.
Jonathan
143 jd2718
· Nov 6, 2005 at 11:55 pm
The faculty conferences, twice a month, should start after the 37½ minutes. Where the principal is nice, or reasonable, or simply not insane (depending on your definition) they will find a way to roll the conference into the extra time so that we do not have a 7:37:30 day.
But there is no contract provision, old or new, that says that a principal must be nice, or reasonable, or even not insane.
Your principal will decide if you will have the long day or not. There would be nothing grievable if s/he makes your school stay for the full 6:20 + 0:37:30 + 0:40 twice a month.
Again, a shame this wasn’t addressed before the contract was presented to the membership, but now we live with what we have.
Jonathan
144 Kombiz
· Nov 7, 2005 at 12:16 am
Jonathan,
I’m positve that once the information is available it will be emailed to chapter leaders, and placed on the UFT’s website. Leo mentioned earlier that the information was going to be forthcoming as soon as it was verified.
Secondly, this will receive it’s own post in the coming days but if you are a UFT member please sign up on the UFT’s website. You’ll have to make sure to check the box indicating you are member where you will be asked for informtaion confirming you are member (social or file number), this will get you placed on the email list for the UFT where you will receive emails about important information. If you are a poternital member, but have not yet joined the union you can do so from the UFT’s website by following the link saying you’d like to join the UFT.
Finally, there are a small, but regular group of commenters on this blog. In my experience on blogs it’s almost impossible to catch the tone, or sarcasm of a comment, unless you know the person personally. If we can all give each other the benefit of the doubt the conversations will be much more civil and the comments much more welcoming for people who don’t regularly comment.
Obviously we’re trying to accomplish something completely different, (and revolutionary) by having a blog, especially when we were fighting the mayor for a contract, and afterwards when we had to explain what was in the MOA. While I try to find questions here that are actual questions, and have them answered, I know that sometimes we will miss some questions. The comment section on this blog, may not be the best place for those questions and maybe there’s an oppourtunity to create a new digital forum for specific questions.
I think the best option is to go through your chapter leader, DR, borough office, but you’re more than welcome to email me, blog@uft.org or Leo, lcasey@uft.org.
In my case I will send the email to people I think may be able to answer the question and respond.
145 jd2718
· Nov 7, 2005 at 1:18 am
kombiz,
you wrote “Finally, there are a small, but regular group of commenters on this blog. In my experience on blogs it’s almost impossible to catch the tone, or sarcasm of a comment, unless you know the person personally. If we can all give each other the benefit of the doubt the conversations will be much more civil and the comments much more welcoming for people who don’t regularly comment.” was this part of your response to me?
I don’t think it needs to be. I opposed this contract, and am not happy that we are now stuck with it, but now we have to sort out the mess and figure how we can best deal with the new provisions.
In my school I have a Chapter Meeting scheduled for this week, the day after the DA. We need to make sure that people rely on good information, identify which contract provisions most likely will affect us, and lay out a likely timetable for good info reaching us, and how, to discourage rumor spreading.
(For starters, my DR told me that we would be receiving information as a borough, not as a district. This would not necessarily bother me, but I was hoping to get a ton of info at my DR’s meeting a week from Wednesday. Too bad.)
Jonathan
146 Schoolgal
· Nov 7, 2005 at 2:27 am
Hey Meds,
TIVO is next on my list. There are just shows I like to watch when they are on.
As for treating myself, I took time off from report cards to get a “Spa” pedicure which costs more than a regular one–but I’m worth it.
I’m up late because I finished writing comments on the report cards. Maybe next year I’ll make my life easy and apply for a cluster position even though my principal would rather I stay a classroom teacher. (being a good teacher is also a way to get respect from a principal)
Blogmaster,
Did you erase the “cat fight”? This was better than Dynasty. I play the pretty one of course.
And, when will the Jelly Fish post again?
He’s one Unity dude I enjoy reading.
Leo,
What did you get your wife for her birthday? With all the money we are getting in this raise, I hope it sparkled and came in a blue box.
147 Kombiz
· Nov 7, 2005 at 2:52 am
Jonathan,
No, it wasn’t directed at you. It was a regarding a misunderstanding in the comments above and had nothing to do with the contract. Though it was all under the heading of information directed at you, sorry.
148 mshalo18
· Nov 7, 2005 at 7:19 am
I’m confused- when did 2 faculty conferences a month become the norm? Before the insanity of the 100 minute PD, we had 1 faculty conference a month. Did Randi screw us over once again and sneak in a second?
As for the 10:1 ratio- any middle or high school teacher who didn’t see the 30 kids in a room with 3 teachers thing coming is either naive, stupid, or both. Sorry all, but they did it last time- I called our DR on it and she said, “Oh no, they can’t do that- it’s 10:1″. Morons in the room actually shook their heads in agreement as if she had spoken the gospel.
Kombiz- How do I arrange for someone other than our district rep to come in to my school and share info? Our chapter leader might as well be an administrator and our district rep came straight out and told us she was voting yes for the contract because “I only have 2 more years to go”.
149 jd2718
· Nov 7, 2005 at 11:54 am
There are 2 conferences, one faculty, one departmental (at least at the high school level). I have been around 9 years, and this was old when I came in.
I don’t think high school teachers would have reasonably expected the 30:3 thing. We haven’t seen it (and perhaps we will not). I think it is in the lower levels that they tend to play this sort of numbers game more, though who really knows just now?
Expect your chapter leader to disseminate good, timely information. And then expect him/her to enforce the contractual protections that this new contract will bring into play.
The contract is here. You can mutter about Randi and Leo and Unity and Norman and Jeff all you like. You can mutter about your chapter leader having voted the wrong way. But let him/her do his/her job – get out good info and make sure protections are in place. You should expect that.
Jonathan
150 NYC Educator
· Nov 7, 2005 at 3:56 pm
Schoolgal,
Thanks for your comment. I have to tell you the kid in that picture is not mine, and also that my kid, a girl actually, is far cuter than that kid.
If you like, you may comment on my site without logging in right now. I turn off anonymous comments whenever I get an influx of commercial crap, but usually turn them back on a few days later.
151 Leo Casey
· Nov 7, 2005 at 4:15 pm
1. Randi announced at Teacher Union Day that retroactive would be paid in the mid-December pay cheque.
2. Schoolgal, if you are having a problem with the professional development in your school, and the principal is being uncooperative, we should really have a conversation about what is happening and what can be done. Give me a telephone call [I am in the office almost all of tomorrow, Tueday, at 212-598-6869.]
3. The two conference days, October through May, with the additional 40 minutes, go back to before I started teaching, and if I am not mistaken, go back to before there was a UFT. If your school uses only one, consider yourself blessed. Under the old contract, if your school did the conference days on Mondays, your principal had the right to keep you for 8 hours on that day. Under the new contract, it is down to 7 hours and 37 minutes. I would expect that principals would continue whatever they were doing under the old contract — if they didn’t try to extract every last minute before, it is unlikely they would suddenly change now.
3. Principals who live by the gospel of Captain Bligh will try to make this contract the bane of the existence of teachers, just as they have done with every contract. Our job is to make sure they don’t. Of course, there will be principals who will look for ways to make the 37 minutes as difficult as possible. We need to expect it, and to grieve it as soon as it happens.
4. I took my wife [and my sister, who has the same birthday as my wife, and my three kids] out for dinner and to a play at the Public Theater, Ruby Sunrise. It is a good performance which I recommend. It is a lot less expensive than a Broadway or even off Boradway show, but it was still the sort of evening I can only afford about once a year.
152 redhog
· Nov 7, 2005 at 4:27 pm
Schoolgal: Jellyfish thanks you from the bottom of his tentacles,believe me. I know him as though he were myself.
153 Bklynteacher
· Nov 7, 2005 at 5:37 pm
(Repeated from above)
Mr.Casey
I want to be clear about something.
As a tech cluster teacher, can I propose to my Principal that “my” 37 1/2 minutes be devoted to a M-Th Afterschool Tech Club?
154 Horrible Contract
· Nov 7, 2005 at 6:06 pm
Mr. Casey:
You can only afford an off Braodway play once a year! Surely you jest. You earn at least $130,000 per year from your union activities alone! You live in a lovely home in the suburbs.
Couldn’t you drop this transparent facade already. You know this contract is rubbish — it was pushed through by hook and by crook. It keeps the Unity machine going –it will do nothing for teachers except make them angry and bitter. Most teachers are not anywhere close to maximum salary. They really do scrimp to go the theater because they know it will add to their general knowledge and help them in the classroom especially if they teach English.
When was the last time you were in a classroom, had students curse at you when you asked them to open a notebook or just refuse to do any work no matter how polite or respectful you are to them? Do you call parents at 8 p.m. on your time and pay for the call?
Can’t you just be honest about who you are and what you believe in? Are teachers so gullible and stupid that you can pass off any lie as the truth?
155 Schoolgal
· Nov 7, 2005 at 6:19 pm
Oh Redhog,
Please don’t tell me that YOU are my Jelly Fish. If so, you have one split personality. I prefer my sweet, funny, sexy Jelly Fish to the scary Redhog.
Having 2 after-school conferences a month is also news to me. There was always a faculty conference (Mondays afterschool) and grade conference (during school time).
If principals start calling 2 after-school, then I will hope the Pension Fairy brings back an early retirement incentive.
156 redhog
· Nov 7, 2005 at 6:58 pm
Dear Schoolgal: I can neither confirm nor deny my identity. But I too adore the Jellyfish. He’s brilliant and enchanting. Maybe if you prevail upon the Administrator, the “Jellyfish” could be lured back into the pacific waters of this occasionally tempestuous, but never treacherous blog. Now where is my smileyface icon?
157 Schoolgal
· Nov 7, 2005 at 7:21 pm
In Writer’s Workshop I am trained.
Your style of writing tells me your name.
Blogmaster, How can this be?
This wicked contract has left us weak.
But now my world’s been turned asunder!
The Hog is mean
The Fish is kind
You really must make up your mind.
158 NYC Educator
· Nov 7, 2005 at 7:54 pm
So, let’s see.
The “real teacher” pro-Unity poster was just Redhog posting under another name.
I suppose you could really muster up a huge groundswell of rank and file support like that. Just have one guy write under a dozen names. I suppose that’s just another proud moment in the UFT tradition of union democracy.
It’s not quite up there with depriving the high schools of their chosen academic VP, which happened when Unity decided in 1984 to let the overwhelmingly Unity-supporting elementary teachers help us decide, but it’s certainly worthy of backroom bragging rights.
Who says there’s no taxation without representation?
159 northbrooklyn
· Nov 7, 2005 at 7:58 pm
Bronxteacher-
Randi’s email is uftpres@aol.com. Good luck getting a reply…
160 Kombiz
· Nov 7, 2005 at 8:22 pm
NYC, The authorship was pointed out on the post a couple of days after the post went live. My point in doing it was, first it was a good essay, and two I had been suprised by the mud slinging and wanted to promote a dialogue. It did that, and shortly afterwards I updated the post. To your second point, I had plenty of post to choose from if I wanted to inuadate the site with repetitive posts about the contract, from classroom teachers. I posted a couple, but part of what I’m trying to do is measure the rhythm of the blog, not drown it with posts. Most posts dealing with education go live right around 3:00 to give teachers a first chance to discuss.
161 redhog
· Nov 7, 2005 at 8:28 pm
Don’t jump to conclusions, NYCEducator. You tend to do that. I am one person and address the world accordingly. Don’t be so gullible. Maybe that’s why you have been drawn into so much needless mistrust.It is too easy to “get your goat.”
162 Leo Casey
· Nov 7, 2005 at 9:08 pm
It would be a good idea for folks to make suggestions to your principals on how to use the 37 minutes. The language is flexible enough that principals who want to do the right thing will find it easy to do so. Every principal will be different, of course, but I suspect that with most, a proposal that combined some after school club or other activities with some tutoring would be greeted more favorably.
163 Schoolgal
· Nov 7, 2005 at 9:40 pm
Blogmaster,
I take it you’re the Grand Puba of all things on this site.
How does one get to post? Obviously there is an “inside” connection, but do you take posts from other UFT dues paying customers?
Is Leo Casey really Leo or Randi in disguise? And I wouldn’t be surprised if Klein himself was among us.
BTW, it’s:
rweingarten@uft.org
and she does respond.
I have to thank NYCEd’s site for that address. The day the contract was announced his site was the only one that had info up and running. When I logged onto the comment section, someone gave out Randi’s email. She responded not only to my email, both those of my friends.
Redfish, unlike you, I really don’t see value in this contract. And I do believe the waters will be murky. This contract will make “Jaws” look like cute little Nimo. (and you were mean to Nimo in that movie)
However, if I ever get a LIF, I hope you would be kind enough to pen my response.
Your alter ego does have a great way with words.
164 Kombiz
· Nov 7, 2005 at 10:12 pm
Schoolgal, start by sending me an email.
And, Leo Casey is Leo Casey.
165 Dfreecity
· Nov 7, 2005 at 10:47 pm
The ratification of this contract was on account of the many union members that have come to equate Unity Caucus with the UFT. The blind trust that has been exercised will cost the rank and file dearly. It’s time for a major change, big time.
166 NYC Educator
· Nov 7, 2005 at 10:50 pm
Redhog,
Feel free get your own goat, if you need one so badly. I’d hoped you’d found a more productive way to spend your retirement, but I do not judge.
I don’t mistrust people until they give me a reason. And name-calling is a poor substitute for arguement.
167 HS_ teacher
· Nov 8, 2005 at 12:38 am
Hypocrisy abound!
It is incredible to see the hypocrisy that Jeff Kaufman and his ICE minions can spew. Besides believing he is entitled to grant people authority as a Board member to enter schools “as representatives” of the union (retirees no less, of which they howled against at the Exec Board and Delegate Assembly) he also believes he is above the very principal he supposedly espouses.
At the Executive Board meeting this evening he admitted to seeing “improprieties” of ballots not at his school but still as an example of problems with the contract balloting. He said he that every one of the votes of where he was, was a “no” vote. This wasn’t his point at the time. But later, as he was trying to argue in favor of his resolution for “Secret Ballot Voting” (of which he abstained in voting for), when Randi began to ask him about his claim at knowing the supposed secret ballots were all “no” he began to squirm around it. He began to say, “there was nothing the union could day. It was moot anyway”. “If a Chapter Leader did it then I would say something” (obviously we all see more than our own Chapter Leader everyday – or yourself if you are the Chapter Leader, Jeff). As Randi began to inquire that if this was during the election period, and he had said there were concerns about such improprieties before the balloting began, even on the ICE website alleging “improprieties” encouraging people to e-mail them to him and James Eterno, why didn’t he tell her about it as she had asked him to (both verbally and n writing)? Why is this serious defamation of our democracy and our union not reported when it was right before him AND HE WAS THE ONE SUPPOSEDLY concerned ABOUT IT? Because he doesn’t really care about the principle. He and his ICEes are not concerned about the provisions of the new contract or of “Secret Ballot Voting”, they care about being elected in 2007. This is about politics, politics, politics. Look at their website already and see what they are focused on. It isn’t about “strengthening” the union. It is about electing their own for their own political gain even if you have to smear or destroy the instituion you are allegedly fighting for(see NJ gubernatorial race this year).
At least Jeff was able to admit 2 things correctly. He admitted he didn’t represent the 32,000 “no” votes – I’m sure he couldn’t be more right. But he realized also when he felt he could get his say this evening, and complained to Randi that if people continued to heckle them, then “no business could be conducted in the Executive Board”. Isn’t that exactly what they have been trying to do at so many Delegate Assemblies? He claims it is not his responsibility for what other people say, but neither he, Nick Lacari, nor any other “declared” ICE/TJC people do anything about (if it isn’t themselves heckling). He did say he didn’t like it when they called Randi names either. He is such a sympathizer.
Let us wait for their spin on this meeting. How will they cover, one of their ICEee people yelling at an Exec Board member “What are you lookin’ at? What are you lookin’ at?,” as if enticing a physical fight. Professional. Mature.
Or better yet, his new found love for the NY Post (see
http://edwize.org/ny-post-choice-is-great-except-for-teachers-who-want-a-union#comments).
For those of you who perhaps “sympathize” with some of their view but claim not to be “with “ them, if you don’t denounce the hypocrisy and fallacy, separate yourselves from them and speak for yourselves, then you are as cold and as useless as more ice heading into winter.
168 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 6:46 am
“Hypocrisy abound!”
Boy, I couldn’t agree more.
HS_Teacher, after all his sanctimonious objections to “politicking,” turns out to be a Unity delegate. Yet another candidate for 6-figure Unity jobs and second pensions awarded to the faithful, like democracy-loving Mr. Leo Casey?
Edwize, the web version of monopoly party Unity’s mouthpiece publication, has Redhog, another Unity delegate, as well as an imminent retiree, write prolix platitudinous one-sided inaccurate nonsense about the contract, under a different name, in a plainly disingenuous attempted to sway those of us lacking sufficient time or connections to avoid working under it.
They proudly present this unidentified Unity rep’s writing as “a voice from the trenches.”
And neither HS_Teacher, nor Redhog, nor the ostensibly justice-seeking Mr. Leo Casey spares one word on the unconscionable and plainly undemocratic Unity policy of muzzling the anti-Unity high school contingent by blatantly denying them their choice of VP.
You guys remind me of the guy on the “Hair Club for Men” commercial, who declares “Why would I lie to you? I am the president of the company.”
Why indeed? What possible motivation could you have?
169 jd2718
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:57 am
“The language is flexible enough that principals who want to do the right thing will find it easy to do so.”
Leo, is this the same language that is in the MoA, or has it been revised in some way?
Is your comment about flexibility directed to the activities we perform during the 37½, or the configuration of the time?
And finally, members should realize that –
“a proposal that combined some after school club or other activities with some tutoring would be greeted more favorably”
- but would also directly reduce memebers’ compensation for what would have otherwise been per session activities.
Jonathan
170 redhog
· Nov 8, 2005 at 2:52 pm
Nothing that NYCEducator has to say about me is accurate. Prolix and platitudinous? Aw c’mon, I’m more in the style of Sir Winston, eh?
171 Schoolgal
· Nov 8, 2005 at 3:20 pm
Prolix? I think I saw the commercial for that product. Isn’t that the pill some men take to make their wives happy?
I will look it up, but I seem to remember it has something to do with being long.
172 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 3:51 pm
It’s good you’ve retained a sense of humor, Schoolgal. I think that we’re gonna need a lot of that in years to come.
173 Schoolgal
· Nov 8, 2005 at 4:43 pm
Thanks NYC.
I think the Blogmaster should let you post. I like that your blog is thoughtful and concise. Unlike the Icebergs, you really don’t fly off the handle.
I would also love the point– counterpoint between you and the fish (not the hog). It makes for some exciting reading. I am still trying to figure out the “goat” reference.
I suppose some of the Unity people posting on this site might be going to Neil’s party.
Since I don’t want to be the only person there who voted NO to the piece of crap contract, I’ll stay home. Though if the Fish is going, he should try the fried calamari–it’s the best.
Anyway, I wish Neil all the best, but most of all–good health. Go Erin!!!
174 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 4:51 pm
What party is that–Neil’s party?
175 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 5:00 pm
Oh, I’m sorry, Schoolgal, I though you were talking about a UFT political party.
Scuse me.
176 Schoolgal
· Nov 8, 2005 at 5:07 pm
Neil is a DR who is retired and spends time in Ireland. He is the only guy I know who speaks French with a brogue.
177 shouldhavegonetomeds
· Nov 8, 2005 at 5:25 pm
almost no one is at the polls today. Every vote for Freddy really counts. Don’t forget to get out and vote
178 redhog
· Nov 8, 2005 at 5:32 pm
I like your way of winking with words, Schoolgal. Butyou are harsh and unwarranted in your damnation of the Contract.Time to chill!
179 Lucy2024
· Nov 8, 2005 at 6:16 pm
I find all the bloggers here very entertaining. I look forward to reading your comments so keep up the good work.
Question:
I teach periods 6, 7, and 8 on most days. Does the new contract mean that I will be teaching 4 periods in a row on those days? Let’s not forget that even Bloomberg called it a teaching period.
Also, if I do have to teach four in a row, I supposed I can’t grieve this, egh?
180 Schoolgal
· Nov 8, 2005 at 6:38 pm
Hog,
You are so right. The thought of this contract sends CHILLS up my spine.
This is a WONDERFUL CONTRACT. In fact when I was watching the 2 mayoral debates, I was stunned to hear our mayor say he gave the teachers a 33% raise.
How could your Royal Randi keep such a secret? I would have voted YES if I knew!
In your honor, I will volunteer for lunch duty and gladly cut short my Labor Day holiday plans. I also promise not to punch out until that half second is up.
Your wish is my command!
BTW, the Fish would never have written such a response. I take it the Fish (and his wonderful sense of humor) is dead. Long live the Fish!
181 northbrooklyn
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:02 pm
Leo-I would love to make suggestions about the new period but I need more information that only my principal/assistant principal can provide and they don’t know the answers. Maybe you do: as Lucy2024 points out if I am teaching four in the row does that mean I can grieve? If I have 10 students for an enrichment class, will they be the same 10 all year? Who pays for the materials?
Blogmaster-I suggest you allow everyone to post a new thread and if there isn’t a response in 10 days slide it into the archive folder.
NYC Educator-Neil’s having a party? Where? I want to go, too!
[Who's Neil?]
School gal-thanks for the new email address for Randi…she didn’t tell me she had changed it.
To my fellow peons-the delegate assembly meeting is tomorrow the 9th at 52 B’way manhattan, 4:00. Great cookies and coffee.
182 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:06 pm
Schoolgal,
I love your spirit. Shame on Jellyfraud for trying to quash it.
183 Chaz
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:06 pm
Lucy2024,
Just because it looks like a sixth period, your adminestrators think it is a sixth period and Mayor Bloomberg stated it is a sixth teaching period. Leo Casey will tell you it is not a sixth period. Did I do good Leo?
184 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:24 pm
I agree, Chaz.
While you, Lucy, will be in a room with a bunch of kids in a supervisory capacity for the sixth time, Mayor Bloomberg calls it a sixth period, and you may think it’s a sixth period, Leo Casey, who will not spend one minute teaching, says it isn’t a sixth teaching period.
That ought to be good enough for anyone.
Next contract, when ten more minutes are added on and your sixth period “small class instruction” contains 34 kids, we’ll just email good old Leo and ask him whether THAT is a sixth teaching period.
If he says it isn’t, that should be enough. After all, you can always trust non-teaching paid employees of Unity, the party that’s had an enforced monopoly on power for 50 years.
185 redhog
· Nov 8, 2005 at 7:44 pm
I am NOT trying to quash Schoolgal’s spirit. And the Jellyfish is not dead because he cannot be carried away by the common tide. He is chivalrous and the truth about contracts reposes in his bell.
186 NYC Educator
· Nov 8, 2005 at 8:03 pm
Excellent, Redhog. Your devotion to truth is laudable. Doubtless when you told her to “chill” about the contract you were simply trying to encourage her creative expression. Far be it from you to try to silence the opposition.
Kindly tell me this, then.
Why did the UFT in 1994 change its constitution so that the entire membership voted on all VPs?
Was it to preclude the high school branch, who does not support Unity, from electing their chosen representative? Or was there some higher purpose? I’m all ears.
Michael Shulman, once a voice against Unity, won the position. In a revote, he won by a larger margin. While Mr. Schulman has now parked his car in Unity’s lot, I’m sure there are others who’d like the position.
In the name of sacred tradition of union democracy, why not allow us to choose our own leadership?
187 redhog
· Nov 8, 2005 at 8:23 pm
Every soldier cannot have his own battle plan in the name of democracy.
188 Leo Casey
· Nov 9, 2005 at 11:02 am
The DOE has issued no directives on the 37 minutes, so it is understandable that principals, who by and large got to their current posts by being careful not to stick their neck out, would not want to commit themselves to using it in a particular way right now. However, it makes sense to put ideas into their heads now, because then when the directive appears, they will have already been thinking about what to do.
It is always possible that Klein would try to do a ‘one size fits all’ directive on the subject, even though it is clear that the situations of schools are so radically different as to make such a plan a failure before it starts. Sooner or later, and hopefully sooner, the DOE will have to give schools autonomy to implement the 37 minutes in sensible ways. The language of the MOA is flexible enough to allow the 37 minutes to be used for purposes such as after-school activities.
In terms of per session pay, there are a great many extra-curricular activities that teachers have been doing on a voluntary basis, without pay. Even those activities which were paid, only rarely covered the full time commitment of the teacher. Why shouldn’t that unpaid time be incorporated into the 37 minutes?
189 NYC Educator
· Nov 9, 2005 at 4:13 pm
“Every soldier cannot have his own battle plan in the name of democracy.”
Platitudinous nonsense.
If next week, President Bush announced that Kansas, Texas, and Alaska would be able to vote for New York’s Governor and Senators, it would not be depriving a “soldier,” but an entire state of democracy.
Your bluster far outpaces your logic.
“Why shouldn’t that unpaid time be incorporated into the 37 minutes?”
Because despite the altruism of some, a great many teachers, in fact, do receive pay for such activities.
Because it will set a precedent that teachers need not be paid for such activities, preclude the possibility of teachers being paid for those activities, and set the stage for teachers being assigned those activites, whether or not they wish to perform them.
As per usual, the short-sightedness of our paid representatives is nothing short of astounding.
190 redhog
· Nov 10, 2005 at 2:54 pm
Please note: Redhog has got the last word!
191 redhog
· Nov 10, 2005 at 10:06 pm
Nothing that provides us comfort and prosperity as NYC public school teachers would exist without the gorgeous legacy of Unity. It is true, alas, that Unity has failed to deliver guaranteed world peace, universal justice, or a lower price for cruises to Alaska.
192 NYC Educator
· Nov 11, 2005 at 9:41 am
Redhog, as usual, trades in obfuscation rather than argument. Apparently, he finds it amusing that high school teachers so blatantly disenfranchised, and does not hesitiate to joke about it.
Unity had him write under another name, falsely calling him “a voice from the trenches,” hiding the fact that he is a Unity delegate. He freely engages in fraud, and palns to retire within the year, while the rest of us are dodging burgers in the lunchroom.
No wonder he has no qualms about the contract.
Furthermore, Unity distributed pamphlets urging members to vote for the contract. Opponents of the contract, in another strike against democracy, were denied equal access. It’s oddly reminiscent of Bloomberg vs. Ferrer, a debacle which Unity’s silence helped enable.
So much for the proud “tradition of union democracy” bandied about by non-teacher Leo Casey.
I defy any Unity supporter to deny or defend this.
193 redhog
· Nov 11, 2005 at 4:38 pm
NYC Educator: You state that I am a Unity delegate. I am not. I have been a chapter leader for many years and taken positions, one issue at a time, on their merits. Over the years there have been times when I have been a vocal, even prominent dissenter. However, my non-partisanship is all-inclusive, and thus I do not embrace an opposition, regardless of its platform and principles, just out of sentimentality for the underdog. I am not sworn to Randi, as you tremblingly allege, but I am sworn to my conscience. Constantly and for a long time now, these have become interchangeable and indivisble.
194 NYC Educator
· Nov 11, 2005 at 11:29 pm
You are a CC, you told me. My CC is a voting delegate, and you’ll forgive me if I thought you were too. Are all CCs not voting delegates? Every CC I’ve ever known was.
You’ll pardon me if I don’t take your word about your fierce independence. I’ve seen no evidence whatsoever to support that, or indeed any of your frequent grandiose claims.
If being a CC doesn’t make you a delegate, I stand corrected. I’ll correct myself and start from the beginning. No doubt this will simplify things for you, and finally enable a genuine response on your part. Please note the corrections:
Redhog, as usual, trades in obfuscation rather than argument. Apparently, he finds it amusing that high school teachers so blatantly disenfranchised, and does not hesitiate to joke about it.
Unity had him write under another name, falsely calling him “a voice from the trenches,” hiding the fact that he is a Unity CC. He freely engages in fraud, and palns to retire within the year, while the rest of us are dodging burgers in the lunchroom.
No wonder he has no qualms about the contract.
Furthermore, Unity distributed pamphlets urging members to vote for the contract. Opponents of the contract, in another strike against democracy, were denied equal access. It’s oddly reminiscent of Bloomberg vs. Ferrer, a debacle which Unity’s silence helped enable.
So much for the proud “tradition of union democracy” bandied about by non-teacher Leo Casey.
I defy any Unity supporter to deny or defend this.
195 Civil Servant
· Nov 12, 2005 at 9:12 pm
Instead of concerns with Democracy, I would be happy today with any UFT information, ” When do we see the MONEY “.
196 jd2718
· Nov 13, 2005 at 11:22 am
Civil Servant asks: Instead of concerns with Democracy, I would be happy today with any UFT information, ” When do we see the MONEY”
I wouldn’t want to see discussing one as precluding discussing the other, but….
December 15.
At the Delegate Assembly last week Randi announced that we expect the retro and the raises 12/15. She said that the UFT would be looking to break the retro into 2 payments (tax reasons), that TDA would be taken out (I assume not, if you are already maxed), and that she would ask the next Delegate Assembly to vote NOT to take dues out of that check.
Someone jump in if I missed something important or flubbed a detail.
Jonathan