Log in  |  Search

Central Labor Council

An e-mail from Randi Weingarten from earlier tonight:

“As I told many of you before, the NYC Central Labor Council had enough votes to endorse Mayor Bloomberg for re-election. They refused to hold a meeting until after our contract was first negotiated and recommended by the DA. I asked them to hold off on their meeting until the delegate assembly contract consideration. The CLC endorsed the Mayor today but the UFT abstained from the endorsement.”

Print

63 Comments:

  • 1 NYC Educator
    · Oct 21, 2005 at 4:58 pm

    But, as a direct result of this contract proposal, they didn’t endorse his opponent either.

    It’s a disgrace that the UFT can be bought off so cheaply, with a contract full of givebacks that fails even to keep up with cost of living.

  • 2 mvplab
    · Oct 21, 2005 at 9:32 pm

    NYC Educator:
    Please provide your source for the cost of living figures. My source says that it is in the 2.5% range.

  • 3 Bklynteacher
    · Oct 21, 2005 at 10:30 pm

    Did a google serach and came up with this –

    http://www.nydailynews.com/business/story/337838p-288495c.html

  • 4 NYC Educator
    · Oct 21, 2005 at 10:49 pm

    And that was before the energy hikes.

    http://www.comptroller.nyc.gov/bureaus/bud/econnotes-pdf/volxiii-2-june05.pdf

    “NYC inflation rose to 4.1% in 1Q05 from 3.8% in 4Q04″

    And that’s also before energy hikes.

  • 5 NYC Educator
    · Oct 21, 2005 at 11:01 pm

    Here’s a very recent NY News story saying inflation is 4.8%, considering energy prices.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/355883p-303350c.html

    I had another source that said 4.1, which I posted elsewhere on Edwize, but can’t find right now.

  • 6 mvplab
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:10 am

    By the way, are we all off topic here other than the first comment? I think we’re going to piss off the blog administrator!

  • 7 redhog
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:38 am

    Political endorsements cannot be made lightly or sentimentally. In this less than ideal world, theoretical principle is but one factor in a complex system of considerations. The long-term credibility and resulting influence of the organization must be weighed. Not all angles can be publicly articulated. Sophisticated analysis is not interchangeable with Machiavellianism. Faling to act is also action, and in demurring from an endorsement, the Union’s determination is wise and in the most honorable sense of the word, calculating.

  • 8 DJHarkavy
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 6:03 am

    If we are going to endorse a candidate, especially one that is not likely to win, let us endorse one who REALLY has our interests at heart.

    Seth Blum, Education Party seems to be the way to go.

    And unlike endorsing Ferrer, it is unlikely to get the administration to an even lower level of negotiation with us.

  • 9 NYC Educator
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 7:59 am

    Failing to act is indeed action. How unfortunate the UFT failed to take a principled stand against a virulently anti-teacher mayor and chancellor.

    How unfortunate the UFT to take a stand for Carl McCall, a true friend of education, and instead endorsed George Pataki, who fights against benefits for NYC’s students and teachers.

    How disgraceful the UFT chose silence to purchase a contract, full of short-sighted givebacks, that fails to even keep up with inflation.

  • 10 Frank48
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 9:59 am

    Regarding Bloomberg’s probable election and the emphasis education plays in it-
    here’s part of an article Jimmy Breslin wrote last year detailing the place this hyena Klein REALLY comes from . Obviously Klein doesn’t worry about inflation as he buzzes around Manhattan nightlife as head of the DOE. Can this man be ANY more detached from the world he’s trying to reform?

    Hey Klein – how about focusing on other factors besides teacher bashing ?
    Breslin writes:

    “There is one social promotion that Joel Klein favors highly. He is the chancellor of a school system that has over one million pupils of color, and poor, and here was Klein on Saturday, in Boston at the wedding of John Welch, the former head of General Electric, who was marrying for the second time in a ceremony attended by a small, classy, big name group.

    Joel Klein at Welch’s wedding. His office told Dan Janison of this paper over the weekend that Klein was away on a “retreat.” Where? Why, upstate and we don’t have three minutes to talk to you.

    Joel Klein at Jack Welch’s wedding. That’s only during the day. Otherwise, his social schedule allows you to refer to him, from now on, as All Night Klein.

    Joel Klein at an arts gala at the new Mandarin Hotel in Manhattan. Here is the gossip column report: “This was a crowd of heavy lifters, from school chancellor Joel Klein and his beautiful wife, Nicole, to David Rockefeller, Jr., Richard Avedon, Sophie Dahl, Richard Serra, Jeff Koons, Alex von Furstenberg. Hiro …”

    Another gossip report on this big party for All Night Klein: “… Tina and Harry’s party also hosted British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock …”

    Now, a sudden change: daylight in the Four Seasons Grill. “Henry Kissinger came over to shake Rod’s hand. New York education titan Joel Klein stopped by for coffee, and Pete Peterson also dropped by.”

    From a location not given: “… Tonight, the Rothschilds are hosting a small fund-raising dinner of New York’s elite with … Anne Ford … Klein, and his wife, Nicole.”

    And on and on with reports about All Night Klein, whose job is to identify and serve and live with and assist a million kids who were running around in the rain with, as noted earlier, Mike Bloomberg’s job fluttering in their fingers.”

    Hyena Klein is incredibly detached from the world he’s trying to fix. Please don’t take the crumbs he’s offering you and hold ont the rights in your contract until we get a better offer.

  • 11 Peter Goodman
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 10:21 am

    It must be nice to able to stand “above the fray,” and only do what you think is “ethically and morally” correct – however – most of us live in the rough and tumble real world of politics. One of the major reasons to endorse Pataki was the State funded much of the raise in our last contract. The union is responsible to it’s members, and the endorsement of Pataki was hotly debated and approved by our delegates.

    The union endorsement must be not an exercise in futlity. We endorsed Scott Stringer because 1. Moscowitz declared herself as an enemy of the union, and 2. we totally agreed with Stringer on the issues. We put our troops in the streets, fought hard, and won.

    At the level of Mayor our endorsement has less effect – our members know the candidates. Although we endorsed Green many of our members chose to vote for Bloomberg. Our membership was sharply split over Rudy. Staying on the sidelines this time makes political sense … with a 20% lead and endless $$$ available and Ferrer’s inability to put together a coalition Bloomberg is a winner.

    Politics is a full contact sport … it makes sense to approve the contract and take it off the table and get ready for the next round of battles … and if you think the recent United Auto Workers agreement to cut health benefits won’t resonate n NYC … think again …

  • 12 jd2718
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 10:22 am

    Did the possibility of endorsement come to the delegate assembly? It would seem that a non-endorsement for mayor (and by extension, for chancellor) is a pretty big step.

  • 13 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 10:42 am

    myblab:

    Can i live where ever you live?I mean with just 2.5 per cent inflation! It sounds great. Gee I live in a rent stabilized apartment and I get increases bigger than 2.5 per cent per year!!! That’s why Social Security people just got an increase of 4.1. Now it doesn’t take an MBA from MIT to realize that 4.1 for someone who doesn’t have to leave the house or even wash their face to get it, is even more than 4.1 per cent for going to work. 4.1 for staying home is easily the equivalent of 4.5 for those who actually go to work for it. But teachers didn’t get 4.5, in fact we didn’t even get 3.5 and we have to go to work for it and more now than before.

    Again, please tell me what planet you live on so I can join you in that 2.5 per cent price increase range!!!!!

  • 14 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 10:54 am

    Peter Goodman,

    As someone who joyously voted NO on the contract, I must say I agree with you on one extremely important point. Teachers in some ways have brought their present kismet on themselves. It was they who voted for Bloomberg and Giuliani in no small numbers!!! On some level they had a suicidal masochistic streak which that conduct reflected. I was always amazed how people with Master’s degrees didn’t understand Giulianni and Bloomberg would prove to be their mortal enemies. I can only hope now it is dawning on them. Forget what’s the matter with Kansas, what’s the matter with NYC unionized workers who thought the Republican ticket was somehow for them? I know other union members have voted in these Republicans too but few of them have all the education of teachers,who I’d like to think should have known better.

  • 15 Jack
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 3:55 pm

    With all the “mythinformation” (and this exactly what it is) going on regarding this contract why are New York’s Brightest lining up like lambs on their way to the slaughter. Think about it: if this contract is really as wonderful as Randi would have you believe then why are schools all over the city (mine included) receiving visits from UFT staff to try and ram this contract down our throats. If it so great as Randi would have you believe let the contract stand on its own and let the members vote it up or down. They won’t do it because Randi lives in fear that her political goose is cooked, and guess what Randi, it is! You sold us out for the last time and I for one am going to do all in my power to topple UNITY caucus including trying for a run on a different slate if need be. This is disgusting we pay YOUR salary! How dare you try to insult our intelligence and sell us this garbage using spin and scare tactics. You know damn well there won’t be a strike if we vote no, but what there will be is a union president with no guts to take on the Mayor and Chancellor at a second round of talks. 15% is so great you live on it! Take a pay cut, because in the next election you will be!

  • 16 Bklynteacher
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:45 pm

    Jack, you are being too generous.

    Even today’s NY Teacher states and I quote:

    “In our case, the time for money swap consists of 10 minutes a day and two additional work days a year (three in Brooklyn and Queens) for a tradeoff of 4.2 percent. The rest of the 15 percent increase – 10.8 percent – is a clear raise.”

    We all knew this already but at least the UFT paper is now being upfront about it.

    So let us be equally clear. Our raise is 10.8% for 4 years, 4 months and 12 days (ie. 52 months), not 15%. We are working extra time and being paid 4.2% more for the extra time.

    The police and corrections officers signed a 27 month contract. They are getting 10.25% for this period. From what I read they are giving back a couple of personal days.

    We have been given a raw deal and THAT IS A FACT and not MYTH!

  • 17 NYC Educator
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:50 pm

    It’s a “clear raise” only if you place no value on all the other givebacks.

  • 18 jd2718
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:52 pm

    Three off-topic questions that haven’t been answered elsewhere.

    1. Teachers in Extended Time Schools. How will their hours and pay be affected? This has, to my knowledge, been nowhere addressed.

  • 19 jd2718
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:53 pm

    Three off-topic questions that haven’t been answered elsewhere.

    2. Under the new transfer system, what keeps a principal from rejecting all UFT applicants and hiring off the street? Imaging, if you will, that the principal’s neighbor’s kid just graduated from Teachers College…

    Or remember Diana Lam’s husband? Will that sort of story become legal, and routine?

  • 20 jd2718
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 4:54 pm

    Three off-topic questions that haven’t been answered elsewhere.

    3. Suspensions Without Pay.
    The MoA says that the suspension without pay is for 2 months. Or three months. Or until the 2030a proceeding is complete.

    Does this mean that there will be indefinite suspensions without pay if the investigators, through maliciousness or incompetence fail to complete their investigations and hearings in a timely manner?

    And how does the UFT plan to protect the rights of innocent teachers who are falsely accused? “Sit tight, eat mac and cheese for 3 or 4 months, ask your brother-in-law to make your mortgage payments; we might get the kid out of your class after you are cleared????”

    Actually, our Union says something different:

    “Here are a few of the major gains in the new agreement:

    Put to bed for ever the argument that the union protects sexual predators”

    Who supports this? Who supports suspending innocent teachers without pay, based on OSI’s charges?

  • 21 Bklynteacher
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 5:10 pm

    So I ask everyone, is this contract, with all its controversial givebacks, worth a raise of 10.8% for 4 years, 4 months and 12 days.

    Of course, we can all just vote NO. At least then we can continue with the current contract terms. No extra days …no extra time… no staying later everyday…and no loss of our current rights.

    The newer teachers will still be getting their step raises and differentials under the old contract.
    Those (like me) who are on maximum lose the most financially as we don’t have anywhere to go. But, to me, it’s worth it!

    Send our Mayor and Mr Klein a strong message – Just say NO!

    Sorry if this is off topic but at this point, I think we all know what’s #1 on our minds!

  • 22 Chaz
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 7:56 pm

    Thank you jd2718,

    I have been complaining for weeks how the UFT bigshots will allow OSI to determine probable cause. That’s like, for teachers, going in front of Hitler’s German, or Stalin’s Soviet courts…You are guilty! Any accusation to OSI is probable cause in itself.

    The UFT response to my question was should we protect perverts who prey on students & minors? They knew full well that nobody supports sexual relations or abuse of a student. However, they must do something to deflect the complaints. There is a major difference between sexual relations/abuse and accusations. A student can accuse any teacher of sexual misconduct, the question is how is a teacher protect oneself knowing OSI will automatically assume probable cause which will result in a 90 day unpaid suspension. For teachers living paycheck to paycheck, this is a death sentence for your reputation, credit rating, and your ability to teach effectively. What happens to a student who files the false charges? They will be punished severely by taking them out of your classroom when you return from the suspension. What a joke!

    That is why Leo Casey and his flunkies are attacking me with insults because they know what they agreed to and are hoping the classroom teachers are dumb enough not to realize this potentially dangerous right they gave away; The right of due process. Shame on them and shame on any classroom teacher that does not understand the consequences and votes for this horrible contract.

  • 23 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 8:08 pm

    Of course Chaz!!

    Anyone seen “Capturing the Freidmans”? OSI is not even meant to be impartial, Typically they are not even interested in exculpatory evidence, inculpatory is just fine with them very a la Capturing the Friedmans in fact. Many of our children, emotionally upset and disturbed have viewed inappropriate activity in their homes, etc. They can easily transfer this to a teacher. This is above and beyond everything else wrong with this contract. Time for money is odious but doable. These false charges can be as you say a death sentence for any innocent person. And they are unnecessary for the innocent of course, and even the guilty will be found guilty soon enough and could be made liable for their back wages, let’s say instead of what was negotiated.

  • 24 R. Skibins
    · Oct 22, 2005 at 10:58 pm

    At a junior high school in Brooklyn some 20 years ago, a girl failed a spelling test. Fearing another beating from her parents, she concocted a story that the teacher(who refused to change the failing grade)had molested her. She even got a couple of her friends to corraborate the story! The poor teacher was led out in handcuffs. Shortly thereafter, the two “witnesses” recanted and told the truth. The teacher was freed. He had to transfer to another district, as there were parents who actually believed him to be guilty (you know the type: the same type who think that O.J. was framed).

    If that occured under the proposed contract, even though the witnesses recanted and the teacher was freed, the DOE investigation would still drag on for months. Even when cleared by the DOE, his reputation would not be restored because of idiots who would think that he was guilty.

  • 25 paulrubin
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 12:25 am

    My less than 11% over nearly 4.5 years is just not worth:
    -no more right to file a grievance over a letter
    -90 day unpaid suspensions
    -increased time in cafeteria and potty patrol

    That’s why I’m torn. Not the extra minutes working with kids. That’s why I’m here to begin with. If they wanted to pay some teachers to work with some kids after school for per session dollars, they’d get plenty of volunteers for a lot less cost ot the DOE than paying everyone so talk about stupid management :)

    With the cost of living up higher than the raise, all this really translates to is an almost cost of living adjustment so why are we negotiating away ANY rights?

    And so this is really what it comes down to. Are we really better off or not? Of course if I were retiring in a year or two no way I’d vote this down. I’d be a fool.

  • 26 firebrand
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:14 am

    brooklynteacher…wish there were more folks like you. I am in the middle of my teaching career, 15 years, and hear most of the folks at the end of the line say that they are more than willing to accept this contract and the money.

    I try telling the newbies in my school the same thing and they just whine about how they need the money now…who doesn’t but our rights and self respect shouldn’t be for sale.

  • 27 HS_ teacher
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:51 am

    Hey “jd2718” ,” shouldhavegonetomeds”, “Bklynteacher”, and “paulrubin” you may as well join “chaz”, “firebrand”, and “R. Skibins” and share your feelings about the ICE retiree hypocrisy. (It isn’t true because they haven’t responded to my request on their view of it but obviously they cam to this thread). Just go to
    http://edwize.org/the-courage-of-their-convictions

  • 28 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:52 am

    I am entering my 30th year this winter and am voting no!!! Without sending overly self-rightous I am proud of my principles I saw “Capturing the Friedmans” and I have spoken to members of the Friedman family. That shxt can happen to anyone. Remember the Jews in Europe thought they would be all right in many cases at the outset of WWll. Well they weren’t, were they?

  • 29 HS_ teacher
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:56 am

    “Jack” : Contract interpretation can be complicated sometimes and even when it isn’t complicated there maybe different ways to interpret it and references outside of the mere contract language to understand it. I see it everyday with my colleagues. But an OFFICIAL UFT REPRESENTATIVE such as a Chapter Leader, Delegate , District Rep, or UFT staff member can help clarify particular issues. Things that may not be as controversial right now such as licensure, member benefits, pension, grievances are often handled or advised by these people. Perhaps that is why they’re in the schools now as they have always been with every contract ratification that I know of. But you know what before you believe me or anyone else’s “mythinformation” as you call it maybe you shouldn’t rely on all of the political propaganda (either for this contract in 2005 or the election in 2007) and join some others about the retirees hypocrisy of ICE who have been trying to “ram” their agenda down our throat at:

    http://edwize.org/the-courage-of-their-convictions

  • 30 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:59 am

    And frankly what are the consequences for a special ed child from an impecunios family for making a slanderous allegation against a teacher? It may be the most attention that the poor kid ever receives in his life. I remember a number of years ago I was working in an institution, a student with a history of psychiatric hospital admissions accused a teacher of raping her. (Actually she had been in my class during the time she accused the other teacher of raping her. She liked me better and disliked him because he required more work.) An investigation was launched. Our principal waa very supportive. The man’s family, Japanese and not fully use to American culture was devastated. What would happen with something like this under the new contract?

  • 31 hypatiaNYC
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 7:59 am

    Considering that all the unions are falling all over themselves to kiss Bloomberg’s ass before the election, we are lucky to have gotten any contract offer at all. This may not be the best offer the UFT has ever gotten historically, but it’s surely, considering the political climate, the best offer we’re going to get now. Vote this down and we’ll be sitting here for the next 4 years debating the inflation rate as our salaries sink even further below those in the suburbs.

  • 32 Schoolgal
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 9:50 am

    Am I to believe that the UFT endorsed Pataki because of something we actually deserved?

    Wasn’t Carl our future? Instead you endorsed the past. That is why I never volunteered to work the phonebanks again.

    You guys better hope this city has strong Democratic candidates because there are many wealthy Republicans who can buy a campagin easily.

  • 33 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 12:03 pm

    Let’s respect different viewpoints here but try to post accurate information. ll99 did not endorse Bloomberg but Ferrer. I believe the Transit workers have also endorsed Ferrer. Thankfully our principals’ union also endorsed Ferrer!!! Ms. Jill Levy the Ms Randi Weingarten of the principals’ unions has been especially vocal in her denunciations of Bloomberg. These are irrefutable facts.

    Now for my opinions: How many DC37 Black and Latino members are actually going to vote for Bloomberg? Even if Bloomberg buys I mean wins the election, in a year from now his popularity in the city will be about as strong as his buddy Bush. Two years ago everyone hated that man’s guts. It is amazing what millions of dollars in campaign spending can do when the bulk of your population doesn’t read the issues.

    HypatiaNYC don’t be so afraid they can not recruit and retain memebers on a pay schedule that is years old. Don’t let those few pennies you think you are goin to get stop you from speaking truth to power. If you end up getting suspended without pay for a phony allegation made against you that is worse than having no conract at all.

  • 34 Bklynteacher
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 1:00 pm

    Firebrand

    Remind your newbies they will continue getting their step raises and differentials under the old contract even if the new contract is voted down.

    Of course they need the money. They need to pay those expensive master’s courses. You know the ones the other City Unions DON’T have to take…

  • 35 Frank48
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 3:12 pm

    A veteran teacher friend of mine suspects foul play in the upcoming tally. She said that all the previous ballots were sent to the teacher’s home. The teachers then sent their votes through the US mail in sealed envelopes .

    For some reason this alarmed her.

    Does voting in the individual school buildings make this process more susceptible to corruption ?

  • 36 ampd90
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 3:42 pm

    I am a 15 year plus teacher. In all thise years, I can never recall having received a contract ballot at home. The only ballots I received at home were those for electing union leadership.

    I think that by doing the ratification vote in schools, you will actually have more people voting than if the ballots were sent home.

    I think that all balloting in a school should be witnessed by at least 2 people, and that the ballot envelope should be walked to the local post office by at least two people.

    If I remember correctly, anyone who wishes to witness the actual count at AAA can do so.

  • 37 Bklynteacher
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 4:14 pm

    Frank48

    In 1995, many of us felt the same way. We were wrong. The vote was fair. The contract was voted down and those were the results.

    So based on that experience, I will trust that the outcome will be fair this time also. I just hope those who are voting will really think long and hard about what their YES or No vote and what it will mean for us all.

    Regrets don’t mean much…

  • 38 R. Skibins
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 6:19 pm

    Shouldhave..:

    In 1989, I had a child in my class who had been referred (back when we actually could refer them). This third grader had the intellectual capacity of a four year old with no hope of improvement. His mother, a high school dropout drug addict, overruled all of us with masters and doctorates, and refused placement. The boy lived in a fantasy world. He frequently hid in the closet and thought that he was Batman in the Batcave. One day he claimed that I hit him (he thought that I was the Joker). The assistant principal asked the other students what happened and each and every one said that the boy was lying. Nothing happened to me, and the boy was removed from my class.

    Under this contract on teachers, I would have been suspended for up to three months without pay as a one-sided inquisition lingered on. This is one of many reasons to vote “no.”

  • 39 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 9:43 pm

    R. Skibbins,

    From the bottom of my heart I think this is the most important issue in the contract. An innocent person can so easily be destroyed on this one. There are many deeply disturbed troubled children in our schools. Nothing Bloomberg did or will do will change that. Frankly, knowing the backgrounds I am surprised the poor kids do as well as they do.
    Still the issues of false accusations will not go away. For starters every teacher should see “Capturing the Friedmans”!! Now statistically very few adults actually molest underage children. We have like 83,000 teachers, if there are ten veritable incidents of genuine sexual abuse of children by licensed teachers a year that would be a lot. 10 of of 83,000 of course is about one HUNDREdTH of one per cent, barely one out of ten thousand truly licensed teachers, if that.(Actually too there are more than 83,000 teachers a year as some leave and others are hired) Hence one does not have to have studied statistics at Wharton to realize for all practical purposes there is no statistically significant sexual abuse of children by teachers.

    However, we do have some eccentric, idiosyncratic teachers as you would have in any large group of people. We also have the highly disturbed children very often. This is a volatile mix. There is room for much misnunderstanding, bold face lying, transmogrifying of innuendo, hysteria, petty pecadilloes greatly magnified, etc.

    All good reasons to vote NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Thanks for the feedback. I have tried to be helpful and reasonable in my posts. I also hold a graduate degree in HR as well as being a long time teacher.

  • 40 firebrand
    · Oct 23, 2005 at 10:24 pm

    HypatiaNYC this tentative contract doesn’t even meet the inflation rate once the givebacks are figured in…so what’s the big deal about waiting four years?

  • 41 Peter Goodman
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 11:47 am

    Frank 48 et al

    We always do referendums, contract votes, extended time agreements, etc. in schools – the ballots in double envelopes go to the Amer Arb Assn. They check the eligibility of each ballot. The in-school ballots result in 90 plus percent ballot return. The ballots to homes are for union elections – governed by Dept of Labor rules – and result in much lower ballot returns. There is no data by school or division – once the ballot eligibility is checked they are counted w/o regard to school source.The ballot counting is public and if you enjoy watching grass grow you can drop by and watch the count.

  • 42 CitySue
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 1:36 pm

    Once again, fear-mongering has obscured the facts, this time about unpaid suspensions. First, Can it ruin a person’s rep and career to be charged with sexual misconduct? Of course it can. But that will happen if the person is charged and suspended, whether it’s with pay or not. So let’s keep the issues separate.
    Now, the second part of the obfuscation. Neither the Special Commissioner of Investigations (CSI) nor the Chancellor’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI) can determine probable cause. That may be determined only by an independent arbitrator at a special hearing.
    How long can a person be suspended? If the arbitrator determines probable cause, the unpaid suspension lasts 2 months, except in the following situations: 1. it may last one more month if the disciplinary hearing isn’t over yet and the delay was not caused by the DOE (if the DOE delayed the proceedings, the teacher gpoes back on payroll); OR 2. the teacher also has a criminal action pending in court from the same alleged acts, in which case the suspension remains until the criminal charge is also resolved.
    And by the way, Capturing the Friedmans, while showing what such charges can do to a family, never says in the end that the charges were false, as I recall.

  • 43 jd2718
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 1:55 pm

    CitySue,

    while I may be emphasizing items to highlight why I am voting no, and why I am encouraging others to do so, I do try to stay factual. It would help if we all did.

    You write: “Now, the second part of the obfuscation. Neither the Special Commissioner of Investigations (CSI) nor the Chancellor’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI) can determine probable cause. That may be determined only by an independent arbitrator at a special hearing.”

    But the officer would be directed to find probable cause when OSI did.

    “A rebuttable presumption of probable cause shall exist when the SCI (Special Commissioner of Investigation) substantiates allegations of sexual misconduct…

    “A report from the Chancellor’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI) substantiating allegations of sexual misconduct is relevant evidence of probable cause….

    It is probably worth reading the entire section in the MoA carefully.

  • 44 hypatiaNYC
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 7:24 pm

    Firebrand-

    Waiting a minimum of 7 years for a raise may be all right for some wealthier folks, but it is impossible for me. We’ve already been without a raise for 2 ½ years and my budget is stretched to the hilt. In the last few months both my gasoline and electricity bills have skyrocketed. I can only imagine what heating will cost this winter. And not only will we have to wait at least 7 years for a raise, but what makes you think the offer will be any better in 2010 than it is now in 2005? We’re also unlikely to get retro money that would make the waiting worthwhile since the figures would be too high for the city to make up our losses. If we pass up this opportunity now, we will only fall further behind in terms of both the inflation rate and the salaries in the suburbs.

  • 45 Chaz
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 8:51 pm

    City Sue:

    JD2718 is quite correct. The way I read the sexual misconduct issue is that the Office of Special Investigations will determine “probable cause”. Based upon their past & present investigation pattern, teachers are in deep trouble from an obvious biased group that would go out of their way to substaintiate probable cause.

    I’m sure your not naive enough to believe the DOE/OSI will give the teacher a fair hearing!

  • 46 HS_ teacher
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 9:46 pm

    Thanks everyone for avoiding the hypocrisy itself of using ICE retirees after the ICE members THEMSELVES said that retirees shouldn’t even be allowed to debate it let alone visit schools and falsely present themselves as OFFICIAL UFT REPRESENTATIVES. Of course it doesn’t surprise me.

    Regardless, if you haven’t yet read Randi’s piece in the last issue of the NY Teacher I think it is quite well written and reflective. It may make you think a little more.

    http://www.uft.org/news/teacher/schools/instantaneity/

  • 47 firebrand
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 10:18 pm

    hypatial
    not worth it. we can get them back to the table. The mayor is not going to want to have this over his head. 3.2% is nothing I have bills, I have three children, student loans a mortgage, an oil burner to fill. 3.2 is going to make very little difference in my budget but will cost me a huge chunk of self respect if I give up my rights…which are invaluable and not at all for sale..not now not ever.

    that angry dwarf is counting on us believing he won’t come back to the table…he’s calling our bluff…besides there’s always the slimest of chances he won’t win…

  • 48 R. Skibins
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 10:26 pm

    It’s funny how the Weingartenists accuse us of fearmongering, when it is they who use a threat of a strike if we vote “no.” Instead of supporting their view with facts, they say that it is the best that we can do, they hurl insults at those opposed, and then accuse those opposed as starting the insults!

    “Absolute power corrupts absolutely,” a great mind once said. Unity, once the radicals, are now the establishment. It’s time for new blood at the top!

  • 49 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 24, 2005 at 11:25 pm

    I think it was very clear from “Capturing the Friedmans” that the charges are false. I have personally contacted members of the Friedman family.

    As for the OSI they couldn’t be honest how Stancik died, they are going to give you a fair hearing. Stancik was pining away for years and we had to have our intelligence insulted hearing that he had a bad heart. I mean he indubitably had a bad heart but that was hardly the cause of death. But even Roy Cohen didn’t get the free pass on the cause of his death that Stancik did.

    For those suspended without pay, for those brought up quicker on specious 3020a charges, now that you can’t grieve letters in the file, etc., you will find that no amount of money could make this contract worthwhile. As a union we are here to help one another. Who can help someone when they have no pay check and their credit rating is about to be demolished? Even if you go back on payroll, incidentally best to get your own lawyer and not rely on the union, there’s 10 to 15G right there, your credit rating can be demolished for quite some time.

  • 50 NYC Educator
    · Oct 25, 2005 at 5:56 pm

    No, we know we can always caount on Unity to do about the same. During the boom years of the nineties, we took zeroes. Now, while NYC has a surplus, you give away the store and get us less than cost of living.

    We can always count on Unity, through bad times, to assure us that a bad contract is the best they can get, and through good times, to get us nothing or damn near close to it.

    16.9% of New Yorkers voted for Bush. We know better here. We can and should do better here. The cops, the correction officers, and even the sanitaition workers did better than us.

    But we can always count on the comforting voice of Unity, the party that’s been in power forever, through good times and bad, to tell us “That’s the best we can do, and anyone who disagrees with us is delusional.”

    Well, I’ve come to believe you. I’m absolutely convinced that bringing us from the highest to lowest paid teachers in the area is indeed the best you can do. And I’ve also come to believe that it’s time for all the opposition parties to unite and bring in some new blood. Why?

    Because you couldn’t do any better, and anyone who thinks you could is delusional.

  • 51 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 25, 2005 at 11:10 pm

    NYC educator

    But we dont’ know better here. people who despise Bush love Bloomberg his multi-million dollar benefactor and supporter of the Iraq War, as long as people with surnames like Bloomberg aren’t actually killed there.

    Anyone who comprehends Msrketing 101 can see Bloomberg is the Republican package targeted for the New York area. Any company targets their product slightly for different demographic, geographical groups,etc. and Bloomberg Harvard MBA that he is, is a real master. I notice his ads don’t even mention the word Republican.

  • 52 hypatiaNYC
    · Oct 25, 2005 at 11:53 pm

    Meds-

    Now you’re moving in the right direction. Our enemy is not each other, it’s not Randi, it’s not the leadership of this union, it’s not our colleagues, to some extent, it’s not even the administrators who are living in their own special hell. The real enemy of teachers and the UFT is Bloomberg/Klein. We have a small group within who would have you think otherwise, but as we move forward from the contract ratification vote, we need to band together now more than ever and find ways to fight our real enemies: those horrors at City Hall and Tweed who would happily dismantle the public education system to please their Republican masters.

  • 53 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 12:49 am

    I never attacked Randi and I have mentioned repeatedly on the blog not to do so. I think she is a hoot actually. Lots of fun.

    But I still did not vote for the contract. I spoke with too many lawyers who told me we were ceding too many rights. (I am not an attorney, but for odd reasons in my life, I have endless dealing with them,)

    I also am very fond of Fire Island the last week of August. Now if Randi was going to show me a real Long Island style pay scale I could be persuaded there I suppose. But I am talking Syosset or thereabouts with top of $120K!! $93K at the top is a joke on us. You don’t start at a law firm with that and Randi well knows it.

  • 54 NYC Educator
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 4:32 pm

    Shouldhavegone,

    Bloomberg was extraordinarily lucky 4 years ago. 9/11 elevated Rudy from bum to saint, the democrats ran a bruising primary, and the inept candidate left standing managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. His billions of dollars doesn’t hurt either.

    Nonetheless, I don’t think there is much coverage in the press of what’s really happening in schools. You have Michael Winerip, occasional columns from Bob Herbert or Juan Gonzalez, and then all other coverage appears to be spoon-fed from Klein’s wishlist.

    I certainly agree that New Yorkers are making an egregious error in voting for Mayor Mike. Nonetheless, I think on national issues, we’re not Kansas just yet.

    PS Do you ever notice you never see Giuliani and BinLaden in the same place?

  • 55 mrirwin121
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 5:56 pm

    NYC Educator

    While I agree with 99.9% of what you say, I don’t understand the following, and I quote: “PS Do you ever notice you never see Giuliani and BinLaden in the same place?”

    Please explain to a simple uniformed teacher. Thanks

  • 56 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 6:07 pm

    NYC Educator,

    Love your blog. Actually, I hate to disappoint you here but my hero, Bob Herbert has been giving Mike a free pass too. However, there is anyother News writer, Erol Lewis I believe right up there with Juan Gonzalez. Today in the News (!) Diave Ravitch noted how bogus the tests scores have been. (Why did the UFT feed into them so – to reap a bad contract?) Also today the Times notes a large usually electorally significant swath of Queens just not buying any of the Mike BS or at least very skeptical of it. Today the Times also prints letters criticizing their endorsement of Bloomberg noting how free speech is repressed totally a la Giulianni, and how there really is no democracry when someone just buys the election.

    However,I suspect even if the dwarf wins it will be just like his great buddy Bush last year. Who can believe he was on his way to re election fewer than 12 months ago? Look at him now!!! And it is great for us because with Bush denuded I feel my Social Security check so much safer. Mike will be the same way, expensive, slick highly targeted TV ads every five minutes don’t change the reality of the situation. New York is so grossly expensive now, that sheerly from an economic viewpoint if you don’t make $200G you shouldn’t even consider the place. Families of all types including single households are suffering. Yes, there is another New York of which Freddy speaks. The problem is that that other New York is close to 95 per cent of the working population.

  • 57 NYC Educator
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 7:46 pm

    mrirwin,

    I don’t know–there were only two people who actually benefitted from 9/11, so I was thinking perhaps a symbiotic relationship or even a Superman/Clark Kent type thing–I could be wrong, of course.

    Seriously, 9/11 revived Rudy’s career, unfortunately.

    He made Bill Clinton look like an altar boy, going to court to demand the right to bring his mistress into the home he shared with his wife and two young children. I certainly hope that kills his presidential aspirations. How Clinton basherws
    will be able to rationalize supporting Rudy is beyond me.

    Shouldhavegone,

    Thanks for your kind words.

    Despite a few questionable employers in her past, I adore Diane Ravtch, and I’m thinking of getting a little statue of her for the dashboard of my car. I’m disappointed to hear Bob H. has been supporting Mayor Mike, but now that the Times charges to read the op-eds, I don’t see them as much anymore.

    He has written some very good stuff on NYC schools, though. Much of what I read about education, even in the Times, could be corrected if they took the time to consult with one single working teacher. Most education writers don’t consider that worth their time.

    As for life under Mayor Mike, I can’t figure how a teacher, raise or no, can ever afford to buy a home here. I was priced out of the neighborhood I work in 13 years ago, and prices have quadrupled since then.

  • 58 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 8:08 pm

    NYC educator,

    I am with you 100 per cent. One would feel even Ray Charles could see these things they are so obvious. I am at max with the DOE, single, do not smoke, drink,or have a car. I have a rent stabilized apt. I earn about 22G above max on the side. I earn more than my friends/neighbors in the vast majority of cases

    I can not afford present day Manhattan with the above scenario. I mean who can? Incidentally, I am not your typical teacher when it comes to spending. I adore Sardi’s, The Four Seasons,Broadway, 21, new bistros, (think nothing of calling Ruth Reichel or whoever at The Times, to ask the real deal on a restaurant). The opera, maintain numerous museum memberships, The person I socialize with most is a physician. Yet, This is almost impossible for me as a single. Who is Bloomberg kidding that anything is going on well for the average New Yorker?

    As for Giulianni don’t get me going and yet he was a real highlight for so many of our moron teachers. How people couldn’t see through that 9/11 crap. I was not the brightest one in school, no but I saw where he was going with that 9/11 in about a half day.

    Love your Bin Laden/Giulianni thing!! What a crude low -life bastard.

  • 59 NYC Educator
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 10:23 pm

    I also work quite a bit apart from my day job. While I really love my day job, I’ve never, ever been able to make a living from it.

    I have to say that even my right-wing colleagues favor neither Rudy nor Mike. One of the very few opinions we share is the one regarding the contract proposal. There are very few teachers I know of who could defend Mike or Rudy, (Only one comes to mind) but I can’t argue with your characterization.

    Al Sharpton said Bozo the Clown could have done as well as Rudy after 9/11. The man had just presided over the worst disaster in the history of the city, and his emergency command post was on the 20th some odd floor of the WTC, a proven target for terrorists. The press made nothing of that, and Rudy commandeered a public school, because they have no value whatsoever, to replace it.

    He then suggested he needed to stay on, not standing for election, in order to “keep up the morale” of NYPD and FDNY, to whom he’d been denying a contract for years.

    Then, of course, he got knighted, and became Time’s Man of the Year.

  • 60 NYC Educator
    · Oct 26, 2005 at 10:34 pm

    There’s a glitch in the posting system that often doubles the last word in a line, and repeats it on the next line.

  • 61 redhog
    · Oct 27, 2005 at 6:33 pm

    a glitch
    glitch?

  • 62 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 27, 2005 at 10:41 pm

    Bravo to Jill Levy, President of the Principals Union. She said she endored Ferrer. No one could buy her silence. Are you listening Randi?

  • 63 shouldhavegonetomeds
    · Oct 28, 2005 at 1:03 am

    NYC Educator,

    Love all you say!!! Glad to see teachers are becoming anti-Rudy?Mike. But you know it is a little “Judgement at Nuremberg” hers now. Rudy/Mike could not have won without teacher votes. They had thin margins. Now no one did it. Give me a break.