Filed under: Uncategorized
Just posted on the UFT’s website.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 7:29 pm
So does this mean we 100,000 teachers may be deprived of all the benefits of the proposed contract, the”Roadmap to a Sixth Teaching Period?”
Like the 30 minute 6th class?
And the three days?
And the ten minutes?
And the lunchroom patrol?
And the impossiblility of grieving letters?
And the lack of transfer possibility?
And the merit pay?
And the abridged summer break (severely abridged for those of us who have to work summer school!)
All I can say is, apart from whole wheat bread in the cafeterias, that’s the only positive thing Bloomberg’s accomplished for city schools.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 7:40 pm
The shadowy figure the groundhog sees is Klein. Maybe that accounts for the poor creature’s mad dash for shelter.Even a groundhog can’t barf in public.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 7:57 pm
You forgot the 10 additional unpaid coverages, as well as the suspension without pay upon an ALLEGATION of misconduct. This punitive proposal violates due process. You are entitled to back pay if the ALLEGATION is unproven. However, try explaining it to your bank, or mortgage lender as to why you will be unable to make your monthly payments as you wait for your hearing. This is a punishment!
· Sep 27, 2005 at 8:11 pm
· Sep 27, 2005 at 8:16 pm
Copy and Sign the petition. Instructions on our demonstration at UFT headquarters will follow:
Referendum on Not Using the Fact-finding as a Vehicle
The undersigned members of the United Federation of Teachers, pursuant to the Constitution, hereby request that a secret ballot of our members currently working for the Department of Education be conducted forthwith to determine whether or not the fact-finding report issued in the current negotiations should be used as a vehicle for further negotiations with the City.
Pending the receipt of the results of such ballot no ballot of the membership shall be had seeking to authorize a strike.
Printed Name Signature School District
· Sep 27, 2005 at 8:49 pm
Hey Jeff – I was at the upper west side protest today, protesting Klein. Where the hell were you? Writing some inane pettition about a contract that the mayor hasn’t even given us yet! Fighting the same monster from last week. I almost respect the fact that you don’t think that the PERB report should be a vehicle if you didn’t make everything so political, it’s all about your ego. It’s just the same strawmen I see you playing over and over! I’ll wait to see what the contract looks like before I comment, you’ve got zero credibility with me.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:00 pm
Steve Gillard gets Bloomberg!
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:01 pm
Glad to see you agree. If you really believe the membership is for using this fact-finding report as a vehicle you obviously bought a lemon. When some of the District Reps went into the schools to talk up this sellout all that they said was 11% raise.
I did not know about the rally today. I surely would have gone if I had known. But my message would not be to threaten a strike so that we can giveback all what our Union has fought for in the last 40 years.
Politics is not something I or any one person can create. I do not want to work the extra periods and I surely don’t want to do lunch duty in my school which is located within a prison on Rikers Island.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:06 pm
You have some gaul. You want two pieces of the same pie. You and your minority contigent (a small minority at that)couldn’t even get 10 percent of the vote at the DA. Now you want a second chance. The DA voted and that is the ruling body of the UFT. This wasn’t a stolen vote, it was mandate from the delegates for the leadership–which you as an executive board member are a part of–to responsibly try and get the city back to the negotiating table to help us achieve a fair contract settlement. I don’t think you are doing your fair share in that effort.
In fact, I’m considering sending an email to the UFT asking them to have your exec. board election recalled because of your malfeasance in that position. (Let lawyers decide whether it is misfeasance or nonfeasance.)
As a high school teacher you obviously don’t represent me and I didn’t and won’t ever vote for you, but I have to live with you until your term is up. Or, maybe I don’t!
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:12 pm
Jeff – Having seen you in DA’s, I respectfully decline your petition.
It’s called hammer meets nail jesse. Like Bush is to tax cuts as the miracle medicine of any problem, Jeff Kaufman is to trying to throwing a wrench into the gears of the union.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:32 pm
The comment by Jeff is off topic and I’m surprised it hasn’t been removed. It should be.
A friend at the exec board last night told me that three people abstained from supporting a resolution to accept and implement the recommendations of the action committee. One of the three is Jeff Kaufman.
When push comes to shove, Jeff abstains!
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:39 pm
I received the full fact finding report with all the raise, and all the give backs in them. Maybe the membership never received that. The people I know, know there’s a process, I think most of the fact finding report would honestly would get voted through my school if it was in the final contract. I’m willing to use the fact that now everyone knows the mayor has screwed us to make my voice louder. I’ll unload my powder on Bloomberg until then.
Well, I’ll be happy to email you in the future when I know of a protest. It would be refreshing to see you do something besides sniping at other unionist. In college in Kentucky, I saw real unions fighting for their future, and there like here, I despised the people taking shots when the chips were down.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:43 pm
Do you think we are going to have a massive rally on the day after election day? At the DA last week we approved that our Union go into full action. While it is true I was against the resolution since it called for the use of the fact-finding report as a “vehicle” I do not oppose actions that lead to the rejection of these givebacks. I abstained because the resolution last night was redundant.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 9:46 pm
In Kentucky, it was people from the right inside the union who were taking the shots. Too many pro-choice candidates endorsed, etc.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:05 pm
You can’t weasel out of your voting record now.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:06 pm
I’d love to support the union, and I’ve strongly supported it for most of the 20 years I’ve taught here. I’ve also been writing in support of it for years. But I voted against the last contract because I felt it was a bad precedent–that it would lead to things precisely like what PERB proposed. And I can easily imagine what comes next. Can’t everyone here?
What the union posts as a contract basis is just terrible, and sweetening it by swapping the coverages for merit pay is a slippery slope.
I agree with every negative comment about Bloomberg and Klein. But to me, the reasonable thing to do is use what little power the Taylor Law gives us. We should refuse to capitulate to these conditions, which we won with YEARS of zeroes and miniscule raises. If City Hall wants to buy that back, let them pay for the years we made sacrifices, PLUS this year. Otherwise let them forget it. In fact, let them forget it anyway.
Juan Gonzalez writes, quite correctly, that lunchroom duty is better left to the para, and that assigning teachers to it has no educational merit whatsoever. Personally, I found it the most repugnant chore I ever had to perform, and few, if any, of the hundreds of kids I supervised were my students. I was also not too keen on assisting secretaries and paraprofessionals with paperwork or wandering the halls telling kids off with their hats.
I love to teach. Why won’t the UFT support us and help us do this, rather than dumping us into tasks in which we are no earthly help to kids?
It’s simply not that big a raise, barely cost of living, and not nearly worth these draconian givebacks.
I would love to support the union again. I would love to be persuaded otherwise. Thus far, though, I haven’t seen even the ghost of an affirmative argument to justify making these sacrifices for the pittance they’re throwing us.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:33 pm
Okay, enough bad-mouthing. We all agree the arbitratiors contract proposal sucks and even the correction officers are getting a better deal. However, I can’t see how Randi (or any other union member) can make garbage appear to be appealing to the rank and file. Yes, she can tweak the proposals here and there but garbage is garbage. It would be best to reject the proposal and start from scratch.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:35 pm
I’m not going to try to convince anyone on this blog, but the leadership is certainly following the will of the majority of the membership–go get the Kleinberg administration off its butt and see what we can get out of them that’s better than the fact-finding report.
It was only a few days ago that Kleinberg even acknowledged the recommendations trying to play catch up when he realized that the NYTimes might not endorse him unless he settles with us.
See the http://www.uft.org to see the history of Kleinberg’s lies.
If Kleinberg continues with these little games, our members will get so pissed off that they will be forced to exercise the nuclear option. I’m ready!
I hope there won’t be any abstentions!
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:40 pm
Hey, mvplab. When you attended the Exec Board meeting yesterday did you notice that Weingarten and Mendel admitted that UFT meetings are not run by any rules (or at least the rules that our Constitution requires)?
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:43 pm
As the admin of the blog I have two requests of all the commenters. Please treat everyone with respect, and please, please keep the comments on the topic of the post. It makes it easier for new people coming into the comment section to not see a conversation continued from several posts ago. Something on the contract comes up every few days so there’s plenty of oppourtunity to post into those threads.
The story that I pointed to above is about the same song that Bloomberg has played over and over again. There’s nothing in this comment thread about that! It may come to deleting off topic comments but we’re the same thirty or so people commenting, so I hope I don’t have to decide what’s on topic and what’s not.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 10:53 pm
New correction officers will now make $3,000 less. Is anyone suggesting that we do the same? I don’t think so.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 11:08 pm
In the 17 years that I have been teaching, I have attended every rally which the UFT has held. I always protested for contracts which were improvements over the previous ones. The contract which we are currently under was a major step backwards. The extended day sellout was deplorable. When the arbitrators counted time spent teaching in front of the whole class, they didn’t count the time when students were pulled out for special education services, or for capping violations. Even with the four or five students pulled out, we still had up to 50% more students in front of us than on Long Island! So we ended up with roughly a 16% pay raise for 15% more work. So, it was only about a 1% raise! Instead of rejecting that finding, our union leadership rolled over and played dead, insisting that it was the best contract that we could have. BULL! So, we got stuck with longer working hours, and a schedule that changes from year to year.
The genie had been uncorked. The pattern is now set to increase the school day with each successive contract. Put the genie back in the bottle by rejecting any contract which extends the school day even further, or takes away vacation time. We will never get those days back once we lose them. Do you want proof? Think: will we be going back to a 6 hour, 20 minute school day? (Still longer than many Long Island districts!)
Now, I cannot imagine anyone fighting for a contract which is worse than the current one. If you are reading this, you must spread the word: Reject ANY contract with ANY givebacks and/or sellouts.
· Sep 27, 2005 at 11:41 pm
Let’s see! Now that Kleinberg has come to the table, let’s stand firm and go back to our original proposal:18 percent raise;a career ladder for all titles; skills and knowledge salary differentials; differentials for serving in hard to staff schools; no layoff; 25/55 retirement; uniform school day without the 100 minutes, etc. etc. And let’s ignore the fact-finders report!
What do you imagine Kleinberg will do? Are you so optimistic that they will cave? If they don’t what next? Go ahead and say it because like I’ve already said it in other comments, I’m ready! Are you?
Remember, that no matter what comes down, active members have to ratify the proposed agreement! They have the final say!
· Sep 28, 2005 at 12:11 am
As an executive board member of the UFT, it is dismaying to see the personal attacks on Jeff Kaufman posted here. Jeff is a strong trade unionist who has the courage to fight for what he believes in. He and I both strongly believe that any contract that uses the fact finding report as a vehicle to achieve it will be a disaster for UFT members.
I think we must reject the fact finding report because the horrific givebacks contained in it will make our working lives hell. Bloomberg is now negotiating from the fact finding report as the center of the new negotiations. We cannot prevail under these circumstances. It’s just a question of how much we will lose.
The UFT is calling it Ground Hog Day with Bloomberg repeating over and over again that the contract would soon be settled, and then nothing gets done. However, Bloomberg is trying to look like a statesman by saying he’ll take what the fact finders recommended and make that the contract. Look at what he said in today’s Daily News: “Let’s go with the person who came down the middle, looked at both sides and came up with something that they thought was a balance.” We know the reality that Bloom/Klein have done nothing to improve learning conditions in schools, but by our accepting that fact finding report as a vehicle to achieve a contract, Bloomberg is now calling us on it.
While I did not abstain at the executive board last night on what was a redundant resolution approving an action plan we pretty much already approved last week, I think it will be very difficult to mobilize members in our schools to take industrial action based on trying to win a contract that uses the fact finding report as a vehicle.
The fight on fact finding should continue despite last week’s vote in favor of using at a vehicle at the DA (It was not 90% in favor as someone said; it was lower). At the DA, The president clearly violated Roberts Rules by dominating debate. The president is not supposed to debate from the chair in support of a motion yet Randi Weingarten spoke from the chair for over 40 minutes in favor of using the fact finding report as a vehicle to get a contract. Nobody in opposition was given over a minute or two to speak against the fact finding report. That’s not exactly a fair debate. Anyway, the report must be brought up again and rejected if we are really going to fight for a decent contract not based on givebacks.
The members in the schools need to be completely informed as to what these givebacks could mean for their working lives. Let’s level with everyone about what the battle is about. We’re fighting to preserve all of our hard won rights and not sell half of them for a few dollars that will barely be a cost of living adjustment.
letter in the file
· Sep 28, 2005 at 6:24 am
Complain Directly to the Authors of the Fact-Finding Report!
According to “Here He Goes Again (Part II),” which was posted on the UFT’s Website as part of the article “Groundhog Day”:
HERE HE GOES AGAIN (Part II)
September 27, 2005:
Today, at a press availability in Queens, the mayor said he wanted to accept the fact-finding panel’s recommendations. At the same time, in Manhattan, his negotiating team was demanding a significant departure from the panel’s own recommendations on critical issues of the use of time and lead teachers.
“This is another delaying tactic to make it look like they want a deal when their actions prove otherwise. I’ve negotiated contracts for 20 years. If they wanted to get to a deal, we would get there. I’m here and ready to negotiate 24/7, ” Weingarten said.
# # #
Whether Mayor Bloomberg wants to accept the fact-finding panel’s recommendations, or whether his negotiating team is looking for conditions of employment that are even more favorable to management, the point is that the report is highly favorable to management on numerous key issues. Also, the report fails to recommend a sufficiently large salary increase.
Why not complain directly to the authors of the fact-finding report concerning their recommendations for givebacks, or any of their other recommendations (such as that rather paltry salary increase which does nothing to balance NYC and suburban salary scales)?
Here is the contact information for each of the three fact-finders, just in case anyone would like to let the panel know exactly what its report is worth!
Carol A. Wittenberg:
Ralph S. Berger, Esq.:
Jack D. Tillem, Esq.:
HS SHOP TEACHER
· Sep 28, 2005 at 9:34 am
James Eterno is appalled at “the personal attacks” on Jeff Kaufman? Eterno and Kaufman and Norman Scott have done nothing but issue personal attack after personal attack on Randi Weingarten, because they have no political alternative to offer. And there are going to be appalled because someone calls them on their nonsense. They can’t get anyone to read their blog, so they come here and fill up the comments section with their personal abuse and ad hominem attacks. They lose a vote by a 9 to 1 margin, and instead of rethinking their position — or even better, rethinking how they act in meetings, doing every possible to disrupt actual discussion and debate with deleterious points of order, such that everyone in the Delegate Assembly and the Executive Board groans everytime they are called on — they argue that the process is not democratic.
The UFT is in a battle for its life, the most critical struggle in thirty years, and Kaufman, Eterno and Scott are a bad sideshow to the real events.
· Sep 28, 2005 at 10:58 am
I totally agree with mvplab’s idea of pitching the 18% and no give backs…. Everyone should have guessed that Bloomberg would show up at the table and say “Let’s use the FF as a contract”.
· Sep 28, 2005 at 12:21 pm
I sat at the DA, listened to speakers, a few were rude and obnoxious, and after over an hour of debate the resolution was overwhelmingly accepted. All contracts are compromises, you like parts (this time the dollars) and don’t like other parts (coverages …) …the teachers I work with are willing to accept the f-f report … hopefully w/o the coverages … I have full confidence in the membership. I hope that Randi can provide us with a contract to vote on … by the way rejecting the f-f report does not mean you go “back to negotiate,” it means you escalate the combat … probably Kleinberg will claim they have the right to unilaterally impose changes and off we’d go …
· Sep 28, 2005 at 12:24 pm
Is the fact-finder’s report a slippery slope. Absolutely.
Holds outs say “Fight for more”. They point out over and over how bad a precedent this is, how bad the new contract could look.
But there was something I learned in my late teens.
There is how things SHOULD be, and how things ARE.
Anyone who thinks NYC in 2005 has the political climate to not only maintain the current contract, but get improvements upon it, is simply in lala land.
Let’s idiomize the world we are living in:
- Bankruptcy is going to be harder for people to declare, even though most bankruptcies are caused by loss of job, medical bills or divorce.
- The banks are allowed to nickle-dime people for everything. Who does it affect the most? Those who can least afford it.
- Public transit and gas keeps going up and up and up. Service is not improving.
- The margin between the top 1% and everyone else keeps increasing. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy since 2001 would have paid for Katrina relief.
- The cops and firefighters got screwed on their last contract.
This is the political climate we live in.
Anyone that thinks they can get better then they have, or even retain what they have, is overly influenced by SHOULD be rather than what is actually achievable.
And those people will have everyone else go down with them while they hold out for utopia.
· Sep 28, 2005 at 3:38 pm
You’re wrong, devil’s advocate.
In fact, under the Taylor Law, we have the absolute right to retain what we have. Personally, I think that’s preferable to accepting this contract. Tempting though the money may be, it will lead to far worse things in the future.
Also, I fail to see how throwing up our hands and giving up without a fight will improve anything for anyone. Live your life like that if you wish. If you take that road,I sincerely wish you good luck, and you’ll surely need it.
· Sep 28, 2005 at 6:51 pm
The bickering continues, teachers don’t care about what happened at the DA High School Shop Teacher! We care about getting a contract that gives us a raise that starts to narrow the gap between the city and suburbs without the outrageous givebacks that our union seems to accept, respect in the classroom, and a disaplinary process that penalizes the DOE by giving teachers triple pay (teacher RICO) when 3020-a charges are found unfounded by the hearing officer. Then and only then would I agree to a suspension without pay agreement.
As for the correction officers, they get 10.25% for 27 months with 5% starting at the beginning of the contract (not 0% for the first year) and few givebacks and they only need a GED to qualify! Yes I would sellout the unborn. Just wait and see if the city can get a $25,000 teacher. The city would quickly cave and would find the money to raise starting salaries.
My solution, start from scratch and get back the 20 minutes we gave up last time, even if we have to wait out the mayor.
· Sep 28, 2005 at 7:38 pm
“My solution, start from scratch and get back the 20 minutes we gave up last time, even if we have to wait out the mayor.”
That gets my vote.
· Sep 29, 2005 at 12:12 am
It is interesting hearing from someone like “NYC Educator” again and again. Apparently you seem to be all over the place making your comments known on many postings and sites as you can. Thanks. On several postings here, as well as you advertised once before in another post, from the ICE blog you claim you are not an ICE representative. But your arguments are still selective and emotive with little truth behind it.
Citing the Marx Brothers is an ingenious way of getting my attention. Whatever it is we should vote against it – “vote NO” you say. What am I voting against? I didn’t realize it was currently my time to vote. At the DA I voted. The next DA is not for a another few weeks. So what am I voting NO about? On this posting and in others you make a long list of things in “this crap contract” – coverages, 3 days, etc. I don’t remember a contract being negotiated YET – with any of those things! But some how whatever comes out of negotiations, if anything comes out, Just Vote No! I don’t know your relationship to Nancy Reagan but if I may make a suggestion why don’t you turn to your ICE colleagues – of course which you have no allegiance to – and ask them what other constructive alternative have they made.
If the DA has made a decision, as much as you may disagree about it, do you really think whining about “the leadership” and “Randi” does any of our membership any good? Forget the DA then, let’s turn to the Political Action Committee in which ICE members sat on (James Eterno), and see what other alternatives or suggestions they have.
At the other evening’s Executive Board, the committee’s agreed upon resolution about further chapter building, community outreach, borough and citywide actions, etc., was presented. James Eterno, member of ICE that actually sat on the committee and I would assume agreed on the resolution motioned to table the resolution he supposedly agreed upon. (Although he didn’t abstain from voting as he said,it is a rather convienient thing to leave out don’t you think?) In other words this is not the time to talk about the resolution (mobilization, organization, etc.) WHAT ON EARTH ARE THESE GUYS DOING? Did the whole world change in just 4 days (when the committee met)? It seems that they believe that now, weeks before a possible strike authorization, that they (ICE) should simply sabotage all of the efforts of our Chapter Leaders and members are making to mobilize and organize. Do you really believe that you need to throw the baby out with the bath water and destroy what 40+ years has created simply because you didn’t get what you wanted, Jeff? Why aren’t you “NYC Educator” and others asking what is it they want and what other constructive alternative can they give? Is democracy that painful to you that you cannot stand the support the leadership has? Can you not find the words or arguments to make a case to support this union without just using parliamentary tricks?
It is times like these that we need leadership and creative minds. “Leading” means giving guidance. If any of us who are in leadership roles – Chapter Leaders, delegates, Exec. Bd. members, etc. – don’t have the will to be creative and “guide” us to a stronger union, even with those we disagree with, we should get off the pot and let someone else “go” who can!
Thanks James, Jeff and ICE for your Leadership! Now get off!
· Sep 29, 2005 at 6:52 pm
Dear HS Teacher,
I’m very gratified to know that you’ve been reading my comments. I regret you have failed utterly to address them beyond calling them “emotive.” I also regret that the best argument you’ve been able to muster is asking those with whom you disagree to shut up.
That’s disappointing from someone who purports to value democracy.
I expected an agreement to come out of this–the fact finders report with merit pay rather than the ten coverages. I’d heard that’s what the executive board was told. Perhaps I was misinformed. If you were there, I’d like to know exactly what happened.
I have read the fact finders report. It is unacceptable. I have also watched the current administration, and I do not expect them to concede anything. Predictably, they are asking for further concessions. Still, Bloomberg has publicly stated that if we do not agree within two weeks, he would accept the fact-finders report.
I fully expect the odious but canny Bloomberg to come up with a contract very much resembling this. I say vote no because I feel very strongly we’d be better off with no contract at all. The raise is simply not worth it, and sets a terrible, dangerous precedent, particularly on the heels of our last contract. There’s just so much time you can give up.
Do you understand that?
As a teacher for 20 years, 20 years of contracts that never enabled me to make a living, I’ve had it. We’ve gone years with zeroes and close to zeroes to earn things like relief from menial tasks. Now, I absolutely believe folks like you are more than willing to send me back there.
Vindictive principals will have a field day.
If I am mistaken, please explain why. Feel free to explain to me why the PERB recommendations, or anything remotely like it is not a “Pathway to a Sixth Teaching Period.”
I’m all ears.
HS SHOP TEACHER
· Sep 30, 2005 at 11:05 am
For twenty-five years I have listened to the brillant minds in the UFT opposition declare everything that comes down the pike a “sixth teaching period.” When Circular 6R was first instituted, they shouted from the mountainsides and the valleys that it was a “sixth teaching period.” Now they go on about how we must not surrender an inch on Circular 6R, without the slightest embarrassment. I guess they think that NYC teachers have very short memories. Well, Chicken Little “NYC Educator”, some of us remember, and you are no more persuasive today then you were ten years ago, when we did Circular 6R. The sky is not falling.
· Sep 30, 2005 at 5:15 pm
I believe it is largely the Triborough Law that keeps our past contract intact while we negotiate a new one more than the Taylor law.
Also while some say accept, look at the times we live in they argue, these dire times aren’t impacting contracts in the surrounding burbs nearly as much. Indeed the more Caucasion the district the less the current bad times seem to impede contacts. I own a home in Wappinger Falls, the teachers are in the middle of a four year contract extending to ’07 that raises salaries about twenty per cent. This is a point of fact, not my subjective reality. Perhaps we should devote part of EDwize to posting just the salaries and contract information from surrounding districts as our members learn about them. If anything we’d have a much better informed membership for the next go around!!
I’d love polite civil responses to this post. thanks. Let’s not forget we are all suffering in this together
· Sep 30, 2005 at 7:35 pm
HS Shop Teacher:
Once again, you’re absolutely right.
The concept of 5 existing classes, plus “small group instruction” did indeed give me that idea. I now realize I’m guilty of failing to address my audience, an infraction against which I caution my student writers. Please forgive me for my lack of clarity.
Perhaps you should sit down before reading this. Please give this some careful consideration before responding:
5 + 1 = 6
You may wish to have your colleagues in the math department clarify any part of this you do not understand. After you’ve done that, I’ll be happy to discuss any portion which remains unclear to you.
And my sincere thanks for your continued interest in my work.
· Sep 30, 2005 at 10:39 pm
I wish the commentors get back to what is important, the very inferior proposal given to us by the arbitrators. I do agree with NYC Educator that only an ignorant person cannot see that the 30 minutes of small-class tutoring is one contract away from a sixth period!! Further, I do coverages and would lose a minimum of $345 and possibly over $1,000 dollars as my principle will use all the teachers for the 12 free coverages.
Finally, the insulting offer of 0% for the first year shows a real disrespect for teachers. It is time for Randi to stop negotiating and start demanding that the teachers’ pay and working conditions be improved without these terrible givebacks.
HS SHOP TEACHER
· Sep 30, 2005 at 11:05 pm
I guess you think that because you claim to be an English teacher, you can ignore history, especially the history you and your ICE friends were part of. Come to think of it, your grasp of Math isn’t a whole lot better, since you are unable to tell the difference between 5 + 0 = 5 and 5 + 1 = 6. I may be a shop teacher, but I think the only area where you have it over me is the supreme arrogance and patronizing self-righteousness you bring to these discussions. You have missed your calling in life — you were obviously made to be a Kleinian LIS.
· Oct 1, 2005 at 6:25 am
Dear HS Shop Teacher:
I regret that you cannot understand my point. It is sad you deem 30 minutes of my daily time, yours, and that of our 100,000 colleagues to be worth nothing.
I certainly understand why you’d favor the fact-finders report.
· Oct 1, 2005 at 8:04 pm
Since we can’t post a new thread…just curious…are they negotiating this weekend?
· Oct 3, 2005 at 2:23 pm
guess they were….
Where’s the info on the new sell-out….
· Oct 3, 2005 at 6:27 pm
It’s still not something I’d ever consider voting for but it’s slightly less unpalatable than the factfinders award. The extra money is neither here nor there because it’s a little more than 3% over 15 months which is my book is a garbage raise. On the other hand, now we only have to deal with three years of zeros upcoming instead of 4
Retroactive money’s a bit higher by moving the raises effective dates back 6 months. Not what it should be but better.
Extra coverage idea gone. You’d never have gotten the middle school and high school vote with that one.
Some nonsense about not micromanaging us yet with no grievance procedure for unfair letters in our file, that’s nonsense with no teeth.
Looking like four 37.5min small group sessions instead of 5 30′s. I’d rather have the 30′s. So now 4 days of horrible traffic instead of the current 1 or the proposed 5. Whoopie!
No more Brooklyn Day or whatever they call it in the other borough it exists. Well despite working in Brooklyn, that’s a silly holiday. It will be a staff development day so win for some, a loss for others.
Some regression on Circular 6 but not clear how much.
Some stuff for paras. Not paying attention.
Only real new item is the Lead Teacher stuff. Without knowing how many teachers are involved, what’s expected, and what the catches are, I can’t comment. Should be interesting to see the monster we created especially if it’s only 1 or 2 people per school. Hard for me to see how it’s ok to pay some of us more than others to help do the job of the administration yet not pay more for shortage subject areas. Well on the bright side, maybe this can help offset the pension damange Tier 4 did to us by timing our Lead Teacherness precisely
All the rest sounds much like the factfinding agreement which stunk. So now instead of smelling putrid, we’re going to agree to something smelling rancid. No surprise other than I figured we’d take a few more weeks to get to this odiferous stage.
· Oct 3, 2005 at 7:23 pm
Just vote no!!! They want a deal, otherwise we wouldn’t be getting one. Teachers already suffered through two holiday seasons without a raise, what’s a little more? The letters in the file is a biggie and doesn’t cost anything for them to give. Sometimes even a grievance you lose always for venting and some airing of differences. On the other hand unless you are going 3020a the letter is just discarded in three years which is what should happen to most of those pieces of trash in the first place.
Also all this talk about lead teacher and recognizing achievement, why not an MA plus 60? Are we saying taking and passing graduate courses is a worthless endeavor? Why not a Longevity 25? their way is just to give it to a favorite, if the skirt is short enoughm the figure lithe enough, etc. We all know the deal.
· Oct 3, 2005 at 10:20 pm
“So now instead of smelling putrid, we’re going to agree to something smelling rancid.”
Now there’s a talking point.
· Oct 3, 2005 at 10:23 pm
“their way is just to give it to a favorite,”
Some favorite. I don’t think I’d want to be beholden to Klein and his minions for another 10K. You might as well go for supervision, if you want something like that.
I’d rather teach kids. But I’d rather do it 5 periods a day, too.
letter in the file
· Oct 4, 2005 at 1:20 am
Here is the UFT’s Hotline message:
Here is the UFT’s press release:
In my view, the salary increase is totally inadequate, and will not result in parity with suburban teaching salaries.
It is being partially funded by the extra minutes each day, and the extra days. Chances are excellent that the extra minutes each day will lead to the teaching of six classes daily in the intermediate schools, junior high schools, and high schools when another contract is negotiated in 2007.
Shouldn’t a paraprofessional’s top salary be about $40,000 in any new contract that’s negotiated?
Check out this article and then develop more appropriate salary schedules for teachers and paraprofessionals:
If seniority transfers are ended, how will a teacher seek a change of school? Is it going to require permission from two principals, one or two LIS’s, and one or two RS’s?
Where is the “lead teacher” experiment being expanded to? Every single school? What are the qualifications for a lead teacher? What are the extra tasks of a lead teacher? Is a lead teacher some type of on-site mentor for the rest of the teachers?
There shouldn’t be any unpaid coverages at all! What’s the rationale behind giving one free coverage per term? Who came up with that brilliant idea, anyway?!
Micromanagement is being limited?! There shouldn’t be any micromanagement whatsoever! Teachers, by and large, know what to do. If they don’t, they can ask a more experienced colleague. The days of “you did this, but you shouldn’t have” and “you didn’t do this, but you should have” must come to an end in the new contract! Teachers must be given academic freedom to conduct their classes in whatever teaching style they see fit, and to choose instructional materials from a variety of different sources.
Why would sexual misconduct be taking place? Check out:
The provisions that would give principals leeway to require that teachers supervise lunchrooms, halls, and who knows what else are extremely inappropriate. (Stand outside bathrooms and log names of students along with arrival and departure times?)
More “professional development” days?! Surely they jest! What useful things have people been doing on those days?
The “55-25″ rule sounds O.K., but a “you can retire after 20 years of service, regardless of age” rule would sound even better. It might actually help to minimize teacher burnout.
I would have to read the exact text of the language concerning the elimination of the ability to file grievances regarding letters in the file to better understand what the proposal is all about. Would it only apply to letters of reprimand, or to observation reports as well? This entire notion of placing derogatory letters into a teacher’s personnel file smacks of unenlightened management practices which operate under the assumption that employees have an inherent tendency to do the wrong thing, requiring correction by a supervisor.
Streamline the grievance process? So, in other words, it’s going to take less time for a teacher to be told that “you can’t grieve supervisory judgment”! Give me a break!
Why doesn’t the UFT hire an experienced law firm that negotiates the contracts of top actors and sports figures, and use their attorneys to deal with Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein?
QUESTIONS FOR THOUGHT:
Does Chancellor Klein have a contract?
What’s it like?
· Oct 4, 2005 at 10:29 am
We will be teaching a sixth class now at the high school level. Instead of getting out after 8th period at 1:43, we now must stay until 2:24, the traffic to Long Island is a hell of a lot worse at 2:30 than at 1:45. My starting time has remained the same, yet every year I leave later and later… 1:00, then 1:30, now 1:43, next it will be almost 2:30!!
For less than $2,000 (after taxes) retro pay and an extra $25 a week (after taxes) this aggravation is not worth it.
Don’t let anyone fool you- this is a sixth class too. In my school we’ll be in a room with two other teachers and 30 students.
We can vote no but you can count on people bullying us into accepting it, just like they did with bulletin boards, group work, and professional development.
The school bully is no longer in the classroom, the school bully has become the administration.
I’d rather be a student. They sit in groups with their friends all day and talk while one does all the work.
What has education become? It’s been a sad time lately, it’s getting worse…
THE SCHOOL DAY: The agreement maintains the uniform school day. It adds 10 minutes to the day, which will be combined with the previous 20 minutes per day added in the last contract. That time would be used for tutorials, test preparation and/or small group instruction, limited to no more than 10 students per teacher. The instruction will be given in a 37½ minute period immediately after dismissal four days a week, Monday through Thursday, starting in February. There would be an expedited grievance process for violations of the 10-student rule. District 75 and the multiple session schools will use the time to expand each class, and the rest of the school system will have four days a week of tutoring, test prep and/or small group instruction after dismissal.
· Oct 5, 2005 at 7:55 am
letterinthefile– thanks for the info.
Jack Tillem lists an phoney e-mail address. Believe me I will be sharing the info with everyone I can find.
· Oct 5, 2005 at 9:36 pm
Someone may get out of school at 2:24?
WOW! and that’s BAD?
I’d rather do 3 days of PD and say it was a waste than spend 30-something Mondays WAITING to say they were a waste
Less than desirable RETRO AFTER TAXES?
Not even Al Shanker could have negotiated away City, State and Federal Income Taxes.
Real stories from the classrooms of new NYC public school teachers. Take a look.
© 2005–2013 Edwize — Sitemap