Log in  |  Search

New Contract Ratified [UPDATED]

With 78,000 UFT members voting, the new contract was ratifiedtoday, with 90% of those voting — over 70,000 — supporting ratification.

“We are very pleased about the overwhelming number of members who voted and the overwhelming support for this contract,” UFT President Randi Weingarten said. “It provides real stability and certainty for educators and the students they serve and a much-needed raise for all our members that gets our most senior teachers to a milestone $100,000.”

CATEGORY

YES

NO

% RATIFYING

Acohol/Susbtance Abuse

5

0

100%

Attendance Teachers

141

14

90%

Guidance Counselors

1790

178

91%

Laboratory Specialists

98

20

91%

Para-Professionals

11372

899

92%

Psychologists & Social Workers

1056

119

90%

School Nurses

177

8

96%

School Secretaries

2717

174

94%

Sign Language Interpreters

10

0

100%

Supervisor Nurses/Therapists

11

2

85%

Teachers

53392

6202

89%

Therapists

400

21

95%

TOTAL

71206

7637

90%

Print

4 Comments:

  • 1 jd2718
    · Dec 17, 2006 at 10:02 am

    One of the numbers in the lab spec row is wrong.

    Actually, as I look more closely, there are also a bunch of examples of funny rounding. Why, for example, is the teacher percentage being reported at 89% and not 90%? or with a decimal? (89.6%)

    Jonathan

  • 2 Persam1197
    · Dec 17, 2006 at 10:26 am

    A breakdown of teachers by primary and secondary school votes would also be very interesting. I’m one of the 6,202 teachers who voted against this contract. Most of my colleagues were not in favor of this contract either.

    Honestly, we were too precipitous in accepting a contract that is below the rate of inflation as a whole, especially as the city is flush with a surplus. There were issues that were not addressed such as the retirement “sweetener” used to convince us to vote for the last contract.

    With the continued breakdown of large high schools as reported, more of our members will end up as ATR’s. It’s a shame that senior pedagogues can end up without appointments as teachers are now “hired” at the pleasure of principals, many of whom have precious little teaching experience. This contract does not discuss the tremendous overcrowding in our schools and the quality of life issues as students are displaced into functional schools incapable of handling the dumping.

    There are issues about the “empowerment schools” that have not been addressed at all as well as the UFT supporting mayoral control.

    Overall, there needed to be more discussions in every area before the vote took place. As we move towards the UFT elections, I for one will give serious consideration to all candidates who offer ideas beyond a quick buck.

  • 3 Leo Casey
    · Dec 17, 2006 at 7:16 pm

    I didn’t do the Math, Jonathan, I just put it up. {-: I will doublecheck the Lab Specialist mumbers tomorrow to make sure I didn’t mis-transcribe a number. I don’t know why the rounding off was done the way it was done. But does it really make much of a difference if we record the teacher vote at 89% or 90% in favor?

  • 4 jd2718
    · Dec 17, 2006 at 7:35 pm

    Leo,

    Does it matter if we get numbers wrong? Yes. The numbers exist; they should be presented correctly.

    It is a problem in this society that arithmetic mistakes are treated as far less important than spelling errors. (I thought about making spelling mistakes here, to make the point. But I don’t have to. Both of us know you would have noticed them immediately.)

    Anyway, misrounding should not happen. The idea that it is not important hurts me as a math teacher, but it also hurts us as a society. This is the attitude piece of what Bobbi Eisenberg wrote last week.

    Jonathan