Taking Stock of the Contract Agreement

149 Comments:

• 1 R. Skibins
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:27 pm

  I am completely disgusted by the monumental piece of garbage that passes for a contract that was agreed upon by Randi Weingarten and the City of New York. While the previous contract sent Al Shanker spinning in his grave, this current proposal sends Sandy Feldman joining him.

  First, let’s take the extension of the school day by ten minutes. It will be extended by twenty minutes in actuality, as the 50 minute Monday extended day will be spread out evenly now. Add it to the other 50 minutes in additional time, it makes it a 30 minute extended day each day. Any salary gain for commuter teachers would be negated by additional child-care costs. Also, if the school day starts earlier, how can commuter teachers find a daycare center which opens before 6:30 AM? An 8:20 start is already too early. Just try to get you kids out and arrive before 8:00 on a rainy day, or if there is an accident. Additionally, adding days to the school year is inexcusable. We already work a longer day and a longer year than many surrounding systems, and once we give up days, we will never get them back.

  Circular 6 eliminated lunchroom duty and hall patrol in order to allow teachers to spend time with students. In this new proposal, teachers will be assigned to lunchroom duty and potty patrol. Does it make sense to pay someone up to $90k to guard a toilet, so that you can eliminate a job from a $10k a year school aide, and take instructional time away from the students?

  The agreement eliminates the right to grieve letters in the file. So what will happen when some jerk of a supervisor writes a trumped-up letter? I personally know of teachers who have received letters because a student made a mark on his folder without permission, and, get this: the teacher of a group of students, many with learning disabilities, received a letter in her file because the level of student work was not up to grade level. One teacher in my school even received a letter in the file which was a complete work of fiction. If this proposed contract passes, then all a principal has to do is place a few trumped-up letters in your file, and you will be terminated.

  Weingarten’s sell-out contract weakens the UFT considerably, as gains which were hard fought for are discarded as easily as trash. I can’t believe that after more than 2 1/2 years of protests and actions, that this is what she came up with. I call on the UFT membership not to make the same mistake it did in 2002. Reject this piece of garbage contract outright. Then we can concentrate on selecting new leadership for our union.

• 2 jesse
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:39 pm

  That’s essentially the breakdwon I was looking for that was not on the website. Can someone illuminate me on circular 6 duties, on the website, and better explained here it talks about the process, so that lunch duty seem more difficult to implement by the administration. Is that true? and how? What happens to the DC37 people who work the lunchrooms now?

• 3 Schoolgal
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:43 pm

  What took you so long to finally post? Is it because you needed more than 24 hours to spin the flaws in this agreement?

  This union started turning back the clock years ago when they endorsed the mayor in the takeover of the Board of Ed. Then they turned their back on McCall for governor–a friend of the union. Many teachers did not like the wording of the last contract that made us prisoners of “Detention Monday” rather than tutoring small groups of children. When you endorsed the SBO transfer plan, senority rights were eroded.

  Even the NY Post loves this new agreement.
  That should say it all!

  You may have saved tenure for now, but with your track record, that will be the next to go.

  You treat the issue of letters in file as meaningless. However it is an insult to any teacher who really didn’t deserve it. And any good teacher would hate to have to go through that experience. It also paints a bad picture if and when a new principal takes over within the 3-year period.

  If you want us back on lunch duty, then you should have insisted that an administrator also take on that responsibility.

  Please do not fool with the pensions of those of us on Tier 1 and 2. I have no doubt that this union will make our pensions worse. (No wonder some of you on the executive board are getting out now.)

  You can spin this any way you want, but the truth is, this union is weak.

• 4 paulrubin
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:46 pm

  There’s a few little nice tidbits in there that the media didn’t report. Not having to get a principal’s permission to transfer? That could turn out to haunt the DOE down the road depending on the real wording in the contract for the more qualified teachers in the system, especially in shortage areas. There has to be a catch there.

  Just don’t insult our intelligence. That last raise spread out over 15 months is basically 3% annually. It’s ok. I’m not upset with it. But it’s neither here nor there and doesn’t influence me in the slightest to vote for or against it.

  Half of our deserved retroactive pay is better than more like 1/4 of it. It’s still an insult. It sets yet another precedent that in my mind makes it critical that NYC teachers be told to prepare for a strike in October 2007. We have to stop caving in all over the place without a fight. We fight and lose, so be it. But wimping out should not be part of the next contract negotiations especially if those billions of additional money turn out to be at stake.

  I’d like some clarity on those two additional days before Labor Day. Are they for setting up our rooms or sitting through nonsense meetings. And if kids are coming back the day after labor day, then what this really is, is two additional days of teaching. So what is going on with that. In English.

  As to circular 6, what’s the bottom line. Sounds to me like homerooms and lunch duty are going to be in place for most of NYC’S secondary school teachers. Isn’t that what most principals would put on the menu and the least senior teachers stuck with that?

  Then there are some obvious questions like does per session go up as well. Will per session stuff be retroactive or will we basically be getting zeros on that. Is the Lead Teacher position really just for low performing schools. $10K for a quality senior teacher isn’t likely to get them to transfer until the last 2 or 3 years of their career for pension purposes. I don’t see the value in this for the vast majority of us. And then finally how do we stay at

• 5 realitybasededucator
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:50 pm

  You write:

  “A careful examination, therefore, shows that this is a contract which has real and significant gains, that it turned back the Chancellor and the DOE on vital core principles, and that it ameliorated the areas where we lost ground. It is a remarkable achievement, fully deserving of members’ support, given the extraordinary array of forces we face at this moment.”

  You’re kidding, right?

  Here’s what teachers gave in this contract:

  A 37.5 minute sixth class of “small group instruction”, loss of seniority and grievance rights, return of pottyroom duty, two days of work before Labor Day (can’t wait for the next contract when Randi adds three more days to make it a full week in August!!!), 10 more minutes, harsher discipline rules, and higher medical deductibles and co-pays (sorry, Edwize, I don’t believe a word of what you wrote above about premiums not rising.)

  Here’s what teachers get in this contract:

  14.25% over 4 years and 4 months…just a little over 3.2% a year.

  This so-called “raise” doesn’t even cover cost of living increases for transportation, food, energy, rent, and prescription drug costs over the time period of the contract. And of course it is not a raise when you have to give back twenty years worth of contract gains in one shot.

  What you write above is pure, unadulterated propaganda worthy of Pravda or Tass News Agency. As usual, the UFT spin is how wonderful the union is, how wonderful Randi is, blah, blah, blah. Aren’t you embarrassed by all of this shameless propagandizing? Anybody who looks at the contract particulars can see you are putting the best face on a very bad deal in order to cover for Dear Randi’s negotiating incompetence and criminally negligent leadership.

  I am sick and tired of having part of my union dues go toward paying for this kind of propaganda at both this site and in Randi’s house organ, NY Teacher. If any reporters are checking out this blog, like they did after the PERB report came out, they should ignore the party line at UFT.org and Edwize and start visiting schools around the city. After they talk to working teachers, they’ll see just how unpopular this contract agreement is (my school voted the PERB recommendations down 78% to 22%) and how hostile much of the membership is toward Randi Weingarten and the union leadership.

  New York City teachers know they were sold down the river by the union leadership and our union leader, Dear Randi, and no matter how you folks at Edwize try to spin it, most working teachers in this system know this contract agreement is an abomination.

  If you give it an honest vote, it will go down to defeat. But you won’t. You’ll hold back the contract particulars for as long as you can, you’ll spin all the negatives as positively as you can, you’ll hammer home the propaganda for the next six weeks, and you’ll try to keep the membership ignorant of how truly bad this deal is until after the contract is already voted on and nothing can be changed.

  The way this union is run is as shameless as the propaganda that is printed above.

• 6 Kombiz
  · Oct 4, 2005 at 11:56 pm

  The contract particulars are posted at the UFT website.

• 7 MONTYPYTHON
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:10 am

  congratulations to our union leadership for selling us out again– those who continue to vote for randi, you get what you deserve. first, 10 more minutes , what a wonderful idea- added to the other 20 minutes for those of us on the high school and you have 30 minutes, next contract will finish it off for a 6th period. good job randi. second, giving up an opportunity to grieve a letter in the file- this is a good thing, i think not. you are giving principals and ap’s a blank check to get letter happy since we will no longer be able to fight it. third, we fought hard to get rid of circular 6 items such as lunch duty and hall patrol for the last few contracts, now you’re going to give it back- wow that must have been one of the positives the union leadership kept bragging about. an extra 10 minutes on top of the previous 20 before for more money and the union justifies this as a 33% pay raise over the past few years. i don’t know who does the accounting and the math at the union but you do not give up time for more money and call it a raise. i only hope my colleagues throughout the system on all levels reject this contract outright. there is too much here that limits our rights not improves them. i for one know the majority of my school will reject it just like we did the perb findings (about 85-90% against)

• 8 jesse
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:15 am

  Do people read the posts before they comment, or they just come in and comment whatever they meant to? Some of the above objections are talked about in the post. I do have questions, as the one I asked above, but it’s not redundant to what’s in the post.

  Secondly, some of us who have been been part of the progressive movement, and have read blogs, really get annoyed when people use language we’ve used to describe the preznit with other people who haven’t sent off our brothers to war, and destroyed the middle class in this country. It’s your choice to call Weingarten whatever you like, but please leave Bush paradigm for Bush.

  Thirdly, I’m not aware of any other union that has a forumn where I can type whatever I want in response to anything they write. You have no idea what pravada was -

• 9 mvplab
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:23 am

  I disagree with R.Skibins:

  Having argued LIF’s as a chapter leader, I always faced a hurdle called “supervisory judgment” and the limits of the grievance process which required the union to prove that a letter was inaccurate or unfair.Having received letters in my file, I often found that by appending a professional rebuttal to the case made by a stupid AP or principal, I was frequently rewarded with the removal of the letter. (You know they don’t want to look silly.)

  Now, what does a letter in a file mean?

  In one scenario, you’re a tenured teacher with 20 years of satisfactory service. You get a letter in your file that says you were carrying a cup of hot coffee in the hallways and that is a violation of school policy. Now your principal doesn’t use that letter for further disciplinary purposes for three years. The letter is then out of your file!

  If you’re untenured, well they can sack you with 10 days notice for just about anything already so the LIF policy either way won’t do you any good.

  The other scenario is that you accumulate several letters in your file and the principal choses to give you an unsatisfactory rating. You then have a hearing and can argue over all the letters in your file and try and prove that they are unfair and inaccurate.

  At least you can no longer get those bullshit letters about bulletin boards, your classroom seating arrangements and whether you exceeded the 8 minute model lesson! So go ahead an use 6 staples when ever you want.

• 10 mvplab
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:45 am

  Let’s do some reality checking here, unlike self proclaimed reality based educator who has his own axe to grind.

  I welcome reporters to come and talk to teachers who are in the trenches and let them see how angry they are at Kleinberg administration and not at the union.

  Remember the #1 issue people said they wanted was cash, and while you can argue whether a cop, or firefighter or teacher can ever be paid adequately, this agreement does put cash in members’ pockets. There’s no getting around that fact. 14.25 or 15 per cent when it’s compounded is real money that will go a long way economically for members.

  You can grouse all you want, but this contract addresses the needs of the members. So this contract will be ratified no matter how much katzen-yammer we hear here.

• 11 R. Skibins
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:02 am

  mvplab:

  I disagree with you 100%. No amount of money is worth giving up our rights. No amount of propaganda from Weingarten and her cronies can convince us that it is a fair contract. We give up seniority rights, grievance rights, circular 6, vacation days and serve for longer hours. What does the DOE give up? We can arrange our chairs and bulletin boards. Whoop-de-doo!

  My fellow teachers:
  Don’t believe the Weingarten lies. They won’t tell you the truth. Just like with the current contract, you won’t really know what’s in it until after it is too late. They won’t tell you the truth. I will. Reject this contract outright, and vote Randi out of office.

• 12 mvplab
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:09 am

  MontyPython is comical. Does he mean to say that negotiations is a one way street? Oh, next time Randi negotiates she’ll do it with no one on the other side of the table.

  I think MontyPython should know that this was a deal hammered out by a bipartisan negotiating team that included school based members. Oh, I know that all they had to do was wish something and it would come true.

  We asked for 18 percent; we asked for 25/55 retirement plan;no layoffs;no disciplinary action for teachers’ decisions regarding classroom instruction;unused sick leave days may be donated to a bank to be used by persons suffering from catastrophic/long-term illnesses on a one-to-one basis.

  The UFT didn’t propose a longer schoolday that was the other side of the table!They wanted to take back tenure. They wanted forced transfers.They wanted absolute principal discretion on everything! They wanted to eliminate the contract!

  So if you want to get angry, point your finger at Kleinberg!and his minions across the table.

• 13 R. Skibins
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:10 am

  Weingarten claims that this garbage contract preserves our core rights. That would be like eliminating the US constitution’s 1st, 4th, 5th and 14th amendments, and claiming that the core values of the constitution were still intact. Excuse me while I go out and barf!

• 14 R. Skibins
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:17 am

  Just because the arbitrators made a recommendation doesn’t mean that we have to follow it or accept it, as it was NON-BINDING arbitration. We could, as Nancy Reagan said, just say “no!” They said no to us being able to have autonomy in the classroom restored. They said no to one-for-one sick day donations. I say NO to longer days, longer years, surrendering the right to grieve letters in the file, elimination of seniority transfers, and having to patrol the toilet and lunchroom.

• 15 mvplab
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:27 am

  R.Skibins:

  Let’s see: What does Kleinberg give up?

  How about 15 percent in cash and more than $5,000 retro by Nov 1 with no zero in the first year! Hmmm, I wonder what he’ll do now with the firefighters now that there’s no pattern left!

  I just saw the entire memorandum of agreement at http://www.uft.org (the top story) and it doesn’t look that bad to me. By the way, take a look at the salary charts!

• 16 agetzel
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:34 am

  Many people here are so very unrealistic. Collective bargaining means that two sides have to agree on a contract. Collective bargaining does not mean that I tell you what I want and you have to do it. All contracts are a matter of compromise.

  First off, I consider myself a liberal to the highest degree. But I am also a political realist. This is the best we can get in this political climate. People who refuse to compromise usually get nothing. (And that is why the GOP will fail in the end).

  Most teachers I know usually come in early. Most teachers I know usually come in a few days before school starts to set up their room. I am not worried that I will be suspended without pay for molesting a child. I am not planning to have sex with any of my students the last I thought about it. As for a letter in my file, I once had one placed in it by a crazy Principal who ended up doing so many outlandish things that she was forced to give me a public apology. I really do not think that 90% of the Principals are out to get teachers. As for the other 10%, they usually trip themselves up in the end. As for seniority transfer, we all know that it has been used in the past to get rid of incompetent teachers. These teachers go from school to school making everyone unhappy. Maybe if a teacher is vetoed and is forced to stay in their school, the administrator will finally do something about this person instead of passing him or her on.

  I think it is more important that we keep our due process rights if charges are brought up. I think it is important that the core of our seniority rights are still left in tact. And I truly think that these marginal changes are worth a 15% raise.

  I do not think our union is worthless because when I lost my position as an Ed. Evaluator, the union protected my rights through an expedited arbitration process that prevented my involuntary transfer. And that is something that this contract preserves.

• 17 mvplab
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:48 am

  R.Skibins:
  Really R- May I call you R? You can call me MVP. I think you’re going overboard here!
  1st amendment? free speech etc. are you kidding? you can write and append all you want to letters in the file.
  4th amendment? search and seizure? Let’s see, help me on this. How did Randi allow this to happen to you? What kind of stuff do you keep in your classroom anyway?
  5th amendment? Let’s see I think this is the due process amendment where you can’t be a witness against yourself or be denied due process of law. Okay?
  14th amendment? Is this the equal protection amendment? Okay you’re going to have to help me! So Randi is to blame for those perceived violations of Constitutional law? Wow!

  Come on R, go get some sleep!

• 18 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:52 am

  Here is my problem,

  I don’t want to attack Randi! I think she worked her heart out, our own personal Norma Rae, but ultimately we got a raise that is less than 3 1/2 per cent a year when you divide even 15 by 4.33333. the number of years the contract covers. A monthly metro card probably the best bargain in transportation now went up over 20 per cent in fewer than the last 52 months.

  Now there were givebacks of a serious nature, especially for the increasing number of teachers who communte long distances and those who as a point of honor don’twant pejorative and often unfair and untrue letters in their file.

  Now I could live with even this but what I can’t accept here is that for all this we essentially endorse Bloomberg. The unions best arguement is look at what we were up against, look how formidable our adversary, etc. Granting Randi and Co. their arguement 100 per cent I say fine now let’s work like the devil to defeat those who did this to us at the polls. the fact that someone even proposed an 8 page contract, which could actually be less then the lease for renting a house in the Hamptons when you think about it, and teased us for years means he should be defeated at the polls. I could accept if this is all the union could get, but now to endorse essentially the billionaire bastard behind all this. That is crazy.

• 19 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:53 am

  Let’s remember what Freddy said about the odd very odd timing of this contract and let’s all go out and vote for him on election Day come what may!

• 20 jd2718
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:55 am

  When we leave the job, it should be better than when we came to it.

  Are we all really willing to take money in return for making the job worse for the next generation of teachers?

  Let’s see the fine print before we make final judgement, but as of now I do not think my conscience will permit me to vote yes.

• 21 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:02 am

  There is another thing operative here. We are told to accept the settlement because considering the times this is good, But wait a minute!! Is not the mayor running on what good times we have in the City? Didn’t he say not to let Freddy paint a negative picture of New York? I mean this is New York 2005 everything is coming up roses and bright lights and low crime rates and daffodils and improving test scores and lollipops and more jobs and high priced boutigues and outlandish restuarants and everything is coming up roses and Santa Claus for me and for you.

  What’s wrong with this picture? You tell me?

• 22 R. Skibins
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:14 am

  MVP:
  Overboard I am not. I was simply making an analogy between this “contract” and a hypothetical gutting of our constitution. Get some sleep and re-read my posting. Then come back from the dark side. Nobody in their right mind should support Weingarten and her second sellout contract in a row!

• 23 outraged
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:16 am

  I have followed the union’s progress for years and I would like to mention some disturbing decisions made by the union, and presented in spin form to the membership.

  1. A contract which was settled without raises for the first two years and which had a five year duration. The contract was settled prematurely, before the first two years elapsed. Letter after letter was sent to the membership warning of layoffs. Especially in light of no raises for two years, what was the rush? Shortly afterward Mrs. Feldman took the job at the AFT and the city finances recovered. The long contract, negotiated with the premise of lean periods cost the union membership the chance to negotiate during better times.

  2. In my school district the school day is 6 hours and 30 minutes. They also end the year one week before the city schools and extend the holidays if snow days are not used.

  3. It appears that the union reps are willing to make it more difficut for the older teachers. They appear to be happy if the more experienced teachers retire. This would in effect leave enough money to hire 2 new teachers. It works well for the classroom numbers, and extremely well for the union who would collect twice as much in dues. Randy would be able increase her salary. How many have gone through the breakup of large schools in smaller learning one? The phaseout is stressful for the senior teachers.

  4. I love it when Randy says the strike word. Bloomberg loves it when she mentions the strike word. He knows its meaningless and it indicates the union is despirate. When will the teachers learn, no guts, no respect. Bloomberg is much smarter than Randy.

  5. Everyone knows the city teachers got perks instead of salary in past contracts. Everyone expected the city to buyback these perks with cash. Randy and company handed them back with for nothing. What could she do after being defensive at the hearings. Instead of telling them, you could buy back these perks for money, she tried to defend them at the hearings. It made her look silly. Stupid!

  6. How could one beleive that gap has narrowed with the suburbs? If the burbs have salaries 25% higher before the contract and the contract has a fifteen percent incease, then they are still, at this point 18.75 percent higher and at the end of the city contract, the burbs will probably make back most of it.

  7. If union polls were right and a majority of the parents felt the teachers deserved a big raise, then why didn’t Randy use that against Bloomberg? Bloomberg cried poverty but found enough money for property tax rebates. It would stand to reason that a majority would giveup the rebates. Another opportunity lost!

  8. Is it possible that Randy is looking towards AFT job which was held by Mrs. Feldman?

• 24 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:30 am

  Vote No on the Contract. You can get a better one. Vote Yes for Freddy!!!

• 25 ChptrLdr
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:33 am

  Randi knew we did not want any compromise on circular 6R. Further, she knew we absolutely did not want more time for more money. As a chapter leader, I was at many meetings where this was discussed with Randi. She knows what is called “staff development”is a waste of time. She also knows that no one hassuffered by 6R. Rather than the riots in halls and cafeterias that management had predicted, we have had more time spent by teachers in activity that benefits the student,and the job of babysitter has gone to newly hired aides who have done an excellent job in keeping cafeterias, halls and bathrooms safe. Does Randi realize that the proposed contract will throw some aides out of a job? I do come in early; I do stay late. I do come in at least 3 days before Labor Day to set up my classroom. However, I will no longer give more than the time set by contract nor will I spend my non contract time in tutoring. LET US NOT REELECT A LAWYER WITH A FEW YEARS OF TEACHING AS OUR NEXT PRESIDENT. LET US ELECT A CAREER TEACHER TO THAT OVERPAID POSITION WITH ITS LIMO AND OTHER PERKS.

• 26 everyman2
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 5:55 am

  Salary schedules, major portions of the contract, and an overview are now posted here(go to the bottom of the web site page):
  http://www.uft.org/news/teacher/contract_agreement/

• 27 a-realist
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 6:21 am

  I always convinced myself that I could never be rich working for the government. I always knew salary increases would be meager. At best, salary adjustments would only equal the inflation rate. However, as I enter the the era of my life in the mid 50s, I can say that I have never missed a paycheck. When the economy had its poor years and other workers were laid off (many permanently), I had my paycheck. My lifestyle did not need to be adjusted. I was able to purchase homes, cars, and travel at will. I had a steady and reliable salary. In addition, I have excellent dental and health coverage. I haven’t spent 10 cents for dental work over the past 15 years.
  Knowing what people are paying for health and dental coverage, I can easily add that to be worth an additional $10,000 per year to me.
  Now this deal may not be the best, but it was unlikely to be be significantly better
  without more givebacks. I think a teacher who will be officially earning $90,000 +++
  per year next month (2005) is earning a reasonably good salary for 9 months of work per year. Heck, throw in a few mental health days and personal days along the year, and I think you can make the deal work for you.
  This contract may not be the best, but I think a teacher must look at the 25/55 retirement possibility as a key element to the whole deal itself. Having the City of New York support the plan is quite important to getting it through the State legislature. Even if we need to wait until the present governor has left Albany, the possibility exist that within two years this could be law. This, alone, could be a significant breakthrough with this contract. But we will have to wait and see.

• 28 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:07 am

  In many Nassau districts, teachers without doctoral degrees were earning 90K 4 years ago. Take, for example:

  Baldwin
  Bellmore-Merrick
  Bethpage
  East Meadow
  East Roackaway
  East Williston
  Farmingdale
  Floral Park
  Garden City
  Glen Cove
  Great Neck
  Herricks
  Island Park
  Jericho
  Lawrence
  Locust Valley
  Long Beach
  Lynbrook
  Manhasset
  Merrick
  Mineola
  North Bellmore
  North Merrick
  Oceanside
  Oyster Bay (East Norwich)
  Port Washington
  Rockville Centre
  Roslyn
  Syosset
  Westbury

  Roosevelt was only paying 89.6 that year, so they didn’t make the cut. In any case, it’s comforting to know that with all those givebacks, we’ve finally achieved parity with our suburban counterparts.

  Four years ago.

  Now most of them max out over 100K.

  Just something to think about while you patrol that lunchroom.

• 29 devils_advocate
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:19 am

  Some people are never satisfied. And some of your guys make ridiculous analogies. I’m a bit disgusted.

  What person in the NYC real world is getting guaranteed raises that are not in unions?
  Statistics show wages have stagnated. You are lucky to get raises at all. Many people do not have that luxury. And if they do get a raise, there is no guarantee when the next one will come.

  Are teachers the only people who have to put up with increased cost of living? Rent? Gas? Metrocards? I thought that is a problem that hits everyone. And EVERYONE, well they aren’t getting salary increases.

  http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/26/news/economy/poverty_survey/

  In last Sunday’s Times [June 7, 2005], David Cay Johnston reported that from 1980 to 2002, the latest year of available data, the share of total income earned by the top 0.1 percent of earners more than doubled, while the share earned by everyone else in the top 10 percent rose far less. The share of the bottom 90 percent declined.

  What person in the real world is not get pummeled with health care premium increases?

  What person in the real world has a right to grieve information in their human resources file? Most people have to just suck it up since it is their word vs. their bosses word. Guess who usually wins if push comes to shove? You can write a letter disputing the allegations, but sadly, the bad review stays in your file, period. It doesn’t get discarded after 3 years.

  What salaried person in the real world doesn’t have to work unpaid overtime? Most people do.

  What person in the real world has tenure? Most people can be sacked without notice. My girlfriend was sacked on Monday. She was paid till the end of the week and she got no severance. This, after five years of being a loyal employee, traveling from Jamaica, Queens to Jersey City daily. Oh, and may I add that her salary was less than the minimum teaching salary? (She too has a masters degree.)

  Seniority rights don’t exist in the real world.

  Most companies in the real world don’t provide pensions. And forget about retiring at 55. So many people work well past 65 because they have no choice.

  jd2718 says “When we leave the job, it should be better than when we came to it. ” That is correct, in a booming economy. We are not in a booming economy. We are supposedly recovering from one of the worst recessions in 60 years. (I haven’t seen much improvement.) Most of my friends are working for less money, and without benefits than they had 4 years ago. ALL of them, have advanced degrees. ALL of them make less than the average teacher. My own family makes 60% less than it did 4 years ago. Our expenses are 15% higher. My individual income is 6% LESS than what I was making in 2002. I’m talking in REAL dollars too, not inflationary dollars.

  Employment is currently at its highest since the 2001-2002 recession, which was the worst recession in 60 years. NYC was hit far worse than many other state economies. The improvement since 2002 is still low compared to the Clinton years.

  People may say the Mayor is running on “Good times” in NY. But anyone that follows economics knows this is poppycock. NYC is not in good shape and has only marginally improved since 2002.

  I’m always hesitant to call people whiners, but some of you, OBVIOUSLY, have never had a job without union protection and have no idea what a great deal you have, and are getting. The sense of entitlement is astounding. Working conditions are MUCH tougher for the average Joe in this economy, get a grip.

  The real world, SUCKS. Perhaps some of the compromises are distasteful to you guys. But you have it better than the average working stiff in NYC, and at least, recognize that.

  agetzel says it correctly: “People who refuse to compromise usually get nothing.”

  Be happy you have a union that can get you as much as you have. Many aren’t so fortunate.

• 30 Persam1197
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:27 am

  As I read the pros and cons above, I sit and meditate on this contract. I see both points and I’m trying to be open-minded, however, this “raise” leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

  I don’t think that the union in its present state can do better, so my gut tells me that we should go for it. My gut also tells me that we need to reevaluate the leadership of our union (and the DOE). Maybe it’s time to have seasoned personnel in management and the union. I’m not convinced that the folks who set policy nor the heads of the UFT really feel my pain and know my job. I may be wrong, but that’s what my gut tell me.

• 31 Jeff Kaufman
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:40 am

  Why you must vote “no” on the proposed contract

  Extra time
  • Teaching day extended monday thru thursday by 37½ minutes
  • Two less days of summer vacation (start date before labor day)
  • One less holiday (if you teach in brooklyn or queens)

  Grievance rights
  • No right to grieve letters to the file: supervisors can write an unfair and inaccurate letter and it becomes part of your personnel file
  • elimination of step ii grievances

  Professional activities
  • Lunch duty
  • Bus duty
  • Hall duty
  • Additional small group instruction period
  • Possible involuntary assignment to position at principal’s discretion

  Seniority rights
  • Seniority and SBO transfers eliminated
  • Excessing rights weakened
  • All transfers up to principal

  Harsher disciplinary rules
  • Absent/late tenured pedagogues- doe can file a notice for arbitration and arbitrators can impose suspensions, fines, loss of salary steps
  • If medical reasons are given for the latenesses/absences, releases for personal medical information must be signed over to doe
  • Full suspension without pay of tenured pedagogues if charged under criminal law or accused by special investigations of any type of sexual misconduct against any minor. Applies even for some verbal abuse.

  Creation of lead teacher
  • Creates a new group of teachers receiving merit pay- further weakening the union. Job posting is city-wide: placement and transfer city-wide.

  Salary increases (not for everyone, check salary schedule)
  • 0% effective June 1, 2003
  • 2% effective December 1, 2003
  • 3.5% effective November 1, 2004
  • 5.5% effective November 1, 2005
  • 3.25% effective October 1, 2006

  Medical and drug benefits
  • Higher deductibles and co-pays incorporated as permanent

  Do the math: with so much additional work time
  It is disingenuous to call additional pay a raise

  Reject the contract
  And tell your union there’s more than money at stake

  Don’t give back what took years to achieve

• 32 roseba
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:27 am

  Jeff,
  Do not post 300+ word diatrabes in ALL CAPS. It is hard to read and it is considered extremely poor Netiquette.

• 33 puptiel
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:34 am

  Oh Randi, you screwed us again! You should remame the union the United Giveback Union. All you know how to do is to give up our rights. I am a chapter chairperson. What happens if a principal put a bogus letter in the file of a teacher who wants a comptime job, and the principal rejects the teacher on the basis of a letter in the file. How do I defend that teacher? Small group instruction? You must be joking. It didn’t work before, why would it work now?
  Last year, I and many others protested in the freezing cold outside the Staten Island Boro presidents office. I am sorry I was there, and I am ashamed of you. Professionalism you say? Toilet patrol, lunch patrol, hallway patrol??? Increased medical co-payments, increased union dues. Yep, I sure am a professional. Do me a favor, I have only a few years left. Negociate a deal that gives teachers early retirement. I need to get the hell out of here and away from the UFT.I admire your spin. Your spinning us right into the ground!

• 34 Jack
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:39 am

  I read all of the above postings with careful scrutiny and have come to the conclusion that we should all vote no on it. Randi says this is “not about politics” (her words not mine). I notice however that we WILL NOT be able to vote on it until well after Election Day. I wonder why? As for the letters in the file clause wake-up people of course the principal intends to use the letter against you if he places the damn thing in your file!!! VOTE NO, VOTE RANDI OUT, and most of all screw what she says and support Ferrer for Mayor.

• 35 Frank48
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:44 am

  We need a lawyer to explore whether teacher’s civil rights as US citizens are being violated with the provisions in this new contract offer.

  We lose the right to grieve letters placed in our file by supervisors and principals – no matter how outrageously dishonest they may be.

  Is this constitutional?

  Also, any student can make any statement accusing a teacher about innapropriate behavior. That teacher will now be SUSPENDED WITHOUT PAY pending some hearing well into the future. You will now be GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.

  IS THIS CONSTITUTIONAL ?

  Considering that , under the new contract, we will now be in many more situations ( potty patrol, cafeteria, others ) where student teacher conflicts abound. You’ll now have exponentially more possibilities to have conflicts with unruly students.
  8:40 AM

• 36 Lucy2024
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:04 am

  Anyone who thinks this contract proposal is good is not a classroom teacher. I am sorry to say that working in a school, in whatever capacity, is not as difficult or stressful as being a full time classroom teacher.

  Anyone who has never been a classroom teacher can’t possibly understand what we go through on a daily basis for the sake of the children.

  What would be so wrong with just a cost of living raise and no givebacks? I didn’t go into teaching for the money. But I do need to pay for food, shelter and clothing, and gas.

  I must say I do like the 25/55.

• 37 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:18 am

  I love some of these arguments. Others have it worse. Look at all the things we DIDN’T give up.

  Life sucks for everyone, so take what you can get and shut the hell up. Forget about a raise. No one else gets them, so why should we?

  Let’s ignore our suburban colleagues, who fail to fall under any of these categories and compare ourselves to Wal-Mart associates instead. Let’s pretend Nassau teachers don’t make 120K, THIS year. Let’s pretend they don’t exist and feel sorry for ourselves under bad old Bush and Bloomberg.

  Let’s be role models for our students and children by instructing them in the ways of total and utter capitulation. Let’s teach them how to settle for whatever comes down the pike and hope for the best.

  That’s our job, after all, if you believe non-teachers like the one who wrote this thread.

• 38 bartholian78
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:58 am

  The time to take back our union by voting no to this contract is now. Randi should resign. She has disgraced not only her union members, but all labor leaders in this nation, past and present. What would Shanker and Feldman have thought of this smack in the face to their rank and file?

  If Randi doesn’t resign, then it’s time for us to force her out. She can take her contract with her and get a cushy job with some Bloomberg corporate entity. Her capitulation to the Mayor is indicative of her complete inability to lead. Therefore we must take the reins and fight for ourselves.

  We must not ratify this abomination. By standing firm we not only protect ourselves and our hard fought for rights, we ‘teach’ other unions that fighting is still necessary and effective in these un-democratic times. It is harder to fight than to give in, but there are times when the easy road simply must not be taken. If it means we make our UFT delegates answer to us and not leadership, organize our own sick outs, picket the mayor’s office and make Randi’s phone/fax lines and email servers explode with the sound of our justified indignation, then that is what we must do.

  Imagine the power we could demonstrate if every teacher in the city stayed home on the same day. Would such an action be worth it if it means we get a fair contract? Are losing some sick days, or taking a few days without pay worth it when you think of providing for your family in the future? Are the children you want to teach, not patrol like a security guard, worth it? I will be voting for Ferrer, but if he loses, I would rather spend Bloomberg’s final years in office without a contract than ratify this one. Once we give up a right, we will NEVER get it back. And what have we received in return? 15% is NOTHING after you factor in the givebacks Randi agreed to along with cost of living increases over time. We have not gotten closer to parity with the suburbs, we have been further stigmatized as sub-par educators who can be treated with less respect than our fellow NYS teachers.

  If we don’t vote this down we are saying we are nothing more than service workers or babysitters. We are spitting on our own competency, education, and training. In other words, we will be no better than Randi, Joel Klein, and Mayor Bloomberg.

• 39 paulrubin
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:59 am

  I don’t blame Weingarten for anything but poor strategies executed over a long period of time and for the natural outcomes of precedents she mistakenly set in the last negotiations to come true.

  But in the end all this whining about UFT leadership is just that. Cause it was pretty obvious from where I stand that there was no unanimity on the idea of a strike and without that weapon in a union’s back pocket, you’re going into negotiations with your hands tied behind your back. If the last few contracts haven’t hit that message home, then nothing will so pick your collective buts up and all move away from NYC cause it’s not going to get better. The tax base will continue to erode. The infrastructure will continue to fall apart due to lack of funding. And there will always be a budgetary crisis because just about every urban area is under the same pressures. You want a real raise? You’ll have to fight for it and there’s just enough time between now and October 2007 to fight for a real raise that brings parity with the suburbs. You want $125,000-$135,000 (that’s what all those LI and Westchester districts will be fighting over from our $93,000). You’ll need a 40% raise in one year with no givebacks and no extra time. Think you’re getting anything like that without a strike? Hell you won’t get that with a strike either. Prepare yourself for a very militant set of decades in an anti-union environment cause that’s what it will take. So we can bitch and moan from today til tomorrow but none of it is to be taken seriously until the union takes a 2007 strike as early as possible. Otherwise the future is set. We’ll get partially 2% retroactive raises for 2007 some time in 2009 with further erosion of the rights that we hold so dearly. Those are your options.

  As to this particular deal, once 90% of your delegates sold you out to base the new deal on the fact finders decision based on the bad strategy of Weingarten and company, the die was cast and quite frankly I”m surprised at just how good a deal they negotiated. Goes to show that this was all decided in the back room long before the fact finders did their jobs but that’s another story.

  Here we had an arbitrator come up with a plan. From the plan what did the city get more? From the looks of things? Nothing other than the political joke of not putting the deal up for a vote til after the selection. What did we get? Another modest raise in an extra 15 months finally without any further givebacks, more retroactive money though hardly enough to EVER get my vote, the elimination of the free coverage issue, only 2 extra days for 1/2 the teachers (the rest get the full 3 days), and some wording without teeth about micromanging us but with unfettered letters flying into our files I hardly see us going head to head with our principals over anything. Better to keep a low profile and do as we’re told. But I guess Bloomberg buys some peace and quiet with these changes so it must be worth it to him.

  No this won’t get my vote. At full retroactivty, 4% a year without additional time, then we’ll talk about my vote.

• 40 laserjet
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:15 am

  After All I’ve read, I’m still not sure what the contract means. Is Circular 6 a menu for what we can do during prep time? Or is it a menu for where the principal can assign us when we would normally be teaching. I agree with an earlier post in questioning why it makes sense to pay highly qualified teachers to watch kids during lunch when lunch aids are far cheaper. If we’re talking about student achievement then having a teacher do anything besides teaching is just stupid!

  As for Devils Advocate who keeps saying the REAL WORLD.
  I live in the real world, too. Are you saying that teaching is not part of the real world. The real world walks into my classroom everyday when the latest political agenda becomes the standard for what I can teach. The real world is in my classroom when I have to find a way to help students who have every problem you can think of. I live in the real world when I have to pay over $3 a gallon for gas to commute to work and get slammed with fuel surcharges by my electric company. I could go on.
  Let’s not judge our contract by how bad things could be. The point of the union is to make things better. The fact that other people in other jobs may have it worse changes nothing for us. Our profession is undervalued. No matter how many “raises”, ie time for money they give us it never adresses the key fact that we work very hard outside of school everyday.

  A raise would be acknowledging the time we already spend and paying us fairly for it.

  If we can’t vote on the contract until after the election, maybe that’s a good thing. Vote for Ferrer and then lets negotiate.
  Finally this union better not come out and endorse Bloomberg! If it does then we should riot in the streets!

• 41 miso
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:15 am

  Some of you posting on this thread are the poison in which ruin schools. I know your kind, hissing in the lunch room about the contract every minute you are there during your prep, professional and lunch periods.

  You talk about how “these” kids just can’t learn. You belittle every Professional Developer and development saying it is a waste of your time. While all you did during the session was gripe about something or read the newspaper.

  You complain non-stop about everything.

  Please – Retire! Take your money and run! Go to the suburbs you speak so fondly of.

  Don’t ruin your school, and try not to poison the minds of young teachers new to the system. I advise young teachers to stay away from your kind. You are nothing more then a malcontent who feeds off negativity. You are the same type that berates children and try to make them worthless so that you can feel good.

  The majority of us love this city and we choose to teach in it because we want to be a part of it. The majority of us have no issues with these givebacks, because we put the time in anyway. We do not fear letters in our file as we do our job the way it should be done.

  This is still the best job in the city. I have worked the 9-5 corporate shift. Shoot, I sit here writing this while all my friends are at work.

  Let us move on, let us figure how we can work with administration so that we can raise the level of education for these children so that we can give them the best education possible.

  Let us move forward.

• 42 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:35 am

  Miso,

  I have not said one cross word about any kid. I have said nothing about kids who can’t learn. I have not noticed any of my colleagues doing so either.

  Your comments are baseless and uncalled for. Your post consists mostly of ad-hominem name-calling rather than argument.

  Most posts here focus primarily on the contract, pro or con, rather than other posters. That is the way of civilized discussion, and that’s what I’ll teach my students and children.

  “Let’s move forward.”

  I couldn’t agree more. It’s quite sad this contract moves backward, particularly by abolishing things we paid for with zeroes in previous contracts.

  I love being a teacher, and I adore my students, for the most part. I can, however, make a clear distinction between my job and this contract.

• 43 institutional memory
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:37 am

  My fellow educators – or at least a large percentage of the ones who have commented in the past 12 hours – appear to believe in the “My mind is made up; don’t bother me with the facts” school of reality.

  I’ve been in the system for 35 years and recognize that this is the best we are going to do this time around. Period. End of discussion.

  The contract will be ratified, despite the crankiness of the unrealistic minority.

• 44 realitybasededucator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:01 am

  Miso,

  For you to equate exercising my democratic right to debate the merits and problems in the tentative contract agreement with “berating children” in order to make them “feel worthless” is a tad silly, don’t you think?

  Despite our differences on the contract agreement, I assume that every teacher who posts here at Edwize is a good teacher. I assume that we all treat our students with the respect and dignity they deserve. I assume that we are all responsible professionals who do our jobs to the best of our abilities and try to make the individual worlds of our students better each and every day we see them.

  I assume you are a good teacher, Miso. I would like you to assume I am a good teacher as well until I give you clear evidence to the contrary.

  Thanks.

• 45 Frank48
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:11 am

  “This is the best we’ll do…”

  We just received an hourly PAY CUT …( 4.4 % more hours vs. 3.75% pay increase )

  PLUS ALL OF THE GIVEBACKS !

  PLUS UFT ENDORSEMENT OF BLOOMBERG, since ratification takes place AFTER THE ELECTION !

  JUST VOTE NO – KEEP WHAT WE HAVE AND OPPOSE BLOOMBERG’S CANDIDACY !

• 46 mets6986
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:19 am

  After reading many of the contract posts maybe the critics are right … maybe public schools and public school unions have outlived their usefullness. If folks whine and bitch about 30+% percent increases over the last two contracts is there any hope? If the members turn down the contract maybe Bloomberg et al should start looking toward the Edisons of the world. In 1975 the UFT went on strike … 15,000 teachers were laid off … the union leadership settled and we came back after five days – and lent the City millions to avoid bankruptcy -it was very unpopular – and it thwarted the City plan to declare bankructcy and invalidate the contract! I’m amazed that Randi was able to wrest this contract from Bloomberg … if we do not have a contract over November 8th he’ll never sign a contract … why should he? and, he’ll do everything possible to drive us out on strike … the Bloomberg staffer who monitors this blogsite he must be chuckling and figuring how much they can save after we self-destruct? gee … those health plan benefits are awefully expensive … why should the City pay for prescriptions?

• 47 xkaydet65
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:26 am

  Frank, the 4.4% increased work load is constant throughout the contract while the $ increases build upon each other. At the end of the contract we will be working 4.4% more and receiving 15% more money. This is not to blind anyone to the realities of the givebacks and the increase in administrative powers, but to use the Math in the way you do makes us look foolish.

• 48 agetzel
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:27 am

  I cannot believe these comments. If you do not like the leadership of the union and want someone more radical–that is fine. You want a more liberal Mayor–that is fine also. However, under the present political climate, we are going to be stuck with Bloomberg and company for the next four years. He has the power of the media behind him because he is the media. Therefore, this is the best we could do under this climate. There are people in this country who want to totally destroy all worker’s rights–and they have political power. We must survive so we can fight another day. If we strike, Bloomberg could abrogate the contract (read the Triborough Law). He would be free to impose any type of working condition he wanted to. These are people who would fire the lot of us. Then where would we be? Our lives would be ruined and we would be unable to fight politically.

  I say take what we got, swallow the negatives, and now fight to change the complete political climate of this country. The economy will probably collaspe under the GOP and once more progressive people are in power in the next 4 or 8 years, then we can get a better contract. Four years from now, Bloomberg will be gone (thanks to term limits) and so will Klein. At that time we can fight for the election of a more liberal Mayor who will be more willing to negotiate a more liberal contract. In case you all forgot, because Dinkins refused to give us the contract we wanted, many did not vote for him and we got our wonderful friend Rudy instead. Therefore, no guarantee that we will get what we want even from our so-called progressive friends.

  People, wake up to political reality and stop living in a world of dreams. Politics and collective bargaining are all compromises.

• 49 Dfreecity
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:29 am

  Most of us will never warrent a letter in our file, but it doesn’t mean that many won’t be placed there. Many of us have worked in at risk low performing schools for years and do not race when the opportunity comes along every May to bump a newly appointed teacher out of a rosier position. There are so many myths that erroneously support why these givebacks won’t hurt the rank and file; they are meant to do one thing and one thing only-to give more power to administrators. Many of the people that I know that have become administrators over the years have been those who either hate teaching or feel that they were never very good at it. Some come in from business and flatly state that their goal is to be in charge of a school, never to teach. In other words, this contract is meant to further empower those who do not do what we do. This contract is an insult to every educator that has placed their life behind their job – VOTE IT DOWN!!!!!! And by the way, VOTE FOR

  FREDDY FERRER.

• 50 firefly
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:29 am

  You’re right mets6986….it’s amazing that we got anything out of Bloomberg…he knows we would never strike and that we don’t have a leg to stand on. I don’t like the contract either, but our time for fighting passed a long time ago…we should’ve called a strike during the first September without a contract. This contract will be ratified, not matter the givebacks and we will continue giving back for every subsequent raise in the future. Sorry to say, because I certainly would’ve taken action, but I think we’ll have to live with this. In the mean time we might actually try to reorganzine our own union and elect a fighter for president.

• 51 bronxenglish
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:31 am

  MISO,

  you are obviously a fellow. let me give my opinion on the majority of fellows.

  FROM THE MIND OF A FELLOW:

  “i got bored/tired in my current 9-5 job. i decided to change my career. What shall i do? i know–i’ll be a teacher. After all, the city will pay for me to get a degree and i won’t have to work as hard as i do at my current 9-5 job. So what that people who went to college to be teachers have to pay for their own masters degrees? So what if i have ZERO classroom experience? I will go into the room and be the best teacher ever. I will show all these dedictaed professionals what it REALLY means to be a teacher. What it means to really care about these kids. So what if i only started to care about them now? So what if i only care about them now, not when i first started out after college–when i took a high paying job instead of a noble one.

  So I will go into that school and I will tell these “teachers” that I am better than them because I care about the kids more than my living. After all, i have a savings account and money from all the time I put into my 9-5 job. I have no problem commuting, since i already live in NYC. I didn’t have to scrimp to buy a house over an hour away. So i don’t care about staying later. Not a problem to me if i get home at 7 pm. I never will. i can just get on the train and be home+. SO what if i don’t see my kids–I am either too young to have any (therefore I can afford to stay up later) or I am too old and my kids are already grown. After all, adults with children don’t just up and quit a job to be a fellow. That would be stupid.”

  I have been a REAL teacher for 7 years. I have seen fellows come and go. They can’t handle it, it isn’t for them, etc… I am sure I will see this happen more and more. However, i think Randi, Bloomberg, Klein, want a city full of fellows. Screw the people who are expereinced and trained in their craft. Get the people who will do whatever the admin says–they are the future of this city.

  This contract will do just that. If it passes, it will pass due to the incompetance and foolishness of the teaching fellows.

  NOTE: there are some excellent teaching fellows. I just think that they are few and far between. However, I still think that it is wrong and unfair that they get a free ride as an educator when I, who knew what i wanted to do from 5 years old, have had to scrimp and save to be a better educator. I was already good since I had the desire to do this from the beginning.

• 52 Lucy2024
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:38 am

  I agree that this contract will be ratified but people still need to vent and express their displeasure.

  My guess is that miso is a teacher new to the system and has been brainwashed into thinking that the DOE really cares about the education of the children.

  The education classes do a nice job of selling the new teachers on the idea that the reason that the DOE is such a mess and that so many children are failing is because of the non-working, cranky old teachers. And that if a new, young, vibrant teacher is willing to buy into the newest educational BS, DOE mandates, professional development and spend 16 hours a day on school work, everything will come up roses.

  This is all wrong because you are taking the accountability away from the DOE and the responsibility for learning away from the children. Without the accountability and responsibility for learning you then give the children permission to fail and permission for the DOE to blame you.

  Those of us who write on here may be a little crazy but we are passionate about education. Many of us have been around the block and see the writing on the wall. There is no way that I am going to send my fellow teachers down the river just because I am single, have nowhere to go after school, and don’t have an immediate family to support.

  This contract proposal should be examined from everyone’s perspective; from the seasoned teacher to the newest of teachers. We need to try to understand where people are coming from and forgive the newbies, they don’t know any better. There are so many things to consider that to just sign on the dotted line would be careless.

  But like I said before, I think it will pass.

• 53 agetzel
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:39 am

  Bronxenglish,

  I am a selector for the Teaching Fellows. Before you make comments, why don’t you do real research and stop basing your opinions on anecdotes. Most fellows happen not to be young rich kids or independently wealthy businessmen. Most happen to be minorities who want to make better lives for themselves and others. Also, we have become pretty good at weeding out those who will not stay in education. The statistics show that most fellows do stay for the long haul. This is all a matter of public record in case you are interested in facts and not bias.

• 54 willimake30yrs?
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:54 am

  I notice a lot of people who have posted in support of this contract are people with more than 20 yrs of service. Although I have no evidence about the intentions of any of the posters, I do know in my school a lot of the older veterans are only concerned about their pensions. They are voting for this to get the additional money to increase their pensions. They will only have to live with the more onerous components of this agreement for a couple of years at most. Than they will say “bye bye.” Younger teachers should be wary of any “50 something” colleague trying to convince you to vote “yes.” Their interests very likely are NOT YOURS! This contract has work rule changes that will make it very difficult for many people to complete 30 yr. careers.

• 55 miso
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:09 pm

  For the record, I have a BA in Education. I started out in the classroom and taught for 8 years before leaving education.

  I was disgusted with the whole system when I left. I was burnt out and had had enough. I decided to try my hand in the corporate world only to find that what I did best was educate kids. Besides, I loved having summers off. I have had the opportunity to have traveled the world because of it.

  I am good at being an educator! I expend a lot of energy trying to make every student successful! I know the system is not perfect, but has got better in the last 4 years. Better than any other time in which I have been in the system.

  Some of you take offense to my comments, but every person who has been in the DOE, ( or BOARD of ED as some of you wish it still were ) knows exactly the type of person I am talking about. We don’t need you! You are poison to the system!

  Young teachers, take note: AVOID THESE PEOPLE AT ALL COSTS! They find every fault with the system, but if you try to engage them in a pedagogical discussion, they can’t have one. They do not believe in pedagogical technique. They don’t believe that you can refine instructional technique. They have been teaching the same way they were teaching 20 years ago and refuse to accept any constructive criticism. They could care less.

  I recently bought a home in New York City, after debating about moving to the suburbs, I refused! Born & raised in The Bronx, I decided to stay and raise my family here.

  So I am more concerned with the schools in which my children will attend. I am proud to say I voted for Mike Bloomberg. I am proud to say we should reelect him as our Mayor! Although I don’t agree with everything he has done, he has most importantly made significant change in New York City Schools for the better.

  For those of you calling for Freddy Ferrer, he did little as Bronx Borough President. He is a bumbling Politician which set our city back more then 30 years to the time of John Lindsey.

  For those of you who have a personal stake in New York City schools, ( I mean who will have children who attend, or will start a family in NYC – Not you Tier 1 & 2 who live outside NYC and only care about your pensions and could care less about the NYC kids ) Let’s stay our course. Let us be part of the significant change happening in the schools. Let us be partners in making this the most dynamic educational environment in the most dynamic city in the world!

  WE CAN DO IT! But that means giving ground to gain ground!

• 56 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:13 pm

  as person with very close to 30 years who on principle will vote no, I agree wholeheartedly with willmake30yrs! I will be thinking of the younger teachers when I vote no!!!

• 57 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:14 pm

  argumentum ad hominem

• 58 miso
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:23 pm

  Ad hominem
  From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
  An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally “argument to the man”), is a logical fallacy that involves replying to an argument or assertion by addressing the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself.

  Contents [show]
  1 Ad hominem as logical fallacy
  2 Usage
  3 Validity
  4 Subtypes
  4.1 Ad hominem abusive
  4.2 Ad hominem circumstantial
  4.3 Ad hominem tu quoque
  5 Taxonomy
  6 See also

  [edit]
  Ad hominem as logical fallacy
  A (fallacious) ad hominem argument has the basic form:

  A makes claim B;
  there is something objectionable about A,
  therefore claim B is false.
  The first statement is called a ‘factual claim’ and is the pivot point of much debate. The last statement is referred to as an ‘inferential claim’ and represents the reasoning process. There are two types of inferential claim, explicit and implicit. Arguments that (fallaciously) rely on the positive aspects of the person for the truth of the conclusion are discussed under appeal to authority.

  Ad hominem is one of the best-known of the logical fallacies usually enumerated in introductory logic and critical thinking textbooks. Both the fallacy itself, and accusations of having committed it, are often brandished in actual discourse (see also Argument from fallacy). As a technique of rhetoric, it is powerful and used often, despite its lack of subtlety.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

• 59 bartholian78
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:42 pm

  Miso can you please go back to your job campaigning for Bloomberg and stop assuming you know anything about the teachers, myself included – teaching 3+ years with an MSEd if you must know, on this blog? The only poison I see around here is coming from your comments.

  You left teaching, our contract doesn’t affect your ability to put food on your table. Your lack of pedagogical knowledge shows when you say Bloomberg has made schools better? Better how, are you judging that by test scores that still aren’t scaled on a percentile basis to give parents accurate knowledge about where their children really stand academically? Or perhaps you are basing it on the corporate programs such as America’s Choice that he has brought into our classrooms, despite the fact that they are unproven in school systems such as NYC and force teachers to adhere to pedagogical practices (your favorite word) that are not always effective given the background and current skill level of the students we are struggling to educate. And most teachers Miso actually do believe their students can and should learn so they don’t end up working at WalMart or in jail. That’s why we fight for things like better pay and smaller classes and why we work our butts off long after our 7.5 hour day is over.

  Please stop insulting us and tell your buddy Mike that we are not listening.

• 60 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 12:50 pm

  miso,

  I’m glad you now know what you’re doing. It’s gratifying to see you acknowledging your own argument as a “logical fallacy.” I hope you base your next post on reason and logic rather than unwarranted name-calling. Then we’ll actually have something to discuss.

  Your success notwithstanding, it’s sad that we, as a society, subscribe to ad-hominem nonsense. It’s a favored technique of the far right when they wish to prey upon our ignorance.

  It’s tragic when shadowy groups succeed in accusing Senator Max Cleland, a war hero who lost two limbs, of being a coward. It’s sad when a shadowy group is able to label John Kerry, another war hero, a coward in order to insert a president who assiduously avoided combat.

  When O’Reilly says teacher unions are not good Americans, many people believe him. When he advocates “right to work” conditions for teachers, which would effectively eviscerate unions as bargaining units, many people believe that too.

  When US Secretary of Education Rod Paige, who was never an educator called the NEA a “terrorist organization,” a lot of people believed that too. Fortunately, there were people willing to speak out and now he’s history.

  It’s high time we raised the level of discourse in this country. It’s our duty to speak what we beleive to be the truth.

  I respect your right to speak in support of this contract. In this country though, even under President GW Bush, we who differ have the same right to oppose it.

• 61 bloomyhater
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:07 pm

  I am a secretary who is currently working in a high school. I was a secretary in an elementary school for 9 years which I loved, but the principal decided that her budget wasn’t that great and in order to save some money, she couldn’t afford to have two secretaries. So she decided like many other principals do, that a school aide can do the job of a pupil accounting secretary. I was the one with the least seniority and was excessed. I ended up in a split position in two small schools until one of the principals was able to keep me full time. One of the schools didn’t have a computer for ATS, Payroll, etc. so I had to go to a third school and use their computer.

  Where was the UFT then. They were taking my dues, but I was told to put in a workload grievance. That’s the answer the UFT has for secretaries. Instead of fighting for secretaries and stopping principals from using school aides to do the job of a secretary, the UFT has secretaries put in a workload grievance. Doing this doesn’t help the situation. The UFT is just letting the Board of Education and Principals get away with this. This issue should be part of the contract.

  With reference to the new contract, I am not exactly thrilled with it, but it’s better than nothing at this point. Bloomberg will be elected again, and if we say “No” to this contract where are we? If we strike, Bloomberg wins, not us or the kids. He gets 2 days pay for every day that we are out. He would just love for the UFT to strike. He really gains if the there is a strike. After he takes all that money and puts Weingarten in jail and has the union pay a fine, then he’ll give teachers, etc. a 4.25 raise, which he wanted to begin with.

  I understand the point of teachers, the stress of being in a classroom all day, but having a teacher in the lunchroom makes a different. Yes, school aides are handling the job, but lunchrooms ran more smoothly when a teacher was present. At this point in time, and with this mayor, you have to give up something and do a little extra work to get a raise. Bloomberg won’t give a penny unless teachers, etc. do extra work for it. He runs the schools the way he does his business.

  On the otherhand, if Ferrar would become mayor, there is no guarantee that he would give us a better contract. He can say he would now, but when he’s in, it could be a whole different ballgame.

  I didn’t vote for Bloomberg in the past election and I definitely won’t vote for him this time, but it sure looks like he will be voted in again, and then where do we stand. I am a single secretary who can’t afford to strike and lose two days pay for every day we are out. I know that I have to support the union, and if everyone wants to strike I would go out on strike, but in my opinion, this contract doesn’t look that bad. Teachers, etc. aren’t giving up that much.

  With respect to going back on hall duty or back in the lunchroom, I know what it is to serve lunch. When the school that I work in first opened, we didn’t have a full cafeteria. We had 150 students and had lunch delivered to our school daily. We didn’t have anyone from Food Services that would come in daily to serve food, the one school aide that we have had to serve the lunch. When she was out sick, I, a secretary, had to serve lunch. I am so happy that we have a full cafeteria now, and a kitchen worker who serves the food.

  I didn’t like doing it, but it didn’t kill me. It won’t kill teachers to rotate amongst themselves and do hall duty or cafeteria duty in order to get a contract settlement. From what the mayor was saying before, the givebacks he wanted, were a lot worse that what he’s asked for in this tentative contract.

• 62 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:21 pm

  Miso,

  I think you are well intended but frankly out of you mind with good intentions. No matter what you say about Bloomberg and company and let’s face it he couldn’t be in there if many teachers didn’t feel like you and vote for him- he would NEVER NEVER NEVER send his children or anyone in his family to public schools nor would any of his friends even CONSIDER it. Have you even heard of Dalton? Sacred Heart? Collegiate? Trinity? Saint Davids? Saint Hilda and Saint Hughes? Calhoun School? Nightingale Bamford? Horace Mann? Marymount so proudly facing the Met on Fifth Avenue? Fordham Prep? Ramaz? If you are like many of our new teachers those places may not even be part of your ken. (IF you really know and love New York so well here is a pop quiz: Of the schools I mentioned above, which two did the LAST mayor send his children to) If you are like well over 95 per cent of NYC’s younger/newer teachers you can’t answer that question correctly because you are not well read enough to know the answer. (yes, we old farts don’t all know the answer either, but we are more likely to)

  Tragically, no one who is anyone sends their children to New York City public schools these days. (If you consider New York Presbyterian Hospital what per cent of their physicians send their children to New York City public schools would you say?) If you consider Skadden, Arps, (if you know what Skadden, Arps is) what per cent of their attorneys send their children to New York City public schools?
  The answers here are simply risible!! It is an indisputable fact of life? Nothing Michael Bloomberg did or does will ever change that!! You are simply delusional at best if you can’t acknowledge that.

  Indeed, in many ways he has made it far worse. I myself always attended Catholic parochial schools (and no I would never send a child of mine to a public school anymore than Mike Bloomberg would) so I had not had much exposure to Jewish teachers in my youth. When I first entered the New York City school system I was very impressed by the large number of Jewish teachers and their great love of learning and education. If they had faults, it was that they saw education, that they so loved, as a panacea of everything and perhaps didn’t always understand why all other ethnic groups didn’t see education as the passageway from oppression and poverty. These highly literate, well read people have largely left the system and often worked to assure that their children made their contribution elsewhere. For that matter Randi’s mother was a teacher. Maybe that’s why Randi made sure she went to law school and her sister went to medical school. They weren’t going to suffer like mom for such pennies.

  In their place are a vertiable plethora of well intended tyros like yourself (although I shouldn’t use the word tyro because our newer teachers often can’t define it, then again they may not be able to define plethora either) who can’t readily give you the dates of the American Civil War anymore than they can tell you what a gerundial phrase is, don’t even ask about the predicate nominative. It is not uncommon to find a newer teacher today struggling with plural possessive or even rudimentary spelling. You may hear one say “that’s mines” or that they will “conversate” with a student’ A new teacher most often can’t tell you the difference between Gwen Verdon and the Battle of Vurdon and typically has heard of neither. They may well believe Bloomsday is when the mayor mails you a few hundred lousy dollars just before the election. Don’t be surprised if they think Caravaggio is some guy on “The Sopranoes”!!

  Yes, we experienced teachers are often skeptical of “new” trends in education, just like we would be skeptical of a re-make of “Casablanca”! Is it because we don’t want anything new? Of course not? Who wouldn’t want something better? We are experienced enough to know trends come and go in education with almost the same celerity as in fashion. Often what is being branded as “new” is just a re hash of something old, even something that wasn’t very good in the first place. But since newer teachers haven’t been around long enough,they may not realize that. So yes, a Ms. Goldberg with 35 years of experience -she even knows what the pluperfect is trust me- is skeptical of the “new’ language arts program because she knows that her daughter or son who just finished Princeton last year didn’t do anything like what is being presented as innovative and is doing just fine, thank you.

  As for you, of course, I can’t convince you because you know it all!! We with decades of experience have nothing on you. You are never going to see it differently you believe. (I too remember when I thought experienced teachers were lazy) I suggest you write down what you believe now, make a recording of yourself, do a video of yourself as well propouning your beliefs. Then in ten, fifteeen, even twenty years from now revisit what you now believe. Only then with 20/20 hindsight will you look back and realize how incredibly naive, how incredibly myopic, how foolishiy quixotic and yes how just plain stupid you were back in October 2005!!

  As for your children that you plan on conceiving and sending to New York City public schools hey maybe when they grow up you can send them to the war in Iraq as well. That way you can support Mr. Bush and his policies as much as you support Mike Bloomberg and his policies. With Mike’s good buddy George Bush and subsequent neocons running things there is no reason to believe that war couldn’t still be operative for your kids as well.

• 63 Schoolgal
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:24 pm

  Dear Miso,

  I too am a very dedicated teacher. I report in August to set up my room as many of us already do. I stay until 5-6 pm catching up on work. I met with colleagues during the summer to review the new Everyday Math program. I have attended Columbia Reading/Writing Workshops during the summer. I have even attended many Saturday workshops sponsored by the UFT Teacher Center and Early Childhood Association. I have what can only be described as very positive letters in my file. But most of all, I work hard to inspire my students.

  Like you, I left teaching after 10 years for the business world and came back.

  I would like to think we have much in common. However you choose to call teachers who understand the history of the labor movement poison. How unfortunate. You and others also compare what we do to the business world. I’ve been in both worlds, and there is no comparison. I have not been in an air conditioned setting for 15 years. People who have joined the Fellows program are dropping out left and right. New administrators do not believe in professional collaboration so teachers can no longer share views and concerns.

  At this point in my career, I would rather have a contract that secures the rights of all teachers (young and old) rather than the raise. I also want my pension plan, as it stands now, either protected or improved since I have worked hard to insure my future securtiy. (The UFT site does not specify the changes they seek in the pension except for years of service.) That is why I am voting NO.

• 64 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:25 pm

  FOLKS MIKE CAN’T WIN IF WE AND OUR FAMILIES EN MASSE VOTE FOR FREDDY AND VOTE THE CONTRACT DOWN. IT IS ALREADY BETTER THAN THE FACT FINDERS REPORT WHY COULDN’T IT IMPROVE AGAIN?

• 65 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:32 pm

  Freddy can win!!!

• 66 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:38 pm

  realist-

  is that the best the city can do though try to make incentives for the most experienced people to leave? What sense does that make? Well I know you are trying to be realist!!!

• 67 down_and _OUT?
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:39 pm

  I would like some help here please. Two questions: When would we be doing this lunch duty? I have one prep, one lunch and one professional period when I am to meet with other teachers regarding students and make phone calls home. What exactly would be taken away to do lunch duty? Also, people are talking about this 15% as though it is bringing us closer to the suburbs salaries. The teacher’s salaries in my school district in Westchester has gone up 14.85% over the past 52 months (prorating one raise for 4 months). And that WAS a raise, they didn’t have to sell a longer day or a shorter summer. I am so ashamed to be a teacher. I feel we are so disrespected by our students, by the media, by our politicians and now by our union leaders! Why is the vote postponed until after the election?
  …and to bronxenglish – you’re just nuts! Get over yourself, I have met some fine fellows who want to try something they think will be more rewarding personally and most are getting very little by way of tuition relief.

• 68 xkaydet65
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:52 pm

  Hey shouldhavegone, well said, but I think your spelling is in need of rectification. It’s Saint Hilda and Saint Hughs. The King’s Church would never add an ‘e’. And don’t be so down on newbies. One guy I work with, a former Marine in his 30s, and a lefty like yourself, is extremely well read and knowledgeable. I can discuss 40s flicks with him. Several others are just as aware. But they took their ED courses after their BAs so I think that has something to do with it. Also, as a Xavier Grad, I wouldn’t put my rival Jebbie high school up there with CoSH and Dalton. BTW if you want two good reads pick up Robert Daley’s and Peter Quinn’s latest efforts. You’ll like them.
  Take care and vote no!

• 69 miso
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 1:54 pm

  I can assure you that this contract affects me as I am certainly a member of the UFT. Although I said I left education, I did return for my second tour of duty and have been in the system a total of 14 years.

  I am not calling anyone posting in this blog anything. I am however stating what is a fact that exists within our schools – “the Malcontent” who poisons every discussion relating to making our schools better. My choice of words is no different than those being used for Randi, Bloomberg or Joel Klein. (You refer to them as if they are our enemy, not partners in which we must work together with.)

  I can assure you I am a registered Democrat, who could care less about party lines and more about doing what is right for the city in which I was born and raised my entire life. Not some transplant or transient individual who wilt under the New York City hustle of life.

  My support stated for Mayor Bloomberg is no different then people’s support for Freddy Ferrer on the sole basis of removing Bloomberg and his educational reform.

  I see school’s getting better in “Small Schools” initiative taking place at the high school level. “Small Schools” are indeed working and will be reflected in the next 4 years as drop out rates begin to decline. Another major factor that will aid to the declining drop out rate will be the decision not to socially promote. The high schools are already starting to see the results of students with better skills.

  We are indeed transforming a system which was complacent and satisfied with the status quo into a truly dynamic educational system that benefits the children of this great city!

  I say this as a New Yorker, as a teacher and most importantly a parent of child who will attend public schools in New York City!

  Let us move forward! To do so, we must give ground to gain ground.

  When we have turned this educational system around, and make it the best of all large city educational systems we can continue to move together in structuring our contract into a win / win situation for us all.

• 70 Leo Casey
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:12 pm

  A few points are worth noting.

  In the last mayoral election, the UFT endorsed three different Democratic candidates in turn — Hevesi, Ferrer and Green — against Bloomberg, because we knew what his election would bring. If anything, the last four years have confirmed the wisdom of those decisions. The suggestion that Randi or anyone else in the UFT leadership were even entertaining the idea of supporting Bloomberg borders on the paranoid and the hallucinatory, as if someone was having bad acid flashbacks from the 1960s.

  We have issues of timing that will determine the date of the ratification vote, because we have to make sure [1] we can get all of the information, including the actual Memorandum of Agreement, to the members, then [2] get all of the ballots and other materials [since it is a secret ballot election, it involves double envelopes, the outside one to verify the right to vote, the inside one to maintain the secrecy of the vote] to the schools, then [3] allow time to conduct balloting in the schools, and finally [4] have the ballots sent to the American Arbitration Association, which must check to see if the vote is valid, and then count the votes. All in all, it is a major organizing undertaking. We are now working to see how we can manage all of that. Our bias is to finish that process earlier, as opposed to later, because we want to get the money to our members as soon as possible — they have waited far too long as it is. But it is the demands of the ratification process, and not the mayoral election timeline, which will govern our decisions on when the ratification vote will occur, and when the results will be announced.

  It is interesting to note how opposition to the contract agreement, especially from the same small coterie of people who write again and again, manages to discuss every topic under the sun, other than the actual contract proposal I outlined above.

• 71 coldstorage5
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:25 pm

  Hello,
  I am 13 yr teacher vet. Married to a nyc teacher. Parents both educators and my sister as well.
  I taught 6 yrs in nyc in the BX. I now teach in Westchester county and a mid level salary school.
  I was in NYC in 1995 when we voted down that lousy contract. I feel/know my wife and sister need to do the same.

  Caf/hall duty is horrible. That alone is enough to vote no.
  The “15 %” raise is a cola ( cost of living adjustment).
  Letters in file with out due process is a complete sell out.
  There are so many wacked AP’s out there that will now load up these files with letters. Now they will not hesitate, with out the threat of a hearing.
  Educators in our metro area dont get paid enough, especially in NYC.
  Randi is a joke, sell out. She needs to go.
  All teachers need to vote this one down.
  Finally, when a collegue tells you ” we wont get a better contract” remind them of 1995 and HOW HORRIBLE CAFETERIA DUTY IS.
  Take care and good luck.
  Steve

• 72 willimake30yrs?
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:32 pm

  Leo,

  There are a lot of people in the schools against this contract who don’t post here. There are too many areas of contention that bother different people. Extra time, extra days, cafe duty, letters in the file, suspension without pay upon alleged misconduct, no seniority transfers.. Does that mean they will vote “no”…Who knows? But I personally have heard a lot of gripes about so many different things that I am not so sure this will pass.

• 73 bronxenglish
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:51 pm

  i am sure cafeteria duty in elementary school is okay. i did it in middle school when i student taught and when i first began teaching in NYC. But in high school?

  lunch/hall/bathroom duty in HS will amount to hearing “fuck you miss” nearly every minute of every day. And it will be because i asked them to remove their hat or go to class. I do not get paid enough for that now or ever.

  How many times do people in the business world hear a person YOUNGER than them tell them to “fuck off?” how many times do they hear a child say “you gotta respect me first. then i’ll respect you?”
  I think many members of the UFT (and non-teachers) fail to see the differences between the elementary age children and the high school age.

• 74 Alum32K
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:53 pm

  We have exhausted all of our options.

  Yes we can look at 15% and say NO! Yes, we can say NO to retroactive pay. Yes we can vote down this contract, but then we’d have to go on STRIKE.

  How many of us who would vote NO to this contract would stand on a picket line (very likely over the winter) everyday and lose 2 days pay for everyday we do so?

  The money is good. Just take a look at the salary scales and see how much we’ll be making by Christmas.

  DC37 got $1000 lump sum. Some of us will see 4 times that in retroactive pay and 5 times that in wage increases.

  We got a great deal!

• 75 realitybasededucator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 2:53 pm

  Leo,

  By agreeing to a contract before the election, by holding the UFT contract vote after the election, and by failing to endorse Ferrer in the mayoral campaign, Randi Weingarten is helping Bloomberg get reelected.

  This is not to say that a Ferrer endorsement is a good idea. I can understand why Randi doesn’t want to endorse anybody. She hasn’t backed a winner in quite a while and she feels she cannot afford to back another loser, so she sits this one out. She probably feels that Bloomberg is going to win anyway, so why bother backing Freddie when it can only bring her grief in the long run?

  Certainly these are rational reasons for not backing a candidate in the mayoral race.

  Regardless of the reasons for WHY Weingarten is not endorsing anybody in the mayoral campaign, however, the practical effect is that it helps reelect Mayor Mike, plain and simple.

  It is not paranoid to see Randi’s moves these past few weeks as helping Bloomberg get reelected. It is reality.

  As for not dealing with the actual contract proposal you wrote above, the point is NONE of these concessions should have been on the table for negotiation. By agreeing to the arbitration and then by agreeing to the odious arbitration report, Weingarten and UNITY allowed the mayor to set the negotiating agenda, which ultimately led to this abomination of a contract.

  Randi was hoodwinked, Leo, and no amount of careful spin and Orwellian propagandizing can hide the fact that Randi’s response to Mayor Bloomberg has been as incompetent, inept, and ineffectual as the Democrats’ response to Preznit Bush and the GOP has been for the first four years of his presidency.

  We have been rolled.

• 76 xkaydet65
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:18 pm

  To reality

  I’m voting NO, but I’d like to try and understand what the UFT did. I think they felt they could beat Bloomie on the contract language so that the givebacks or some of them are not quite what they seem. The 37 minute extension is already under state scrutiny because the contract clearly states that it would begin AFTER the students are dismissed. This clearly implies that it does not involve ALL kids. The state has questions about whether selected students can be compelled to stay for after school sessions. The DOE didn’t think about this when they agreed to it.Also most principals and APs are too incompetent or lazy to come up with and implement a real menu of professional activities. Yet they can’t simply assign everyone to cafes and homerooms without offering other options. These things and the PD stufff they have to do will take time away from their classroom excursions since these new activities are required by the contract.
  One area where the union screwed up big time was in selling out those with after school per session. Since not all kids will be in the 37 min and there cannot be simultaneous paid per session during the 37 min, what do kids and parents do who want afterschool? Go home and come back? This fact was not thought out by anyone.The 37 minutes is going to haunt the DOE because I am sure they have no plan on how to implement it, and if they cannot compel attendance, there are some schools that will have a lot of one on one tutoring.

• 77 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:18 pm

  We most certainly do not have to strike if we turn down the contract. The old contract remains valid until we agree to a new one.

  Anyone who does not see where this contract is leading is folling no one but themselves. There will most certainly be a full sixth class dangled like a carrot in front of us, and the rank and file will say “Oh, well, it’s only another ten minutes,” because they’ve been brainwahed by this contract and its predecessor into believing their time is worth nothing.

  You’re already teaching a virtual sixth class under this contract. Leo Casey can defend the lead teacher position all he wants, but his defense is only valid if he fails to anticipate why Klein put it there and what it’s leading up to–and anyone who’s read Klein’s 8 page contract knows why he’s putting these measures into place.

  Also, when future contracts, like those of the past, offer zeroes, you’ll have given up our hard-won rights for nothing.

  “Oh, it’s the best we can do.” How many times have I heard that?

  I heard it from Sandra Feldman in 95, when she urged us to vote for a 25 year longevity. We voted it down and it was reduced to 22.

  Then, based on a DC37 fraud, every single union in NY endured years of zeroes under Rudy, during the city’s biggest economic boom in my memory.

  Now that Bloomie has money, he offers us crap and wants givebacks besides. “That’s the best we can do.”

  Only if you think so.

  Money comes and goes, but lunchroom duty is forever.

  Reject this contract. Tell Mayor Mike to go build a sports stadium or donate another 7 million bucks to the Republican party. If he wants to buy these things back, things we took zeroes for, let him give us a raise, and THEN pay for them.

• 78 NYC Educator
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:20 pm

  Xkaydet65,

  Good point.

  I hadn’t thought of that.

• 79 Schoolgal
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:38 pm

  Miso,

  I too know of Freddy’s reputation which is far from stella, and I do not think he will make a great mayor. But politics is not the issue–RESPECT is.

  Do you really want your child getting a “scripted” education? How would you feel if you worked with a great teacher who was relegated to a “sub” because of loss of senority rights?

  I too live and work in this great city.

  Thanks to the UFT transfer, I was able to get a position closer to home. I went from spending $20/wk in gas to $20/month. (Now it’s $50) Also I started working during the 70’s when excessing and layoff were commonplace.

  I student taught and worked in Spanish Harlem and really enjoyed working with children in need until the first wave of layoffs came. I found a job in Brooklyn, but was excessed again. I later retuned to District 4 as a recertified teacher, but was laid off again. If it weren’t for senority rights, I would have had to find a new career path.

  I am not saying that Randi or anyone else is the enemy, however I am saying that my $800 plus dues should give me the right to voice my opinion without being called malcontent.

  Yes, there are teachers who complain about everything and some are a disgrace to the profession. A good administrator should build a case against them, and as a former UFT rep and U Ratings Advocate, I have seen principals win these cases. However, I also know of cases where UFT reps were being constantly harassed with letters in their file because they stood up for the rights of teachers.

  Are you an elementary level teacher? When was the last time you performed lunch duty without taking an aspirin? Don’t you think administrators should also have that responsibility? They did back in the 70’s and 80’s, and believe me, students followed all the rules.

  You talk about partnerships. Have you read the works of Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond on professional staff development?
  This system has not had a professional development community since the dissolution of District 2M. Even when I was a staff developer, I couldn’t meet the needs of the teachers or students because the district office mandated the topics. Even now I serve on my school’s professional development committee, but our principal has decided on the next 3 topics of discussion. (Is that what you mean by working together?)

  It’s hard for me to respect your point of view when you have never experienced excessing and layoffs, or have known anyone that received an undeserved letter.

  Do not confuse the “malcontents” with people who really care about education, children, and unionism. I have lost out on school positions due to school senority rights. I was disappointed, but I always respected the contract. A malcontent would want that provision changed.

  This contract will pass because teachers like you see the money over the real issues.

  Are you also looking forward to the day when tenure no longer exists? Well judging by the way you characterize teachers, I bet YES!

• 80 laserjet
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:51 pm

  I was thinking about the logistics of the after school session, too.

  Here’s what I’m thinking. If we’re supposed to dismiss the regular day and then teach the 37 minutes half of that time will be spent waiting for kids to get picked up and bus duty. Will there be two bus picks. One for regular dismissal and one for tutoring. Will kids who stay for tutoring need to be picked up.
  Don’t after school programs normally involve a snack? Are we going to spend time eating with them too.
  The tutor time might look good on paper but unless it’s mandatary and pre official dismissal it will be a disaster.

  As for Miso, I don’t think the readers here trust what you have to say or your reasons for saying it. If you want to take a message back to Bloomberg, tell him that we don’t like the contract. While the current leadership locally and nationally seem to think that protecting personal and work rights is bad, people who have to work for a living understand that no amount of money is worth selling your rights.

• 81 get_me_a_contract
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 3:57 pm

  This is my take (and I swore I would never post again).
  I am voting YES on the contract. I am not happy with a lot of it. I think that not being able to grieve letters put in one’s file is awful. I think that the addtional staff development days are the pits. I am highly disappointed that class size was not an issue and that it was not reduced.

  However, there are some good things in the contract, including the raises and the abatement of some of the micromanagement.

  I don’t know if we could have gotten a better deal but I suspect that if we vote this one down, the renogiated deal will be more severe. I don’t want a strike. It would hurt my students and it would hurt my family.

  I think that this is not an ideal world. Yeah, on Long Island, the teachers far outearn NYC teachers and work fewer days in less difficult situations. I think that we will always be behind them in conditions and pay. Our children are not deemed worthy of what the kids on LI are worthy of. Randi cannot change that.

  Mike Bloomberg blocked the ballot initiative to lower class sizes. For me, a smaller class would be a paramount issue. I hope that this is addressed either in the next contract or on the ballot sometime in the near future.

  Nevertheless, despite all the comments I read on this blog, I think that this contract will pass overwhelmingly. It is not a great contract, but it is much better than the one I thought we would eventually get.

• 82 dismayed
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 4:12 pm

  TO: get_me_a_contract:

  Why would you vote yes on a contract that you make so many arguments against?

  If we vote the contract down, we revert to the previous contract.

  Don’t vote yes to a contract that goes against what you believe we really deserve!

• 83 R. Skibins
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 5:24 pm

  Vote “NO” and sign this petition.

  http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/UFTContract/

• 84 Disillusioned_in_NYC
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 5:33 pm

  Al Shanker must be turning in his grave with this new contract. As they say “we’ve come a long way, baby” but now we’re going backwards at a faster pace. I’ll vote “no” to this contract and sit and wait 4 years for Bloomberg to get out of office and Randi Weingarten to be thrown out. What a disgrace to our union!

• 85 firefly
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 5:48 pm

  The question of how those 37 end of day minutes are to be used is really quite interesting and will pose a problem for the DOE…someone mentioned that we can’t mandate that the students stay later and that’s correct. I can’t imagine the students in my school lining up for extra tutoring…especially when they have home responsibilities, work, etc.

  Also, in my school, there aren’t even enough classrooms to accomodate all of the teachers. Will we have to share a room? Also, how can we run our afterschool clubs when we all have to leave the building by 4:30? Can we host a 1/2 hour sports or drama club? I don’t think so. I’m thinking that most schools will have to distribute the extra time over the daily schedule and frankly, I’d rather add 5 minutes to each of my classes. That’s an intelligent way to serve the students.

  Someone also mentioned the class size issue. Isn’t class size a moot point really. I mean, I agree that a class of 15 -20 students is perfect and that children learn much better in a smaller environment, but most schools are, in fact, overcrowded and would there be enough teachers to go around if we halved each class? How many more classrooms would we need? I think class size is a problem that just can’t be fixed at this point in time.

• 86 bronxenglish
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 6:08 pm

  firefly–even adding 5 extra minutes a class will still screw up after school stuff. In addtions YES YES YES CLASS SIZE MATTERS!!!

  34 kids in a room is ridiculuous–especially when they are high schoolers who don’t fit in desks or have so much stuff it overflows into the aisles or onto other desks.

  Ideally, i would love to see class sizes at 25. that would be managable. Not to mention, i don’t think THAT many extra teachers would need to be hired.

• 87 firefly
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 6:34 pm

  The high school I teach in has classrooms that can accomodate 500 students. Our firecode calls for not more than 600 people in the building. At last count we had 700+ students, not to mention faculty, etc. The DOE seems to have more power in this case than the Fire Dept. code. We have staggered sessions because we do not have the space (classrooms) to accomodate all of the students. We teach in the auditorium among other non-classroom spaces. I think my principal would be hard pressed to hire even 5 – 10 more teachers to make up for even one additional class per subject area if we reduced classes from 34 -25 students. I don’t know, I simply don’t see it happening. We’re a small school having this problem…what about the larger school? How many teachers would they need?

• 88 letter in the file
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 6:44 pm

  Here is a copy of my October 4th post from the “From the Website” thread:

  Contract Proposals

  Here is the UFT’s Hotline message:

  http://www.uft.org/hotline

  Here is the UFT’s press release:

  http://www.uft.org/news/agreement_contract

  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:

  newyorkmetro.com/guides/salary/14497/index.html

  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:

  http://www.nycsci.org

  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?

• 89 get_me_a_contract
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:07 pm

  I just have a question for those who are so adamently against this mediocre contract.

  What is the strategy for getting a better one?

  Let me know and I will vote against this one, but please don’t propose just sitting with what we have for four more years waiting out Bloomberg. I don’t think that will do much but punish us financially.

• 90 coldstorage5
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 7:33 pm

  To the people afraid of a strike:
  My parents did strike in the 60’s .
  Yes the did lose some time, BUT,
  They made up the extra time during the school wk by working longer a few days.
  The taylor law was/is a joke that weak teachers are afraid of.
  The union will negotiate back days into a new contract.
  If NYC teachers did strike 1,000,000 kids would be one the street. Politicians would cave big time.
  Thats the problem with educators, they’ll say this is the best we can get. They are dead wrong. A strike would last 2 maybe 3 days at most.
  This deal sucks and everyone with a brain in their head knows that.
  Finally,
  Just remember .
  LUNCH DUTY IS HORRIBLE.

• 91 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:17 pm

  getmeacontract

  Were you with us in l995? it was the same s****!! We were told a contract was the best that could be done. Never mind thecontract included two zeroes based on a totally rigged, vote at DC 37 the architect of which went to prison. we voted it down and a slightly better one and only slightly better one I must admit appeared. There was no strike both sides wanted a deal. Don’t be that scared of Bloomberg, in some crazy way he wants to be the educational mayor, working without a new contract there are numerous ways we could rattle his cage even after he was re elected, ie. He shows up for a grand gala at the Met with the part of New York totally unknown to the experience of most teachers. But the UFT stages an impromptus bit of street theater. We dress up in Dickensian rags begging the attendees to help us get raises. Look at the guy who goes to Bloomberg speeches dressed up a la George Bush to remind everyone that Bloomberg’s is Bush’s friend. I think if this is rejected, Randi could get some improvements. The letter in file thing is strictly non monetary for example. Remember Klein wants that to expedite his firing of tenured non probabtionary teachers. That is very dangerous and one of the big reasons I will be voting no!! Hope you think about this!!!

• 92 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:23 pm

  15 per cent divided by 4.33333 years the length of the contract equals 3.46 per year. That is objective reality. Now considering inflation, the heinous rise in the cost of education and transportation, the price of housing in the Metropolitan area, Is a raise of 3.46 per year worth paying for with givebacks?

  You tell me?

• 93 fromthemainland
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:25 pm

  People who write so negatively and prodigiously here – and it does seem like a very select group – should read the memorandum of agreement and understand what it really says. Some of your outrage lacks any basis in the facts of the agreement. Far too much of what is written here is political polemic by opposition to Randi Weingarten.
  Are there some things that are unpalatable in the memorandum of agreement? Absolutely.
  Are any of them issues about which the members would have gone on strike? Absolutely NOT!
  Finally, regarding the mayoral election, any worker in this town who votes for Bloomberg is out of touch with reality and is anti-labor! If you need a UFT endorsement of Ferrer to persuade you of that fact, then for sure you would never have been on strike! For all the people making a fuss about it, put up or shut up. The Ferrer campaign needs money and it is matched significantly under the campaign finance law! It would be interesting to find out if all the complainers here are willing to put their money where their mouths are! I intend to do so.

• 94 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 8:51 pm

  fromthemainland

  yes, we should all contribute to Ferrer, thanks for reminding us not to be hypocrites!!!!

• 95 firebrand
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:07 pm

  bronxenglish
  you are new you are green I’ve been teaching English in NYC schools for 15 years and I did it because I wanted to. Sure I began teaching to pay for law school and did well in law school for that one year that I did both. But I stayed with teaching because I wanted to teach. I loved it.

  How dare you say that as a fellow you got into it because you “actually wanted to teach kids” as opposed to any of us.

  I’m sure it’s more likely that you wanted summers off.

  Keep your sweeping generalizations to yourself…and hope that your principal doesn’t find a reason to transfer you on a whim.

• 96 hypatiaNYC
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:25 pm

  I’ve read all the comments on this board and I am truly amazed at the venom directed towards Randi. I, for one. think she did a stand up job for us and I applaud her. It’s clear to me that there are people posting here who would criticize her with the harshest language regardless of the contract she delivered to us. Their only suggestions are to strike immediately (a definite loser as many people don’t want to go), or to wait out the next four years until the next mayor takes office (making it 7 ½ years without a raise). I reject both of these suggestions as un-doable.

  Let’s face it, these are very difficult times for labor unions. DC37 accepted a contract that’s deplorable at best, and the police were forced into givebacks for paltry raises. Randi, on the other hand, managed to take that awful fact finding report and either eliminate or mitigate the most onerous provisions, while handing us a 15% raise with retro. I don’t think it’s perfect, but I certainly realize that it is indeed the best we can do under the circumstances, and I urge everyone to vote for it as I will.

  Some people here have complained about the letter in the file provision. Frankly, I think this is better. In the past, an administrator could write whatever he wanted about you and the letter would follow you around for the rest of your career. You could grieve it, of course, but the process would take over a year to reach arbitration (if it got that far), and most of the time, you would lose anyway to ‘supervisory judgment’. Now, the letter will be gone after three years.

  I also think the transfer policy, while eliminating SBO and seniority transfers, has possibilities. In the past, only 50% of vacancies were advertised, and there were caps limiting the number of teachers in each school from leaving. Now all vacancies will be advertised and the caps are gone. Woe to that miserable. letter-writing principal who closes in June with a full staff and opens in September to discover that everyone has transferred out.

  Newer teachers were always on edge about being excessed over the summer or on the first day of school and then having to risk being placed anywhere in the city. In this new agreement, potential excessees have to be notified by June 15th so they can look elsewhere if they wish. Otherwise, the Regional Office must place them in the district or the region. No more being thrown into the borough or city pool. If no positions are available in the region, then they return to their schools as ATR’s until positions opens up.

  Finally, there’s the question of time. Yes, we have to give up two days. I won’t relish coming in before Labor Day, but the extra money in my paycheck will go a long way to pacify me. As for the additional ten minutes…I await to see how the DOE intends to deal with the busing issue. Remember, the 37 ½ minute tutorial takes place after dismissal. Most of the students will be going home and only those in need of remediation will be staying for small group instruction, clearly limited to groups of 10. Again, a 15% raise will do a lot to alleviate my negative feelings about a few extra minutes.

  All in all, considering the political climate we public sector people find ourselves in, Randi did a terrific job for us. Instead of criticizing her, calling her a Bloomberg lackey or ranting for her resignation, we should be thanking her for a job well done. I urge you to vote yes on this contract.

• 97 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:34 pm

  Xkaydet65

  Thanks for your response!! I don’t want to attack anyone but Miso sounds really out of it!!! Sorry for the mispelling but once you know about something like St. Hilda’s who would really want to send their very precious child(ren) to one of our schools if they could avoid it. (And yes, I know I am something of a snob but if it were my kids as I say. And yes up at St. Hilda’s you do have to get along with Ms. Connors who rules with an iron fist. All those places have their own culture. Obviously too Dalton is not Calhoun or visa versa if you want to nit pic me on that one.

  In addition to being a long term tenured teacher, I hold an MBA in management and the intellectual capital teachers or any group of professionals represent is a real interest of mine. Sure I want a pension, yet on some level I also really resent that my employer is eager to offer me a check based on my life expectancy only to replace me in the classroom with a teacher who may not know what an automat ever was.

  Last summer incidentaly I taught physics to a student from Calhoun. Her parents were both attorneys who had a good handful of children between them but they were just sick of our schools so they just took out their checkbook. It is a whole different world, but obviously if you went to Xavier you know something of that. Whenever I meet a parent who sends their child there they are usually very pleased.

  Miso is just ridiculous. She talks about this New York she is supporting, but unfortunately the real movers and shakers in New York would have no part of our schools except perhaps to attend a charity fund raiser or two out of pity or at best noblese obligese. Hey, then again some people are very proud to send their children to the war in Iraq as well. Who am I so to say with my left wing snobbism?

  Thanks again for the response. I do think we should be respectful of one another. People are understandably hot under the collar right now.

• 98 Leo Casey
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:38 pm

  I don’t know of any serious political observer who does not agree that the maximum leverage the UFT had was in the period up until the election. Bloomberg had to worry about the consequences of having advertisements on the air and teachers on the streets, while he was seeking re-election as an education mayor. The suggestion that Randi and the UFT should have postponed final negotiations on a contract already 2 1/2 years overdue until after election day is a suggestion that we should have waited until our leverage was gone.

• 99 mshalo18
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 9:45 pm

  To all of you who say, “this is the best we can do”:

  Have you ever been at the mercy of a lunatic principal? Well, I have. A principal who made up stories about me, repeatedly told me to leave, wrote letters that were always removed at step 2- this is the kind of person I was at the mercy of for 6 years. Under the new contract that Randi has negotiated, I would have been out of the teaching profession a long time ago- and quite frankly, that would be a shame, because I am a damn good teacher. My story is not unique, either. It happens ALL the time.

  ALl Randi had to say to Bloomie was “NO- I WON’T negotiate a contract full of givebacks-my members deserve better”.

• 100 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:01 pm

  Leo,

  Thanks for your balanced comments. The real problem with the contract is that it is the beginning of the end of tenure. DOI investigations are not fair. Pecadilloes can be transmogrified, fiction fabricated, and even out and out lies propounded. Union lawyers are not necessarily the best for those things. A private attorney and investigator could cost one twenty five thousand dollars in one of those cases very, very easily nd quickly. All this when your pay check has ceased!!! Talk to members of the private bar around the city. See what they think of the DOI!! See if they would let their children become teachers and work under this contract. They wouldn’t do that anymore than Randi would do that. Remember the last head of DOI Ed Stancik? The man had his private demons which he took out on others. He was in every sense of the term a very sick man. Then to add insult to injury we had to pretend he died of heart disease. I spoke to one chaplain at NYU where Stancik died in his early 40’s who could scarcely keep on a straight face when I noted that. OF COURSE ANYONE WITH AN IQ IN TRIPLE FIGURES KNOWS WHAT THE MAN DIED FROM. As the comedian Nathan Lane said once, I am single in my 40’s and I live in Manhattan. You do the math!!!!

  The point is do we want a sick man like that or I should say any of his successors who can’t even own up with honesty and integrity to the diseases coursing through his own body to have the power of stopping the pay check of our members?

  Anyone who has seen and pondered works like “capturing the Friedmans” would be loathe to sign this contract. Sure you can fight and win specious spurious DOI charges, if you have tens of thousands of dollars. The contract says nothing about remimbursing for the top notch OUTSIDE counsel and INVESTIGATORS you might need and want in one of those cases.

• 101 hypatiaNYC
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:03 pm

  mshaloa8,

  Sorry about the lunatic principal, but I can’t understand why you would stay in such a school and take such abuse for 6 years. Maybe you didn’t have enough seniority to transfer. Under the new agreement you could leave without his consent, and if you’re a good teacher, you’d have plenty of choices about where to go. The truth is I’m glad Randi didn’t say NO to Bloomberg. I can neither wait four more years for a raise, nor do I want to go on strike and lose two for one pay. The contract isn’t perfect, but the raise is good, and we live to fight another day.

• 102 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:03 pm

  MShalo18

  I hope you look at my comments because they buttress your point, I believe.

• 103 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 10:10 pm

  What people forget is that teaching is subjective. We all think we are good, hope to be and strive to be, but anything can happen and be twisted out of all proportions. You don’t know what a lunatic principal is like to you experience one. Many years ago Seward Park High School noted at the time for an excellent education had a principal Maloff who destroyed ever so many careers. Examples of these people are rampant. I am sorry this is so

• 104 xkaydet65
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:20 pm

  Hey Shouldhavegone

  We should go out for a beer sometime. Maybe Farrell’s so you feel politically at home. We could probably have a good discussion comparing the automat cuisine to Bickfords, and we could probably keep our political differences from kiling us. Anyway, about the newbies, maybe their knowledge base is low compared to ours even when we were in our 20s. But if they can teach these kids in front of them to think, then I have hope. Don’t know if they can but I can hope. Guess it’s why I stay at this job.

  I do agree with you about the DOI, Stancik aside, many of these quasi police agencies get carried away in their zealotry. Think about the group that monitors cabbies and limos. These guys can be their own reign of terror to hacks and drivers for no other reason than that they can. The DOI is our IAB and giving them more power is scary because all it takes is a word and you’re in their sights. Innocence may not be enough of a defense. If the UFT goes along with this, Randi better put some of our union dues to putting some top defense firm on retainer.

  Have a good night.

• 105 Chaz
  · Oct 5, 2005 at 11:24 pm

  The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly. the proposed contract certainly fits the movie.

  The good: 15% raise for 52 months 3.46% per year for all of you math callanged teachers. Non-chargable letter to the file limit of 3 years. Stability until October 2007.

  The bad: Time 2-3 days extra and 10 minutes per day. This time for money bit is bad. No grieving letters to the file. More principal power, hope you have a reasonable one in your school.
  Suspension without pay for sexual misconduct, corporal punishment, and even verbal abuse. The burbs averaged 3% to 3.5% per year with little or no givebacks so our raise does not narrow the gap

  The ugly: The rquirement that teachers work in non-professional duties, the stealth six period coming to your school soon, and the continue micromanagment.

  Can we trade Randi for Clint???

• 106 Battling Betty
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 12:11 am

  To all who are complaining about potty patrol: Read the memorandum of agreement that is posted on the UFT website (you have to click on the contract story on the home page and then go to the bottom of that story to get to the memorandum of agreement, a fact sheet and the salary charts). In the memorandum of agreement, under number 8 on pages 6-8, there is a menu of activities each teacher will be offered. While the rabid Klein may now be trying to pretend he won something big, the way this section reads it sounds like he didn’t get much. In fact, it seems like the UFT negotiating committee managed to come up with a lot of ways to make it hard to get potty patrol. The way I read it, there is teacher choice. And anyone who does homeroom will never have to do any other administrative duty. Finally, if it comes down to needing someone for one of these duties it must be assigned to the least senior teacher. I’d say the union was pretty clever about subverting what Klein wanted.

  We should be able to use this wording to protect us. Stop making it seem like we’re all going to spend every day on potty patrol or in the lunchroom.

  Since I finally got the nerve up to join comment on this blog, I might as well go on.

  I realized that I was getting too much of my information about this contract from the comments on this blog and the newspapers. I’m glad I read for myself what the memorandum of agreement says. It’s not as bad as many of you make out on this blog. In fact, the whole package — money included — seems pretty good to me, particularly under the circumstances (Klein’s attack on teachers and on the UFT)!

  I’m for voting for this contract and starting to fight for the next one. I was ready to strike… I’m certainly ready to raise a little h— for the next go around.

  Finally, to those with the strategy that we should vote no on the contract, but not strike and wait, I think that you’re pretty gutless. That’s the most passive, toothless, lie-down-and-play-dead approach that we could take. Randi and her negotiating team took Klein and his group on — mano a mano — and beat him. I’m ready, and so are the teachers I work with, to follow Randi into Round 2.

• 107 WebMachiavelli
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 12:44 am

  This is some funny shit…

  First you guys bitch that you want more money. You get even more than any of the other unions. Still you bitch about the contract.

• 108 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 1:06 am

  Web Machiavelli

  Do you even have a college degree?Do you realize that they cost? well over $100,000 these days. Then you have to get a Master’s degree. That will easily run you another $25,000. Of course after that teachers are looking for some return on their investment if just to help them with the hundreds of dollars they spend on their students.

• 109 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 1:32 am

  xkaydet65

  I don’t mind meeting. I don’t know how you give out information on this. I don’t know Farrell’s actually or the two books you mentioned earlier please explain if you will.

  Know I don’t mean to beat up on the new teachers. Obviously we need them Unfortunately, as Diane Ravitch has noted the turnover has been way too fast. Tyro teachers need to be around experienced teachers of a variety of hues for awhile. They don’t get much of that, for with each new contract or hassle from the Dept of Ed droves of experienced teachers flee taking hard to replace intellectual capital with them. Meanwhile he or she who does not study history is bound to repeat its mistakes, apparently to cite just one example we are about to do the Scopes trial all over again!!!

  Now this DOI crap is really, really serious and I think we have a lot of common ground here. The union figures how many can they go after, and the odds are in the union’s favor like a casino I guess. But what if you are the one they go after? If you have a family, the burden and torture can be unbearable and you really won’t be able to afford it. If you are single well everyone thinks you are some sort of a deginerate anyway.

  Meanwhile, while we talk about striking, illegal and very problematic at best, we gave the death of Ed Stancik a free pass. Give me a break. That man died a horrendous death from an illness which was caused by his behavioral modalities. (And yes, I am a left wing liberal and I say) But when someone is lying even about their own health when they can’t accept who and what they are EVEN as they are thenvillifying others it is very worrisome. (I think right wing Catholic men can be very problematic. Think of Xavier graduate Anton Scalia who favors the death penalty for minors then receives communion from his son the priest and finds no contradiction in his behavior. What a proud son of Ignatius is he!!) We don’t know who else will be in that office or what type of witchhunt they will go on. As you say look at TLC. We obviously both go back awhile. In the l970’s it would be nothing to take a cab and find your driver was a PhD student or waiting to pass the bar or went to Columbia, etc. Now the drivers struggle with vowel sounds. Did all the PhD’s get A-one jobs along with those waiting for bar results. etc.? I think not, but the odious policies of the TLC drove them away. Now we have our own DOI. A Dinkins creation that has gotten worse with time. Remember the union only provides a generally mediocre ‘to whom it may concern style defense”. If you want a top defense, you will have to pay big time. Thank you for at leas thinking about these points. Anyway we both plan to vote no!!!

• 110 devils_advocate
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 3:01 am

  When I wrote about “real world”, it was to hit home the fact that the world revolves around compromise, and that one has to be aware of the political climate.

  There are decades when you can make strides and improvements and decades where you lucky to keep what you have.

  Right now, we live in an era where workers rights are being eroded. (Like prevailing wage for reconstruction of Louisiana for example.)

  Your president got you a pretty good deal, all things considered, (compared to what’s going on in non-union jobs as well as other deals Bloomberg struck with unions).

  Your president got you a better deal than the fact-finding report which is not only surprising, but reflects very positively on your president.

  Many conditions (eg: Looney Principals), while not identical to what teachers experience, are certainly not absent (in the least) in other professions. Anyone who has ever had a tyrant for a boss can relate.

  That’s the point. A lot of people put up with similar things that you all complain about without the good fortune of bargaining agreements, job security, raises etc. This is not the 90’s where people can just pick up and get another job, with better benefits and more money. Usually, it is just the opposite.

  Politically, we are not in a “employee” friendly environment. If you don’t understand that, and you don’t understand just how unfriendly it really is, then you aren’t living in the “real world”.

• 111 Realist
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 6:03 am

  The only problem with devils_advocate’s post is the name under which it was posted – this is not the devil’s position, it is the side of right and good.

  As educators, we are supposed to be able to be objective and look at the world as it is. Realit is that the world is not always as we would like it to be.

  Some glaring realities:

  * Outside of civil service, union membership has been declining steadily for decades

  * The realities of the Taylor Law and the lack of enthusiastic support for the union among many of our colleagues, especially the younger ones, would make a strike or even less dramatic militant action to “force” a better contract unrealistic

  * Virtually all of Klein’s draconian demands were beaten back. The few that survived, while none of us like them, are things that we can live with.

  * Can anyone justify a strike – with two for one penalties – to oppose the right of principals to allow teachers to choose to do cafeteria duty? Or to defend the right of a convicted sex abuser to keep teaching? Sure, that may be oversimplification, but that’s exactly the way it would sound to parents and in the newspapers.

  * Compared to what people in other unions have received, and compared with what non-unionized professional workers in industry are receiving, the conract is actually a pretty good deal.

  * The final deal is significantly better than the arbitrator’s recommendations, a significant accomplishment.

  All in all, I think Randi and the negotiating team did a pretty good job of mitigating the worst of Klein’s demands and moving our salaries closer to the suburbs – which was exactly what we told them to do.

• 112 bronxenglish
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 6:40 am

  firebrand:

  i am NOT a fellow!! i do not care for the idea of fellows. if you read my whole post, you may have seen that.

• 113 bronxenglish
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 6:46 am

  in addition, i am not worried about transfers. i have 7 years under my belt and am the senior teacher at my school. i want to vote no on this contract no solely for myself, but for all the other teachers in this union–those already here and the ones that will be coming in.

  I LOVE my job. i do this for the kids each and every day. To say otherwise is a load of crap. the majority of us do–teaching is NOT a job one gets themselves in if they are solely in it for the money. Only a fool would think that.

  Sorry for you, firebrand, that sarcasm doens’t come through in typing. that is what my “thoughts of a fellow” meant to express. sorry ’bout that.

• 114 mshalo18
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 7:24 am

  It seems som of you are not all that familiar with Circular 6. You need an SBO to have homerooms.

  As far as the outcry over potty patrol and lunch duty- if the principal needs to assign you to patrol bathrooms, he’s going to do it, regardless of whether or not it was one of your menu choices. Considering the potential liability of both, you better believe I’m upset.

• 115 CitySue
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 11:02 am

  Under the new tentative agreement you don’t need an SBO to have homerooms. And yes, if homerooms are restored, that will be the “professional activity” for almost every teacher in the school.

  I used to teach a unit on discerning fact from fiction in advertising and propaganda. Every one reading this blog needs to know how to do that. There has been more misinformation and disinformation on this blog than in my lessons. Read the MOA for yourselves everybody! Read the fact sheet. See that for some of the things we supposedly have to “give up” we get better in return. Like more freedom to transfer, like letters in file out after 3 yrs, like language protecting against those handcuffing workshop model rules.
  And I hope the person who did the math and came up with how we gave back more time than we got in a raise isn’t a math teacher. Fact is, we got a 15% raise for some 4% more time.
  We’re teachers folks. We’re supposed to deal in verifiable facts, not hearsay. Practice what you preach!

• 116 institutional memory
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 11:15 am

  Today’s Daily News refers to “… a faction of the union that finds flaws with everything.”

  My message to our dissident faction is that you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. CitySue is 100% correct!

• 117 NYC Educator
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 4:06 pm

  “Fact is, we got a 15% raise for some 4% more time.”

  Then, if you willfully choose to ignore all the other givebacks, we got an 11% raise, less than 3% a year.

  Such a “raise,” considering the cost of living, is no raise at all and justifies no givebacks whatsoever.

• 118 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 5:24 pm

  NYC Educator,

  It was very helpful when you noted how many Long Island districts were paying over 90K four years ago. Could you get us more of this information? Could you get information on Suffolk? I heard Syosset has a top of 120K!!! I own a house in Wappinger Falls (Dutchess County) where the teachers are also in the middle of a four year contract that includes 20 per cent raises or thereabouts and also runs to 2007. Ultimately we all make our own decision on the contract, yet. But I think this type of objective information can help people make a better informed decision. Many in support of the proposal for example note the hard times we live in as justification for acceptance. That’s pretty fun in and of itself when you realize but Mr. Bloomberg is running for re-election in part on the great prosperity of the City!!! The idea that things are so bad is further weakened when you see the pay scales in a variety of other locales in NYState that are within a hundred miles of the City.

  I hope you will have some more feedback for us. For years in the summer I have been embarassed on Fire Island and the Hamptons when I meet teachers from Long Island there who earn so much more than I.

• 119 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 5:27 pm

  15 per cent divided by 4.333333 =3.4615

• 120 Disillusioned_in_NYC
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 5:28 pm

  Let’s use this proposed contract as a first step in getting a more fair one. Good negotiating doesn’t always mean grab the first thing that’s thrown at us.

  If nothing comes from that, avoid a strike—let’s just do our job “by the book”. No more coming in early to grade papers, set up rooms, clean desks, have morning meetings with parents, etc. When the last bell of the day rings, the same rules apply….we’re out of there…..leaving behind our hours of paperwork. We teach our students, prepare our lessons and grade papers ON OUR PREPS and take a full uninterrupted lunch hour. What gets done, gets done and what doesn’t get done…then so be it! We’ve done our job!

• 121 paulrubin
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 7:53 pm

  I’m working in a school that brought back home rooms and lunch duty as a SBO every year since Circular 6 was invented. Basically yes, most of the teachers in a school where the principal wants those things back will be doing 5 lunch duties or have a home room. But that will end up being your PD assignment if I I understand the new deal correctly (can someone point out if I’m in error). Up til now, it required an SBO vote to get these sorts of things added to the menu. Now the principal gets discretion to do so. A few teachers are going to get tortured with lunch duties. That’s inevitable. But a home room in exchange for no other assignment on your 5 PD’s is hardly a horrible thing. No it’s likely to be a worse deal than what you’re already doing on your PD but some of the posters here are making it sound like you’ll have a home room AND the other stuff. I don’t believe that’s the case. And figure about 50% of the teachers in a school will probably get home room, not all. Maybe a few more if the principal doesn’t max out his budget on teachers. But right now I have a PD assignment AND the principal makes us still sit in the home room babysitting the home room teacher for 10 minutes to make up for the 10 minute extended day. Any way you slice it, I personally think we should stop the nonsense and try to get a real raise for a 6th teaching period. Add the extra 5 minutes already. Toss us another 5 or 6% and be done with it. The city wins. The kids win. And we end up just a hair south of $100K.

• 122 NYC Educator
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 8:31 pm

  shouldhave gone,

  I happen to have the NYSUT book for 2001-2002, but current ones are available in Nassau public libraries.

  You could also try contracting NYSUT. Why this is not available on the web I don’t know.

• 123 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 8:54 pm

  NYC educator

  Thanks!! It’s not really for me. I am a very senior veteran teacher well versed in the surrounding Metropolitan area. But many of our newer teachers don’t necessarily know a Cold Spring Harbor from A Cold Spring or a Hyde Park from a New Hyde Park. Indeed do our newer teachers necessarily know a ritzy Rosylyn from a rundown Roosevelt? If you had a share of Google for everyone of them who didn’t you could retire now and forget the new contract with its 3.46 raise per year.

  Anyway truly believeing education makes a difference I think a highly well informed membership is the best we can hope for these days. Post anything you can for us.

• 124 Educat
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 9:35 pm

  how could our leadership negotiate such a dog of a contract?? because they totally misread gloomberg & co.this mayor was very worried about the uft becoming vocal. we were in a much stronger position than our leadership believed. if we really turned up the heat,we would not be eating this cheese. now look where we are. and why ratify after the election?? so the membership has little choice but to open wide and swallow.

• 125 indigo
  · Oct 6, 2005 at 10:51 pm

  The medical, medical, medical. Why is it being put into the contract? We are f*cking the future with this contract! All the old teachers love it, they are getting ready to retire and fear a strike like they fear the grim reeper. Well guess what, you guys are going to get so scr#wed…the medical is a trojan horse. Just wait for things to come in the future.

• 126 WebMachiavelli
  · Oct 7, 2005 at 3:27 am

  shouldhavegonetomeds

  Yes I have a degree. I spent 100k on mine ten years ago. So I would say I can empathize with your plight on your desire to get a better return on your investment but you did afterall pick your career path.

  As for spending your own money on supplies again that is your own doing. Stop doing it and it won’t be an issue. I do not pay for the supplies my employer needs for operations to function normally so I see no reason whoy you should.

• 127 divina
  · Oct 7, 2005 at 10:36 am

  Shouldhavegonetomeds,

  I’m a native NYer. I have lived in NY City for over 35 years.

  While I am familiar that there are burbs called Roslyn and New Hyde Park… the economic status of every two-bit town on LI is something I don’t know. (Nor do I want to know because LI and the psuedo-LI of the Queens border isn’t where I live, nor would like to live!)

  Why would you know an area unless you lived in it, or worked in it?

  I’m more familiar with lower Westchester and its towns, because I spent extended time there. Otherwise, I wouldn’t know Rye from Ryebrook. (And I’m sure many on this blog who are native NYers do not know that area well, particularly since we borough-ites are a Mass Transit culture.)

  And you might as well Fuhget about New Jersey! LOL!

  I’m really not sure why any of that would be relevant and it smacks of hostility toward non-native NYers. (As if that wins you some sort of award for being lucky enought be born and bred here.) I don’t think it is a fair assessment or a kind one.

• 128 TeacherTeacher
  · Oct 7, 2005 at 5:56 pm

  We will gain NOTHING except 14.25% over 52 months and 12 days. Those of us in the trenches, who read the facts, know better.

• 129 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 7, 2005 at 9:42 pm

  Divina,

  Personally, I have a very strong bias that people who are purporting to be educators should have a good idea of local geography say about a 100 mile radius from where they work. I have a Master’s in the teaching of Reading among many other degrees and in my classes we take out maps a great deal. It really adds to the children’s literacy. Indeed, I don’t own a car and yet I maintain a AAA membership just to get the maps for my classes. This week we spent a lot of time studying such things as Lake George. who Ethan Allen was, the location of Six Flags in the Lake George area, etc.

  But my point here is something else. Teachers have to vote on a proposed contract, The union is hawking that even if you don’t like all the provisions you are coming close to parity with the burbs in pay. I say check into the burbs, learn where they are, if you don’t already know and check out their pay scales, see if what the union is asserting is even true. I personally own a home in Wappinger Falls New York (Southern Dutchess County for the geographically challenged) where in a four year contract the teachers are receiving 20 per cent rather than 15. I just believe as much of this inrormation as possible could help our teachers make a more informed decision for this contract. Sorry for any implied snobbery.

• 130 divina
  · Oct 8, 2005 at 7:22 am

  Shouldhavegonetomeds,

  Knowing the difference between Boerum Hill and Cobble Hill does not make someone a good educator. That’s absolute nonsense. All it means is that you’ve been around that part of Brooklyn long enough to know that they are too similar areas in a close proximity. (And probably shouldn’t even have different neighborhood names to begin with.) Once upon the time, the East Village was just the Lower East Side until it was reinvented and renamed.

  Given the number of neighborhoods, just in the 5 boroughs, plus, LI, and Lower Westchester, and New Jersey… anyone knowing that level of idiosyncrocatic detail (like the “hills” mentioned above) is wasting their mind on trivial data. That level of detail is unnecessary. That is why we have maps.

  BTW, Wappinger Falls New York is not a NY suburb. Neither is Beacon or Poughkeepsie. None of Dutchess county is a NY suburb. It’s too far away. Anything north of Yorktown starts to edge on out of bounds.

• 131 paulrubin
  · Oct 8, 2005 at 7:54 pm

  The area we should be considering is 50 miles from the NYC border in all directions. That’s about the limit that NYC teachers generally commute (yes I know there are some exceptions but those people are simply insane masochists). In those areas there are plenty of school districts to look at and the general rule of thumb is that the salaries range from about the same as we’ll be getting typically in fewer years of service with better working conditions to making 1/3 higher and everything in between.

• 132 Spock
  · Oct 9, 2005 at 10:25 am

  I am voting YES!! Why? Do I think this a perfect contract? No, but some of the objections are without merit. I have worked my way up from paraprofessional to teacher. I know what it is like to work a 9-5 too. I will take teaching anytime.

  Randi bashing is very convenient, but at the end of the day, she did the best she could in the light of the terrible decisions handed down by the fact finders. She ameliorated the worst parts of the fact finders, got us a longer contract and us retroactive. We want a screaming radical as the leadership of the union? I don’t think so! The opposition to Randi can say they want this and that, but they are not in a position to negotiation and most of what they demand is pie in the sky.

  Letters in the file? The joke of that is you cannot win them. Even in arbitration, the most we can hope for is some deleted or rewritten language. Of course, if this was left in the contract as some of you suggest, all the principals wake up and see the error of their ways. They would now say at a step 1 grievance, “Oh so sorry I put that in your file! Let me take it out at once!” NONSENSE!

  VOTE YES!

• 133 steadyeddieg
  · Oct 9, 2005 at 11:19 am

  What a laugh! A secretary has the nerve to write that children behave better in the cafeteria when the teacher is around.
  Secretaries, guidance counselors, school psychologists and social workers are vital members of the school system. However, they should be a separate bargaining unit. They should NOT be voting on issues that are teacher-related. Similarly, teachers should not be voting on their interests as well.
  Miso left teaching after 8 years stating that he was burned out. Doesn’t he realize that a contract such as this will burn most people out?
  I was reading that cafeteria duty would be assigned to the least senior teachers. With all the work put on them to begin with, they will not be able to cope. Therefore, by the next contract, senior teachers will be given this duty en masse.
  It’s time for the Weingarten Group to be term-limited. She and her cronies have been in far too long. They have rarely seen the insides of a classroom. They don’t understand or appreciate the rigors of classroom teaching.
  Those who denounce us may have very cushy out-of-the classroom job. As a result, they want this horrible contract to pass, so they can add to their pensions. The minute they’d be put back in the classroom, they’d be off to 55 Water St. to submit their papers.
  Why did I and others strike? Yes, we did it for ourselves. We also did it for future teachers. While this may have been a bad time to walk out, it is also inconceivable that educated people would accept this contract, which demeans professionalism.
  In 1975 we were told by Unity Caucus that this was the best they could do. They will always offer scare tactics to get the flock to go along with their bargaining results.
  What givebacks did the transit workers, police and others surrender? Only this union is constantly harassed and condemned by the editorial boards. Why? We allow it.
  It is only when Ms. Weingarten and all of Unity Caucus get full-time teaching positions- teaching, then and only then will working conditions get better.

• 134 Bklynteacher
  · Oct 9, 2005 at 4:30 pm

  I am in my 29th year and plan to vote NO on this contract.

  I’d appreciate it if those who have written that the “old” teachers will be voting YES, have a little respect! We’ve been in the system a lot longer than many of you. We fought for the rights that you are now fighting to keep. All of my colleagues with more than 20 years are all voting NO. We’re trying to convince the newbies why giving up seniority transfer rights is a bad thing!

  Back in 1995, they wanted to put in a 25 year longevity. We voted no and defeated it. Thanks to our backbone,
  you all reach maximum 3 years sooner.

  So think twice before you brand us “old-timers” who are only out for ourselves.

  Stand strong and vote NO!

• 135 ampd90
  · Oct 9, 2005 at 6:23 pm

  I will admit that my original plan was to vote “yes” to send the contract proposal to the membership for their approval/rejection. I felt that they desrved the chance to decide for themselves. I would have voted no for the contract myself.

  However, after listening to some of my fellow chapter leaders last week, I will not even dignify this proposal by sending it to my members for a vote.

  For me, as I suspect for many others, the deal breaker is losing the right to grieve letters in the file. In the few years that I have been chapter leader, I have been 100% successful in getting these letters removed from the file. However, there were far more letters that I KNEW I could get removed, but the teacher was afraid to go through the process. No amount of pleading, pointing out errors in the letter, etc. could get the teacher to grieve it. But the expression on a teacher’s face when we went to his file, and I was personally able to hand him the inaccurrate and unfair letter (I think he burned it) was worth anything we as a union must do to keep that right!

  I cannot, in all good conscience, vote for a contract that removes this remedy from the chapter.

• 136 TriBeCaTchr
  · Oct 9, 2005 at 11:19 pm

  Dear ampd90,
  Have a little faith in your members in that they can decide for themselves. Tell them about your concerns and let them make their own choices. You really MUST let them vote!

• 137 steadyeddieg
  · Oct 10, 2005 at 1:36 pm

  Lillian Roberts of D.C. 37 states that aides will not be laid off when teachers resume cafeteria duty.
  By the way, Lil, what will they be doing? Are they just going to sit there and collect a check? I don’t want to hear that they will man telephones in the main office. This is nonsense.
  Sounds like you’re getting your way as political pay back for endorsing Mr. Bloomberg for reelection. Sounds like Ms. Roberts was privy to this contract proposal as she answered so quickly that aides would not be fired.
  Wake up UFT members before it’s too late. Judgment day is coming.

• 138 Schoolgal
  · Oct 10, 2005 at 3:13 pm

  Aides have always helped with lunch duty even when teachers and administrators were in charge.

  The aides I worked with have always been hard-working individuals.

  Some had early telephone duty when teachers called in sick, others take over the security desk, some do ATS in the mornings, xeroxing, laminating, and lunch duty the rest of the day.

  Some have been collecting lunch applications.

  Even though I am not a fan of this mayor, and am very upset that we couldn’t find a viable candidate to run against him, Ms. Roberts has every right to endorse the mayor. Even influential Dems are supporting him (like the Vallones).

  Let’s hope the mayor keeps his promise to DC 37.

• 139 Bklynteacher
  · Oct 10, 2005 at 5:13 pm

  >>>

  Ferrer IS a viable candidate. Just pull the lever under his name….

• 140 Dfreecity
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 4:14 pm

  Today’s Daily News (10/11) shows Klein planting a kiss on the top of Randi’s head. Last week’s AM New York (Tues., 10/4) shows Randi planting a kiss on Bloomberg’s cheek. These photos are worth more than a thousand words. Vote this contract down and take back the UFT!!!!!!!!!

• 141 Bklynteacher
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 7:21 pm

  Despite the delegate Yes vote today, we can still reject the contract. The rank and file vote is what counts in the end.
  Stand strong and vote NO.

• 142 steadyeddieg
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 8:34 pm

  Dear Schoolgal:
  I realize that the aides are valuable. I don’t want anyone laid off. My point is that if the aides are to remain in school, keep them in the cafeteria and give the teachers the necessary relief.
  Dfreecity- I wouldn’t care if Weingarten and Klein were Romeo and Juliet or Nelson Eddy and Jeanette McDonald. The fact remains that the contract stinks and should be voted down overwhelmingly.

• 143 Dfreecity
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 10:01 pm

  Steadyeddieg, the photos offer up serious questions as to what message Randi is trying to convey;

  a simple handshake would have sufficed in both instances. She is not a child.

• 144 Kombiz
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 10:11 pm

  I have to speak to this as someone who watched the press conference live on TV. Klein was speaking and in the middle of his speech he turned around and essentially said that Randi had promised him a hug when a settlement was agreed to, and moved to Randi and grabbed her for a hug, and Randi could be seen grimacing, even in the photo’s. I rarely come out of my admin shell to opine, but that’s how I saw it one TV. As someone who was somewhat akward at junior high school dances, I felt a flashback to an akward past I didn’t imagine I’d see on live television.

• 145 ChptrLdr
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 10:14 pm

  I returned home from the Delegate Assembly with my delegate, a fellow chapter leader, and her delegate. We were all disgusted, and all four of us will not be running for reelection this June. I felt embarrassed to be affiliated with people so dense they don’t realize they have been manipulated, and Randi was not really subtle in her deception. I really don’t care about the kiss. What I am disgusted is at the spin Unity has on what is, obviously, a terrible contract

• 146 shouldhavegonetomeds
  · Oct 11, 2005 at 11:17 pm

  I’m voting no for a number of reasons, even though I believed that Randi did work hard on the deal the damn thing just didn’t come out right. As for the kiss, that just makes me feel sorry for Randi, I mean that countenance on that school chancellor, as I say poor Randi!! Now everybody vote just vote no!!!

• 147 steadyeddieg
  · Oct 12, 2005 at 3:32 pm

  Dfreecity: As a solemn observance will shortly begin for many of us, who cares if Randi and Joel kissed?
  Look at the latest Unity lie: The 55/25 retirement deal would not have as many conditions as is now told. Even Bloomberg is mum about this.
  Appears to me that Randi could star in a remake of that great film SECRETS AND LIES. We could also do a takeoff entitled LIES MY UNION LEADER TOLD ME.
  Those subjected to cafeteria duty-get yourselves doctor notes. I used to “adore” running from the basement cafeteria to the 4th floor classroom. One time an assistant principal chastised me for not being there on time. Since he did this in front of the class, I told him to get me a pair of roller skates.
  Of course, if this point were made to the public, they would accuse me of being a whining teacher. Seems as though everyone is against us. WE ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN.
  When you have children eager to learn, the teaching profession is great. We don’t need a 3 front war- the administration, the kids and an UNCARING UNION.
  You must remember this A KISS IS NOT A KISS, A SIGH IS NOT A SIGH, THE FUNDAMENTAL THINGS OF LIFE, AS UNITY CAUCUS ALLOWS ALL THIS TO GO BY!!!!!
  What poor Randi? She gets a big fat salary plus 2 pensions. Let her get her rear end into a classroom.

• 148 ChptrLdr
  · Oct 12, 2005 at 6:16 pm

  Bravo, steadyeddieg. Randi, the ex corporate lawyer, should be ousted at the next election. How long did she teach, anyway? Anybody know? How did the membership get suckered into voting her as our leader? Also, that first “pro” speaker at the assembly, the union V.P., who was she kidding? She has an office and doesn’t teach. What a racket!!!!!! She should have been soundly booed!
  WHY WERE THE “VISITORS” AND RETIREES GIVEN THE SAME COLOR TICKETS TO ENTER THE ASSEMBLY? BY THE WAY, THE LADY WHO WAS SITTING NEXT TO ME AT THE ASSSEMBLY IS A RETIREE. SHE VOTED THE SECOND TIME.

• 149 All on my own in the NYC blogo-edusphere? « JD2718
  · Jan 10, 2009 at 10:19 pm

  [...] discussion, and I ended up commenting quite a bit. My first comment was about math curricula. My second was about the proposed [...]