UFT Leadership Chooses Sacred Cows Over Member Health

It's been a very rough year for Michael Mulgrew and all the folks sitting around 52 Broadway. This is largely due to the shitstorm they stirred up when they tried to dump all our retirees into an inferior health plan (except those sufficiently privileged to buy their way out). 

They thought it would be a cakewalk. They failed to anticipate the backlash, the losing lawsuits, or the City Council stepping up to protect those who served this city. 

They are not used to losing, and smelling loss, Mulgrew threatened rank and file with a $1500 premium if we didn't screw the retirees. That's still a possibility if they don't find another solution.

They need to satisfy the debt they incurred in 2018, when they made an idiotic deal with MLC behind our backs to cut health care. And there are ways to do that without tossing retirees into the briny deep. One way would be to consolidate city welfare funds. Why do we need a separate organization for each union, especially when each is in the same business, providing the same benefits?

An argument I get is that the UFT Welfare Fund does a great job. They administrate, overseeing reimbursement for eyeglasses and dental work. As far as I can tell, though, much of this work is outsourced. There is an actual insurance company negotiating our dental insurance, and some online entity now doing eyeglasses. I'm still awaiting reimbursement for glasses I got in January. I'm also waiting for the 50 bucks I overpaid when taking an MRI at a supposedly cheaper provider. These are minor issues.

But how good is the Welfare Fund if you have a major issue? My daughter went to an orthodontist who prescribed night braces, for months, that she did not need. I went for a second opinion, and the other orthodontist said it was a waste of time and energy. (And money.) I went to the second one. The first then put in a claim that the night braces were the actual braces. I complained to the Welfare Fund. They said they were sorry, did nothing, gave the first orthodontist full payment, and I had to pay the full cost of real braces, thousands of dollars out of pocket, for my daughter. 

I had an oral cancer, and my mouth was treated with radiation. Consequently, I have dire dental issues. Recently a UFT periodontist prescribed a cleaning procedure that was supposed to cost me $70 per quadrant. I went to get the first half my mouth done, and they charged me $300, 160 more than UFT agreed upon. The extra charge, they said, was for an oral rinse. I said if I'd wanted an oral rinse, I'd have gone to CVS and bought a bottle of Scope for 10 dollars. 

I called the Welfare Fund, who said they'd give this dentist a strong talking-to. The dental office was unmoved. I was able to protest this fee via my credit card, and was successful. (Thanks for nothing, UFT Welfare Fund.) The periodontist charged for three quadrants rather than two, and I didn't bother calling my good friends at the Welfare Fund again. How many strong talkings-to could this periodontist take? And whose welfare, exactly, is our Welfare Fund representing?

I don't believe a consolidated Welfare Fund would be any less efficient than the one we already have. It would surely be a hell of an improvement over screwing our retirees. However, patronage is what keeps UFT leadership ticking. It is, in fact, what keeps their Unity Caucus in perpetual control. They aren't going to give up a bunch of high-paying union jobs, and whatever power they deem associated with them. The highly-paid, dual-pensioned elites who run the welfare fund contend otherwise, and suggest consolidation would result in mismanagement.

The fact is we have already consolidated health care, via the MLC, which negotiates it for us. Now on this point I agree they're doing a terrible job, but that's only because they make dumbass decisions without consulting rank and file. That can and must be fixed.  That doesn't seem to cross the minds of those in leadership. Of course, who wants to surrender highly-paid, dual-pensioned gigs just to protect the health care of thousands upon thousands of men and women who spent their lives working for New York City?

This may very well be why Michael Mulgrew, despite a UFT resolution proclaiming otherwise, virulently opposes the New York Health Act, which would grant all New Yorkers premium-free health care, maintain Medicare for all our retirees, and actually eliminate the need for the GHI senior care plan that has Mulgrew and Adams freaking out all over creation. 

If Michael Mulgrew wants to represent the interests of working teachers, he needs to embrace cost-cutting measures that don't debase the health care of retired or working teachers. At the very least, he needs to give up our proprietary Welfare Fund. At best, he'd not only do that, but also embrace the health and well-being of all our NY State brothers and sisters by a. negotiating with the sponsors of the NY Health Act, and b. publicly supporting and embracing it.

Thanks to Daniel Alicea.

Cynthia Nixon, Andrew Cuomo, and the UFT Learning Curve

I've got mixed feelings about actress Cynthia Nixon and her foray into politics. On the one hand, I'm really excited to see a true progressive looking at the governorship of my state. I have to say, though, that I was not happy with some of her remarks about unions.

“With the deals that [unions] have now, you can’t hope to make improvements to the trains in a fiscally responsible way,” Nixon told amNY, not specifying the unions to which she was referring. “Everybody’s got to pull together, and everybody’s got to make sacrifices.”

I don't know what deals the unions have now, so I can't comment on that. I was sorely disappointed, though, to hear a nominal progressive criticize union. It reminded me of no one more than Andrew Cuomo himself, whose first campaign platform entailed going after unions. This opened my eyes a lot, and made Cuomo the first Democrat for whom I declined to vote. I voted for Green Howie Hawkins for Governor these last two rounds.

Nixon, though, is very good on education. Unlike Cuomo, who takes suitcases full of cash from charter folk, she won't be doing that. She has an entirely different POV.

Too many corporate Democrats like Andrew Cuomo are taking charter school hedge fund money.

We have to stop diverting education funding into privately run charter schools, and put the focus back where it should be: on strengthening our public schools and keeping them public.

— Cynthia Nixon (@CynthiaNixon) April 13, 2018

Now here's the thing about Andrew Cuomo--he's making an effort to look good to us, and has been doing so over the last year or so. Cuomo observed the 2016 election, and read the tea leaves. They told him that America wants a government that fulfills its needs. Some of those needs are universal healthcare, affordable college, and a living wage. I repeat that often. Another, of course, is a decent  K-12 education for all of our children.

Cuomo has indeed made concessions. He's moderated his tone over firing all of us because of highly flawed test scores. He's created a program that will make it easier for some New Yorkers to go to college. He's stepped back on the IDC, which kept the Senate in GOP hands even though Democrats held the ostensible majority. Even though that thwarted a whole lot of improvements for New Yorkers, Cuomo can now say he's stopped it so as to disassociate himself from them.

The problem with Andrew Cuomo, of course, is that he has no moral center. He sways whichever way the political wind blows. He is for sale to the highest bidder, so long as whatever the bidder is buying will aid him toward reaching his Prime Directive--the advancement of Andrew Cuomo.

And that's when we come to our own union leadership, clearly poised to endorse Cuomo this time around.  A NY Times headline declares key unions are leaving the Working Families Party, which has now endorsed Cynthia Nixon for governor. You have to scroll down quite a bit for specifics, but when you do, you see this quote from UFT President Michael Mulgrew:

“My only concern is some reckless behavior that will have an unintended consequence of us ending up with a Republican governor,” Mr. Mulgrew said. “When these elections are over, we will judge any decision we have to make off your behavior if you caused bad things to happen — even though it was not your intent you are responsible for them.”

Let's focus a little on reckless behavior. Our parent union, the AFT, endorsed Hillary Clinton well before we saw any teacher voice at the polls. There was a kabuki dance of deciding the endorsement, but we ultimately got behind a candidate who did not support universal health care, a living wage, or affordable college. We got behind a candidate who mustered the audacity to lecture AFT about what we could learn from "public charter schools," whatever the hell they may be.

And just in case you hadn't noticed, Hillary Clinton lost that election. So by Mulgrew's logic, even though it was not our intent, we are responsible for Donald Trump. That's quite an albatross to hang around our own necks. You'd think we'd learn something from that, but you'd be wrong.

Rather than embrace a progressive candidate who holds causes dear to our hearts, we condemn her for one thoughtless comment. We might try to talk with her, negotiate with her, but instead we dismiss her out of hand, back a man with no integrity whatsoever, and hope the progressive wind that's blowing him this week will not change direction any time soon. We ignore mountains of evidence that Cuomo will do whatever is expedient for Cuomo, and brush away Nixon just as we brushed away Bernie Sanders.

This is an egregious error. I'm sure that UFT leadership will disagree, since they know better than me, they know better than you, and making a potentially fatal error in the 2016 Presidential campaign has done nothing to persuade them they are fallible in any way, ever. But it's not a huge leap of logic to say that Cynthia Nixon's philosophy more closely resembles that of working teachers, just as Bernie Sanders' did.

The blanket condemnation of Nixon is precisely the same as that of Sanders. The blind support of sure thing corporate Democrat Cuomo is precisely the same as that of sure thing corporate Democrat Clinton. Now I'm reading that union leadership may set up their own ballot line to make sure Cuomo wins and the progressive gets no traction whatsoever.

What has leadership learned from the debacle that was the 2016 election?

Nothing I can determine.

Where Credit Is Due--UFT Paperwork Committee

From time to time, I may be mildly critical of UFT leadership. I mean, there may be one or two things here and there with which I do not concur. But this notwithstanding, I have to admit when they do something right, they do something right. At some point or other, Mulgrew told the DA that the biggest problem teachers had was paperwork. I didn't agree with that. I'd say the biggest problem is the evaluation system, which is totally off the wall. But he pointed to successes with the paperwork complaints, and I now have some firsthand experience I'll share.

Earlier this year, some DOE genius put out a memo about participation. It differentiated between ways of measurement. For example, one teacher judged it based on her memory, and that was a no-no. After all, how can you rely on the memory of some teacher? You don't actually expect anyone to have fundamental respect for the judgment of a teacher, do you? Instead, it gave the example that Johnie brings his pencil and notebook each and every day. Now that is participation, because you can quantify it, and to some DOE genius, that indicates student effort.

In our school, there were meetings and discussions. How do you measure participation? Some teachers said they placed check marks whenever someone spoke. Others spoke of two-point rubrics. The default, they said, was everyone gets two points each day. It's easy because you only take a point off if they don't do something or other. I could not envision recording each and every student each and every day on this scale or any other. On the one hand, I absolutely could rate every action of every student. I know this because I often go to meetings and take copious notes. Alternatively, I could teach. But I could not do both.

I was extremely surprised when teachers who never, ever complain about anything whatsoever came up to me and said that this mandate was impossible. I mean these were straight arrow types who would rather eat a live toad than file a grievance. So I asked a friend at UFT whether this merited a paperwork complaint and got a very spirited hell yes in response. This complaint made its way to Contract Enforcement head Debbie Poulos, who mentioned it in passing to some DOE bigshot. Said bigshot demanded to know which school it was, and what do you know, the bigshot agreed it was ridiculous to demand documentation for participation. This makes me suspect the DOE may have hired an ex-teacher or two somewhere or other, but who knows?

Another thing that has bothered me ever since I became chapter leader was the fact that teachers who took six classes were required to also do a C6 assignment. OK, well it didn't bother me that much, because sixth classes have been available to ESL teachers for years and I've never pursued one. But there was one special education teacher in particular who had these classes and never seemed to be able to keep up. UFT told me Article 7O says that you take these classes in lieu of a prep. I looked it up, and there it was. So I figured, well, you take the sixth class, and that's what happens.

But last October I had a conversation with James Eterno, and he instructed me to actually look up Special Circular 6R and read it. And who would've thunk it, it said right there in black letter that anyone who took that sixth class didn't have to do a building assignment. So I ran around and found a senior teacher with six classes to file a grievance. For reasons that escape me, it took four months for Queens UFT to take this to step two. For more reasons that escape me, by that time the member didn't want to go through with it anymore. I couldn't file the grievance myself because I didn't have six classes. Also, I didn't have another four months in the school year.

Now in our school, we break up the C6 assignment. We do the C6 for three days, we do one day of Other Professional Work, and we give one day toward the infamous teacher teams. The teacher teams entail paperwork, so at UFT"s request, I went and filed another paperwork complaint saying they ought not to do it since Circular 6 says they get a prep back. This one was done by the book, and went local before it went central.

Wednesday night my DR informed me that UFT won this complaint. I asked him if I could get a big bass drum and walk up and down the street beating it while screaming at the top of my lungs. He said yes I could, but I needed to wait until I got a call from Debbie Poulos first. Well, that call came shortly afterward. Alas I could not locate a bass drum. But I took my dog Julio into the back yard, where he had a barking contest with the dog next door. Next best thing, I guess.

Barking contest was pretty close. I can't say exactly who won.

UFT DA March 2017--UFT President Shuts Down Move to Amend JHS 145 Reso

• Announcements

Mulgrew thanks us for being here.  Moment of silence for UFT members who’ve passed.

President’s report—Michael Mulgrew

National—Says we’ve set out a strategy and now have to adjust to changes. We can now officially get rid of Friedrichs and say Janus, out of Illinois. On schedule for fall docket of SCOTUS.

Said our strategy has to be to protect NY from DC. Says he will call President 45. Plan to repeal Obamacare will be voted on tomorrow. Congressman Collins from Buffalo bribed for his vote. Still has to go to Senate, but if it passes Congress, it’s now shifted a huge cost, 2.4 billion, to NY State. Until we extend or expand millionaire’s tax, we already have 3.5 billion deficit.

We’re within 12 days of budget. If we have to put plan for additional 2.4 billion, it’s a big problem. Mayor and governor working together. NYC reps understand this. Points to Andrew Pallotta from NYSUT, says he’s working with us.

We are in constant attack politically, besides challenges in workplaces. Won’t be easy. How many times can we say Public School Proud and we have to do this and that. Says we are the leadership and we have to keep pushing or they will win.

If NY pols want to screw NY worse than anyone else, they will hear from us. Says he wants to show John Oliver but language is too bad.

Likes that we can use Trump’s ed. budget to say we told you so. ESSA is still the law. Once you pass a law, it’s then up to the agency, which sets regs. Law remains and regs give guidance. ESSA regs have been rescinded. Looks like they will leave ESSA rescind regs, and thereby enable budget.

Additional funds for Title one, without regs, can be a billion dollar voucher program. Title 2A is teacher PD, Saturday, after, summer school. Trump’s person said nothing proves after school or feeding children makes them do better in school.

They want to defund, destabilize public ed. and say it doesn’t work. Want more money for charters, no transparency or accountability. Says pols are either for local public school or against it. Says we now have the most famous Secretary of Ed. in US, for wealth and incompetence.

Says this relates to Lobby Day and we will tell state officials. Education and health care are biggest pots of money and we are working together. Thanks Paul Egan for reorganizing after blizzard. We need to say Feds want to destroy public ed. and ask if they are with us or against us.

Talks snow day. Says some people have to report. It is not contractual that you report. City makes decision school based personnel have to report. Mulgrew asks why others don’t, and is told they have to take personal days. Union didn’t and wouldn’t agree to this. We have no more snow days. If we get another blizzard day added on at end of school year. Next year’s calendar has two snow days. In my heart I stand with people who say St. Patrick’s should be holiday, but torn as union leader.

Tonight there is a PEP panel closing schools. You will hear a lot about Renewal Program in mayor’s race. Third doing well, third stable, and third moving down. Tonight they are voting on 145 in the Bronx. If no supports are offered we need to tell the tale. We have reformers saying public schools are failing, will use closing schools as examples. If nothing is being done by DOE behooves them to change what’s going on. I go to Banana Kelly which is all of a sudden in better place and see a happy staff with collaborative leadership.

Teachers. counselors and secretaries have bosses. We follow directions. Administrators also have bosses, superintendents responsible to chancellor. Fault rises up when there is failing leadership. If we don’t move all of our schools reformers us this against us.

Proud of mayor for saying ICE won’t enter schools without warrant, as students were fearful. You can’t tell us our job is to protect children and ask us to step aside when people come into our buildings. ICE said we will not enter buildings except under exigent students. We don’t know what that means but we’ll see. Parents have said they are fearful.

Despite all that Public School Proud working well, will push after budgets. Will report next month.

Vouchers and tax credits across country are unprecedented. Outside NYS people are disgusted. Fewer people in ed. schools. This isn’t helpful. Still we need to educate children.

Feds no longer fund community learning schools. Teacher choice, dial a teacher and BRAVE we will push.

OPW under teacher discretion. Exception when principal mandates something, Part of arbitration.

Speaks of success in paperwork complaints.

Says principals are departmentalizing everything, including kindergarten. From K-3 departmentalization requires SBO.

4-6 ELA and math are posted positions but preference sheets must go out before decision. Departmentalizing anything else is SBO.

DOE is now approved CTLE vendor. We worked to help them because was in member interest. We can’t do their work for them. They have to do paperwork to be approved. They also have to get approved instructors. We have quite a few approved, but Monday PD is not approved because NYSED wants to know how DOE will be sure it meets criteria.

We started last June but putting CTLE together took a lot of work. DOE doesn’t work as fast as we do.

We have to stick to our plan, insulate NY, push people on public ed., renew coalitions. Saturday this place was full of guidance counselors. Thanks chapter. Saturday PM 1100 paras celebrated. Previous Sat. early childhood. College and career fair last week. Thanks Janella Hinds.

Says this is righteous fight. We’re right, they’re wrong. We’re good they’re bad. Says we take fight to them, support friends, we win. 5:10

Staff Director’s Report—LeRoy Barr

College and careers called future in focus 460 students, 26 unions, made sure children are college and career ready. Thanks Janella Hinds. Early childhood conference, guidance conference, para luncheon, March 25th, Men in Education Forum starting at 9. CL weekend. Please call and fax and thank those who participate. PEP meeting tonight, asks people to leave and show support for this school. Rich Mantel there now. We have resolution there. Go to Tweed and show support for school, against Moskowitz Academy. Enjoy break.

Questions

CL—DOE hired Randy Asher. Is DOE really trying to help ATRs or will he try to fire them?

We try to protect ATRs. We went five years with no contract and didn’t sell them out. Would have made us at will employees. Have spoken with Asher, willing to work with him. You could utilize existing agreements. I don’t know their intent. We’ll see where it goes.

CL—How can we coordinate with other unions against constitutional convention?

We are coordinating. We’ve done more school visits and may be ahead of curve. They say we only care about our pensions. Of course we’re concerned about them. Shows they don’t understand constitution. Pension is agreement. We pay this, you pay that, and this is what we get when I meet conditions for retirement. Reason is that many people didn’t get what was promised. NY State said agreement was agreement. Pols used to protect working people.

You will see this amp up after budget is settled. Great piece in New Yorker about reclusivee billionaire, donates to Trump, and a lot of money for constitutional convention.

CL—Charters—original concept was collaboration, laboratory, been eroded and made negative. Can we put forward Shanker’s view instead of DeVos’?

This was not Shanker’s idea. He changed position when he realized it was about privatization. No one remembers that. We have many examples of good ideas being mutated into bad ones. DeVos thing led us to good place with state officials. If charters solve problems, fine. If they make money or don’t take all kids we don’t want them.

History of vouchers was to avoid segregation. Some in south closed public schools and gave vouchers. Deprived African American students of school. This history will be told again. You don’t have choice if voucher covers pittance or if you’re cut out. No choice when you destroy public ed.

CL—Members worried about TRS letters saying they are at a deficit. They are receiving lump sum based on retroactivity, Pension contributions problematic.

Don’t freak out. Retro can’t be included in final pension, but is part of pay that must be included in pension. Ask Tom Brown and we will help.

Delegate—CTLE hours. Paras concerned. Having hard time getting to UFT. Issue is it’s good idea but it’s coming so much during our time. Paras don’t get paid on our level and teachers not paid on level of being constantly certified. Police laugh at us. We are giving away a lot of time. can we do this during school hours?

One of the reasons why we helped DOE become CTLE certified is this. We have four more years to get 100 hours. We will develop more in regular day.

Motions

Paul Egan—UFT supports proposal to keep people in homes and save people millions. Home stability. Passes.

Peter Lamphere—MORE—Supports JHS 145 and DA adjourning to join PEP in solidarity. Defeated

Political Endorsements—Paul Egan—Recommends endorsement of Stringer for Comptroller. Record as great advocate of our union. Stands up for our pensions and NYC fiduciary responsibility.

Michael Freedman—CL—Says he defeated Moskowitz for Manhattan borough prez.

Marjorie Stamberg—opposes Democrats and Republicans. 40% of people prefer socialist.

Question called.

Endorsement passes.

Egan—Recommends Laticia James—Didn’t defeat Moskowitz but has great track record in NYC.

Question called.

Passes

57th Anniversary UFT—Resolution—Mel Aaronson—In 1960 UFT formed through merger, and many other groups joined. Teachers all over America benefited from our work in becoming first local in country to have collective bargaining. Took a lot of work including three strikes, but this thanks those who came before us. Pledges our continued fight for what we look forward to, better ed., civil and labor rights.  Further supports fact we will support each other in safe and healthy workplace. Urges everyone to support.

Dave Pecoraro—calls question

Mulgrew asks veterans from 1960 to stand. Much applause. Standing ovation.

Regents Grading

Janella Hinds—This resolution covers scoring for Regents exams. Says what happens in January and June is waste of time and resources. We seek better system. We would like tests moved and people to remain in their schools. Asks for support.


Arthur Goldstein—MORE—For the last few years, midyear Regents exams have been a mess at my school and others. One year the principal decided that we would proctor school midterms that week. It was a disaster, as no one remembered that ESL students also take tests, and administration for students with special needs was virtually impossible at this volume. We had a new and improved plan this year that also did not work with members, who had a ton of mandated projects and no time to grade them.

This will also save the city a ton of money, which could be used for a whole slew of purposes more worthy than correcting tests. The state raises cut levels to make us look bad, and lowers them to make politicians look good. I understand that they might therefore assume we are as corrupt as they are. I’d argue there’s no reason we shouldn’t grade our own students, but since regulations rule that out, I’ll argue there’s no reason we shouldn’t grade other students from our schools. In fact, smaller districts all over the state do just that. Honestly if we aren’t honest or capable enough to grade papers, i have no idea why they even hired us.

But since they did, I urge you to vote for this resolution and restore some small degree of teacher autonomy.

CL Bryant Georgia ?—speaks against, says this is opportunity to meet other colleagues, says principals will pressure teachers, and there’s good per session.

Retired teacher—Says if tests are changed and moved, doesn’t believe principal of one school will ask you change tests for other schools. Saves money and makes sense.

Question called.

Passes

Carmen Alvarez—Support of Immigrant New Yorkers—Speaks of undocumented and fears. Federal threats chill our young people and their families. Asks we support them.

Marjorie Stamberg—Wants to amend. Would like to add to stop broken windows arrests, which undercut claim NYC is sanctuary city. Would like to not permit ICE or other immigration officials in our schools, will stop deportations.

Stuart Kaplan—opposes amendment—says resolution speaks to supporting immigrants. Says it supports families. Amendment would take away from nature of what resolution is written to do. Says we should stand with what DOE says.

Retired teacher—Understands amendment is illegal. If ICE has subpoena they can come in.

Speaker supports reso opposes changes. Compliments Stamberg. Says reso says to city you are doing right thing.

Question on amendment called.

Amendment defeated.

CL—Asks to close all matters.

Resolution passes. 5:55

Karen Allford—Supports Juvenile justice reform. Our goal is to make sure all kids read by third grade. We’ve seen coaches, libraries, after school programs but with 1.1. million kids some may be incarcerated. We don’t want 16 and 17 year olds with adults. They are children and we must support them to raise the age. Only NY and NC do this. Please support.

Question called.

Passes unanimously. 5:57

LeRoy Barr—Supports Resolution in support of JHS 145. Spoke about this a lot. Don’t want it replaced with Moskowitz Academy. We should attend tonight and make DOE do their job. A school that wants to succeed needs opportunity to do so. Please support.

Delegate from Adult ed.—Was heartbreaking to see students, former students and teachers say what they had not had. DOE sat there and said it was done deal. Moskowitz has already advertised she has space. Didn’t make a difference. Time to become rowdy.

Dave Pecoraro calls question.

James Eterno calls to amend—

Mulgrew says it is a courtesy—after back and forth rules Eterno out of order—doesn’t allow him to speak.

We are adjourned.

Update: Here is Eterno's proposed amendment.

Making Nice With Governor Andy

 I was pretty shocked that UFT leadership declined to join a pro-education march because they were trying to maintain a good relationship with Andrew Cuomo. To me, it feels a lot like cozying up with a scorpion. I mean, maybe it seems like a good idea at the time, but after a while you're gonna get stung.

Andrew Cuomo was the very first Democrat for whom I declined to vote. I had never heard of a Democrat whose platform entailed going after unions before. It didn't seem like a good idea to me so I voted for Green candidate Howie Hawkins. Cuomo was lucky to be running against frothing-at-the-mouth lunatic Carl Paladino that year, and seemed invulnerable for some time thereafter. His sheen is looking a little tarnished lately, but I don't buy it.

It appears, though, that UFT leadership does. After all, he's withdrawn his "principled" opposition to the millionaire's tax, and with the advent of Trump,  is trying to remake himself as Bernie Sanders Lite.

I got a recent email from a friend who pointed out several things with which our newly-minted progressive governor is still not precisely supporting us:

Elimination of foundation formula that drives more funding to NYC and other high needs districts--That doesn't sound so good, does it? I'm writing this from my chronically overcrowded building, where you're lucky to make it up the stairs in time for class. We're facing massive potential federal cuts, what with Betsy and her tax credits, and I'm not at all certain how we could endure cuts from one source, let alone two.

Raising of charter cap in NYC--Haven't we got enough buildings that have dumped libraries so as to accommodate Moskowitz-branded test-prep factories? Don't enough kids pee their pants while "slamming the test," or whatever the hell it is they do in those places? Haven't we already done enough to accommodate a two-tier system where Moskowitz does whatever the hell she pleases, refuses to agree to conditions everyone else takes for granted, and then trashes us for the crime of taking and keeping every NYC kid no matter what?

More funding for charter schools statewide per student--I don't know if you've thought about where the money for that will come from, but I have no doubt it will come from us. We'll be told to do more with less. Sadly, we're already doing that. There comes a point when you end up doing less with less, and if we haven't reached it yet, it's a miracle. If Andy's our friend, and this is how our friends treat us, who needs enemies?

More funding that we have to pay for their space in NYC if DOE does not co-locate them in our public school buildings--I don't suppose I have to tell you where that money is coming from. It's preposterous and outlandish that Bill de Blasio, even with so-called mayoral control, is compelled to support charters he, and we the people who elected him, do not even want. This rule came along three years ago, and a highly-placed source in NYSUT told me that Michael Mulgrew supported it. While I haven't got the proper equipment to read Mulgrew's mind or search his soul, I can say that UFT leadership did not raise a peep in protest when this happened.

All of which would be terrible for our schools--That's true and I don't personally trust Andrew Cuomo any farther than I can throw him. It's nice that he placed his finger up to the wind and determined that people in NY are very anti-Donald Trump. But it's not hard to determine that Andrew Cuomo is a self-important, self-serving, morally bankrupt windbag who does whatever suits his relentless ambition.

Andrew Cuomo is already running for President in 2020 and will say and do anything he deems necessary to suit that goal. Nonetheless, he's still the same scorpion he was when he first ran for governor, stated he would go after unions, and pretended to be a Democrat.

Hell Freezes Over

Photo notwithstanding, this isn't about the Eagles. I'm just sitting here pretty much in shock that anyone from UFT would recruit me to do anything whatsoever. But it just happened nonetheless.

It's been a very interesting but bumpy ride for me on this blog. I started in 2005, with a view toward defending the UFT against the slings and arrows of the press, which seemed to hate us and everything we ever did. I had written a few times for New York Teacher, and they were the first people who ever paid me to write.  That said, I had personally taken exception to the 2002 Contract for adding time. Given that we had recently taken zero percent increases, I saw further such increases as a way to wipe out any gains and effectively leave us working extra time for free.

Shortly thereafter the 2005 Contract showed up. I had been in negotiations to write for Edwize, the gone but not-much-lamented UFT blog. I found the 2005 Contract to be a virtual abomination, and stating that publicly marked the end of my Edwize career before it even began. So I stayed here, and developed a voice that may have criticized union leadership once or twice, here and there.

I've run for office a few times, and last year, with the support of the MORE Caucus and the high school voters, managed to win a seat on the UFT Executive Board. We go there twice a month and support almost everything Unity brings up. Unity, which outnumbers us by over ten to one, opposes almost everything we bring up. It's a pretty funny position to be in, but you never know when they'll come to their senses.

I've been on an up and down quest to help reform the awful ELL policy called Part 154, and have not had a whole lot of success getting the kind of attention it deserves. I had a journalist all set to write about it, but for whatever reason, we had a lot of back and forth and it never happened. My friend Aixa and I made it all the way to being on TV, but haven't been able to get sustained attention thus far. I was able to help initiate and push a resolution with UFT to reform it, but nothing much has happened since then.

While I was pretty happy about it, I also almost fell off my chair when UFT VP of Education Evelyn de Jesus invited me to the NY State Association for Bilingual Education Conference in White Plains last weekend. I had signed up to do work with a UFT ESL committee, but didn't expect anything to come of it. I spent three days with people who were passionate about the kids I see every day. It was pretty amazing. Evelyn also spoke to me about presenting on future occasions, which surprised me even more. In fact, Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa, who I've been trying in vain to reach out to, actually walked up to me after she spoke and said told me was working on Part 154.

I'm more than happy to work with my union to promote our shared values and help the kids we serve. Fun though it may be fight all the time, this might be a better way to go. It's something I've been urging on this space for some time. We are fighting the worst dangers I've ever seen. Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump would be happy to close every public school in the country, make a few bucks on privatization, and maybe bring back child labor It appears inevitable that the United States will move backward to become a so-called right to work country. And if that isn't enough, my students, from every corner of the globe, are facing fears and dangers worse than I ever thought they'd have to encounter.

So I want to thank Evelyn de Jesus for thinking of me for this. I'm ready to work with UFT to preserve and protect the rights of my students. I'll do whatever I can. If we can give them a better and/ or safer education, I'm up for it. UFT President Michael Mulgrew said, at the conference, that if they came to our schools we're ready to be arrested. I know I am. These kids are like my own children and they've been one of the best parts of my life.

I'm ready to stand for them, to defend them, and to fight for them. I'm thrilled to see UFT leadership feeling the same way, and they have my unqualified support in this.

Executive Board Takeaway February 27.2017

There were a few striking things that occurred on Monday night. The first was Howard Schoor’s joke about how popular the questions period is. This was at least the second time he made that crack. This is significant for a few reasons. One, of course, is that we high school reps are seen as a pain in the ass rather than contributing members. Contributing members are expected to sit quietly and never contribute anything. That was pretty clear later in the evening, after Jonathan Halabi asked a question, Schoor asked whether he had answered it, and a woman nearby remarked loudly, “YES, he DID!”

Questions, for Unity Caucus, are a nuisance to be avoided. This is very odd for me because I’m a teacher and questions are pretty much my stock in trade. Can you imagine a teacher in a classroom making jokes about questions? In any case, since the overwhelming majority of this board sits quietly, never asks questions, and never rises to say anything whatsoever, I can only assume that the meetings were quite peaceful before we arrived. Also I hear the food was much better. Monday at 3:30 I went to a ramen joint on Broadway so I wouldn’t have to eat the crappy sandwiches, but they tell me when the board was all Unity they had food that people actually wanted to eat.

Of course there are exceptions to the sit down and shut up rule. When someone on the dais puts out the bat signal, the Unity loyalists all rise to argue against things like effectively enforcing the class size provisions of the contract. The system works great, they say. They fixed it in my school, once, and therefore there is no problem systemwide. We suffered and gave up pay for the existing provision, 50 years ago when most of use were not even alive. We should drop this resolution, form a committee, invite no one from the high school Executive Board, and work out this issue.

So basically, we have dozens of people pissed off about the downgrade in catering, people who’d have been perfectly content to sit and do nothing. And that, I have to assume, is mostly what they did before we came around to ruin everything.

I asked about the resolution that would bring Regents grading back into schools. This resolution has been on the DA agenda twice and has not come up for a vote. It’s not a priority for leadership. More important, evidently, is to show a clip from SNL with Melissa McCarthy as Sean Spicer. It was pretty funny, but it was also on network TV as well as all over Facebook. Of course Mulgrew isn’t on Facebook, so maybe he assumes no one else is either. Who knows? Maybe they think it's a good idea to laugh at Trump, whose name Mulgrew wouldn't utter, as he does everything in his power to cripple American union.

The worst thing, though, was the response about whether or not UFT would support the pro-education March this Saturday. Mulgrew deigned to grace us with nine minutes of his precious time, and stressed over and over we have to focus on supporting education. Yet we are not officially supporting a pro-education march this Saturday in Manhattan. This is because AQE, the organization that sponsors it, ran an anti-Cuomo ad. The ad states, correctly, that Cuomo is very much in sync with Betsy DeVos. He has attacked the public education “monopoly,” as he calls it. He has also supported tax credits for private schools, back door vouchers, just like DeVos.

These are simple facts, demonstrated on the ad in Cuomo’s own words.



But we want to get our “seat at the table” and therefore we must not antagonize him. For some reason, UFT leadership believes Cuomo is our friend this week, and also seems to believe that he would not stab us in the back in a New York minute given half a chance.

It must be liberating to ignore history and hope for the best. From my vantage point as a working teacher it’s very tough to do that. I don’t believe a Cuomo changes his spots. I believe AQE is right on target, and I’ve seen Cuomo pimping for charters very recently. I don’t doubt for a moment he’d stand with Moskowitz again on request.

I’m willing and ready to listen, and I’m not afraid of questions. I’m afraid I don’t see those qualities in leadership, and I’m literally afraid that UFT will continue to not only make the same egregious errors that left us adrift in Trumplandia, but also double down on them and ensure, at the very least, that it takes us longer to crawl our way out.

Six Hundred Seventeen Dollars (times 800)=Half a Million to Send 800 New Yorkers to New York

That's how much UFT will pay to send people to the New York Hilton for the NYSUT Representative Assembly on April 7-8. This is an important event, because there will be an election that will determine whether NYS Unity or Stronger Together controls NYSUT. We all have an interest in that because as UFT members we all pay NYSUT dues.

Of course we all know that Unity votes Unity, and approximately exactly100% of them will be doing just that. So given that, why are we spending half a million dollars to send 800 New Yorkers to New York? In fact, I live in Long Island. I could take a train there from work on Friday, take the LIRR on Saturday, and maybe see the whole thing for thirty or forty bucks out of pocket.

I'm hoping to go as press and write about it, which is what Jonathan Halabi, Norm Scott and I did at the AFT Convention in Minneapolis last summer. If my constituents can't have a vote, at least they can know what happens. I've made a few inquiries. Alternatively, I guess I could go as the guest of another union. That would be fun to write about.

So here's the thing--I'm one of seven people elected by 20,000 high school teachers, and as such I'd deem it my business to know what goes on there, Still, I haven't got a vote in NYSUT, and consequently, neither have any of us. Unless the majority of high school teachers want to give a blank check to Unity to vote Any Damn Way They Are Told, this is not what I'd call an ideal form of democracy.

But let's not dwell on petty politics. Let's take a look at what sort of deal this can be if you're a loyalty oath signer. So you get $617 to go to the convention. You take the subway there and back a couple of times. That's what, $11.00? If you live outside of the city, you add a round trip LIRR fare, and you're out around 40 clams. You've got $566 left over. This could come in handy if you decide to buy $14 beer at the Hilton, but really you could eat on the cheap and pocket $500 easily. That's pretty good pay for sitting around a five star hotel and listening to a few speeches.

Alternatively, you could give $150 each, save hundreds of thousands of dollars, and use it on the organizing that hasn't been done in decades, so as to preserve the United Federation of Teachers as an entity when Friedrichs 2 comes down the pike next year. And if you really want to save money, you could send one representative to vote eighty thousand times. Now it may not be sufficiently dramatic watching Mulgrew sit by himself and do that. Also maybe you need someone who can speak, so you send LeRoy Barr. That's a few subway fares, and then you have to cover the Staten Island Ferry for Mulgrew. Let's say you budget $1000 for both of them, and let them eat any damn place they like. Let them take cabs if they want to.

For this particular convention, I'm not sure I covet a vote. I'd probably lean toward Mike Lillis over Andy Pallotta. I'd choose activist Bianca Tanis over just about anyone. I can't think of any earthly reason why anyone would choose Martin "Buy NYSUT Auto Insurance Even Though Allstate Is Half the Price" Messner for any job more challenging than lifeguard at the car wash. But that's just me. Of course I've got no vote, just the great honor of paying dues. Whichever side wins (because theoretically, at least, it is a contest), the 20,000 NYC high school teachers I represent get no representation whatsoever (and thanks a lot to both caucuses for that).

I could see spending a lot of money to go somewhere if they were going to represent membership and deliberate about something important. I could see spending a lot of money if they were going to make decisions. But they aren't. They're gonna sit in some room, someone from leadership is gonna tell them how to vote, and they'll vote that way or no six hundred and seventeen bucks next time around.

A bunch of people go to the Hilton and pretend they're doing work. They go to meetings they're told to go to, vote how they're told to, and the preordained winners win. That's not a lot of bang for the buck, or more accurately for the 500,000 or so bucks. Given our share of paying for the common rooms, gala luncheons, and whatever the hell else goes on it will likely be more.

Perhaps leadership imagines this sort of thing will inspire all the Trump voters to pony up $1300 a year, as they'll be forever grateful we didn't mention his name when bemoaning his awful practices. On the other hand, maybe we could just buy them off and it would be a wash. But there are a whole lot of ways we could save hundreds of thousands of dollars that weekend, and a whole lot of better uses for that money.

Maybe, while we still have dues deducted from our paycheck, leadership should give some thought toward giving us a vote in organizations our dues support. I shall nonetheless sit while waiting for that to happen.

UFT Unity Response-- From Facebook: I'm a life member of nra and uscg retiree besides a social studies teacher. So you boys sound like a bunch of cry barbies .follow the advice of Ted Kennedy. " instead of saying " why say why not " and maybe you goathumpers will win an election and affect change.

DA Takeaway--I'll Sit While I Wait

This was one of the more colorful DAs I've attended. Of course the surprise appearance of Bill de Blasio was largely what made it that way. But there were a number of other noteworthy occurrences.

There were Michael Mulgrew's claims of victory over Betsy DeVos, though with her sitting as Secretary of Education this victory was not easy to understand. I'd also argue that there were a lot of parent groups involved in this fight, and a lot of voices that we are sadly not quite in sync with. If there were any victory, moral, pyrrhic, or otherwise, it was not solely ours.

There were several references to us getting every dime of retro pay, and much praise of Bill de Blasio for coming to agreements with 98% of city unions. If Bill de Blasio is reelected, I believe we will get every dime of retro pay, but that's not a done deal just yet. I think the winds of change will allow de Blasio to essentially run against Donald Trump, and that works overwhelmingly in his favor. UFT endorsement is a dicey thing, because we've been so wrong so often against such incredible odds that I'm afraid to even think about it.

The most notable reference to retro came from LeRoy Barr, who said we have to wait two or three years for retro, and seemed to shrug it off as a minor inconvenience. Now that's true if you ignore the fact that we've been waiting for seven or eight years already. For those of us who support entire families on teacher salaries, for those of us who have college tuitions and exploding medical copays (which may not yet have exploded to full potential), it's hard to ignore those seven or eight years. It's hard to ignore tens of thousands of dollars owed me, for example. I'm guessing I'm not the only teacher who feels that way. This is based on frequent questions about when we're getting raises, and what on earth the various charts really mean.

Then there's a pet resolution of mine that hasn't been voted on for the last two months--the one that tries to place Regents marking back in school buildings. This has been problematic in my school, where my committee was approached with a threat--either proctor midterm exams during Regents week or we will make you teach! Gasp!!! Go ahead, we said. The following year they did indeed impose class midterms and proctoring during Regents week. This year they held classes during Regents exams. I got tons of complaints both years from teachers with no time to do end-of-term work.  Returning the grading to school would resolve this issue.

Of course high school priorities are not the priorities of leadership, which can't be bothered consulting the elected high school Executive Board about anything whatsoever. After all, we're just a bunch of teachers. We haven't got union jobs, we haven't signed loyalty oaths, and we often say what we think rather than what we're told. So rather than find time for something that might help us, and our union brothers and sisters, we spent ten minutes watching a tape from Saturday Night Live that was so widely distributed on Facebook I'd be surprised anyone on social media hadn't seen it. (Of course Mulgrew, despite his talk about hashtags and such, isn't on social media.)

As for high school teachers, you can't have upstarts like James Eterno voicing their opinions in "debates." Better to call for a single opposition POV from another person with views that will alienate most of the people listening. You let that person talk for a long time, and then claim there is no more need for differing views. That way you shut out people who've actually got experience with specific issues that may cast doubt on candidate de Blasio. James explains here why he disagrees with the endorsement, but no one at the Delegate Assembly, ostensibly governed by Robert's Rules, got to hear word one about it.

It was also interesting to hear Mulgrew casually admit that we were on the precipice of becoming a "Right to Work" country. I haven't got the remotest notion of what we do when that happens. As a chapter leader, will I be expected to represent people who shirk dues? Will UFT expect me to go out and try to sell the insular top-down leadership that shuts up James Eterno, the person a majority of high school teachers selected as Vice-President? I don't know.

I like de Blasio a little better than some people do. Of course I haven't seen the sea change over at Tweed I'd like to have seen. I was not particularly ecstatic about the contract that gets me paid two years after it expires, if I'm lucky. I don't blame de Blasio for the contract, though. It is, in fact, his job to try and get favorable terms for management. It's labor's job to get favorable terms for us. It seems to me de Blasio, despite being portrayed as a hippie commie weirdo, managed to negotiate the lowest pattern bargain in history. Mulgrew vehemently denied that at the contract-centered DA, and turned off Eterno's mike when he brought it up. But I've seen no evidence Eterno was wrong, and leadership hasn't offered any.

There was de Blasio's claim that tests don't matter that much, followed moments later by a boast that we're doing better with tests. I'm not sure he saw the irony there, but I won't fault him for it. I think de Blasio tried to face up to charters when he came in, but got very little support, including from UFT. When Eva got that ruling that the city had to pay charter rent if it didn't give them space, a very highly-placed source at NYSUT told me that my union President supported that move. While I haven't got evidence to support that notion, I've also seen absolutely none that UFT opposed it at the time. I didn't hear boo about it from leadership at the time.

I don't think we have a better alternative than de Blasio, especially now. I hope our early endorsement pays dividends. But the same people who speak of how wise this early endorsement is told me how wise the early Hillary endorsement was. We all know how that turned out. I certainly hope the UFT endorsement isn't the kiss of death it's been looking like in various mayoral races, and most spectacularly in the ascendancy of Trump and his gang of high-powered, not-so-smooth-talking thugs.

I'm also not persuaded that the support public school campaign is what's gonna help, even if they do it in Cleveland. It sounds very much the same as previous campaigns that went exactly nowhere. Nonetheless, I'd be happy to be proven wrong. In Spanish, they don't say, "I won't hold my breath," but rather, "Espero sentado."

I'll sit while I wait.

DA Takeaway January 2017

This month's DA was notable for several reasons. One is the positive campaign Mulgrew intends to run. It's a great idea, but I'm skeptical because it's only words. I regularly approach the Executive Board with the argument that it is us who represent New York City's children, and it is us who should stand for them. They roll their eyes. Last month they rejected a class size resolution that certainly had input from public school parents. They did this on the basis of our having sacrificed to place class sizes in the contract.

That's an absurd assertion, since it happened 50 years ago, and we still haven't shut the holes in it, which are so large you can drive a Mac truck through them. Maybe we'll get that the "plans of action" cannot be used indefinitely, and maybe the new negotiation process will help a little, but the ultimate decision is with the arbitrators. For my money, they don't give a crap about the real issues of class size and until they do, there's no evidence UFT does either.

As to the DA itself, it was remarkable that James Eterno could be treated with such contempt by leadership. James stood and asked that we work toward a minimum of two rather than four observations, and also mentioned that many state locals work under that understanding. He cited discontent among rank and file with the number, and my experience suggests that he's dead on. He also cited the fact that his wife Camille is currently being railroaded over at Humanities and the Arts Magnet High School. He concluded by asking that the person who speak against his suggestion be someone who is actually rated by the system.

UFT Secretary Howard Schoor got up and angrily told James he doesn't get to pick who speaks against his motion. Schoor, who is not rated by Danielson, who has never been rated by Danielson, and who will almost certainly never be rated by Danielson then proceeded to signal the Unity Loyalty Oath Signers that they were to vote this proposal down. Of course he couldn't just do that; he had to also give an argument.

Here's the argument--There are fewer people rated ineffective now than were rated unsatisfactory under the previous system. Here's what's wrong with that argument. For one thing, it treats those rated developing as though they were rated satisfactory. As someone who's spent a lot of time meeting with, representing, and counseling people rated developing, I can say with 100% certainty that's not how they feel. Sure they don't face the consequences of an ineffective, but that's cold comfort for them.

Another problem with that argument is, as always, leadership conveniently forgets that two ineffectives means the burden of proof is on the teacher at 3020a. That's a hell of a mountain to climb, and no one had to do it before the advent of this system. But the very worst problem with Schoor's argument is this--No matter how few people are rated ineffective, there is no argument whatsoever you can possibly make that will make a single one of them feel better. I do not tell people who are rated ineffective, "Well, it happened to far fewer people so you might as well feel good about it." That would be, and is, idiotic. Remember that Schoor made this statement directly to James, whose wife, again, is currently facing these ratings and being raked over the coals by Danielson.

But the overarching problem with the argument is that making it at all underlines just how out of touch leadership is with membership. It's amazing that people who are not even touched by Danielson can muster the audacity to lecture those of us who are. And this imperious and preposterous attitude bodes ill for the next coming of Friedrichs.

And despite all this, that was not the most striking thing I heard at the DA. The most amazing thing I heard was the statement by Michael Mulgrew that UFT asked for two observations. This shocked me for several reasons. One is that I've been to chapter leader training and the Executive Board, and I've heard about the new system from the best experts the UFT had to offer. The argument I heard, not once but several times, was that more observations give teachers a better chance of doing well. I also heard that CSA, the principals' union, wanted fewer observations.

Now if UFT had asked for two and was rebuffed in negotiations by the DOE, why the hell didn't they just say so? And why on earth would anyone give James Eterno a nasty answer to a very real problem when they could've just said, "You know, we wanted that too, but we couldn't get the DOE to agree to it." If that's the truth, it's a hell of a better argument than any I heard, and I've heard the arguments on at least three occasions, including the DA.

So what's the truth? Is Mulgrew telling it? And if so, why don't all of them tell it? Why haven't they told us before? Have they been lying to us to make us think that they controlled negotiations better than they did? If so, doesn't that suggest that's what they do as a matter of course?

With leadership like that, is it any wonder we're facing DeVos, ready to dismantle public education but ever vigilant about protecting us from grizzly bears? It's amazing that we had to listen to Mulgrew talk so much about transparency, and that leadership nonetheless sits up there on that 14th floor posturing as though they're on Mount Olympus, talking down to all us non-deities below.

The Only Thing Worse than a Two-Party System

A two-party system has been problematic for the United States. We were particularly hurt by it this year, and will feel its effects for at least four years to come. I didn't think there was anyone worse than GW Bush, but American ingenuity is and always has been unlimited, and we've managed to find someone.

It was pretty frustrating to see a brilliant candidate like Bernie Sanders fight a David and Goliath battle against a preordained candidate like Hillary Clinton. A big reason was that we'd become accustomed to Democrats who didn't really stand for working people and gave us valuable lip service instead.

Health care for all? A pipe dream. Unionized labor? Not necessarily bad, but we support non-unionized charters and Barack Obama could never find shoes comfortable enough to take a stand in Wisconsin, let alone anywhere else. A living wage? Maybe we'll compromise and give you a higher non-living wage. College education for all? Maybe Donald Trump will send Ivanka to Queens College, so forget it.

So what do we get? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. With that menu, I chose Hillary Clinton, though I had very strong reservations about her. I don't regret it because I'm proud to be among the near 3-million votes she got over Big Orange. Trump's pathological lies and execrable bigotry put me off big time. His victory put me off even more.

As frustrating as that is, it's just as frustrating facing a union controlled by only UFT Unity. Now it wouldn't be so bad if they were out there fighting for us, but I don't get that feeling at all. We've given in so many times, on so many bad ideas, that I wonder whether leadership knows the difference. It's hard to forget, for example, that the only time I've ever seen Michael Mulgrew fighting mad was when he was defending Common Core and offering to punch all our faces out.  But that's the tip of the iceberg.

The iceberg itself is full of mayoral control, which we endorsed for Mayor Mike both before and after he showed himself as our blood enemy. There are the Green Dot Charters that Randi brought to the Big Apple, partnering UFT with Steve Barr after he snookered LA teachers but good. And who can forget the 2005 contract that not only sent seniority placement the way of the dinosaur, but also gave us the Absent Teacher Reserve, the one with which we're still grappling now.

But they're always right. It doesn't matter what they do. When they win something, it's a victory. When they lose something, it's another victory. When they support Hillary, they tell us how smart they are. In fact, they're still defending that decision, despite the massive and ruinous consequences that will rain upon us in the coming months. They never do anything wrong. They never have and they never will. As long as you're willing to accept that, you can sign an oath and join the team.

Here's the thing, though. The team is losing on a massive scale, The ship is sinking and leadership is still telling us how clever they are. When we ask what on earth we're gonna do about this they tell us there's a new loud and proud campaign--more of the same. It's very hard to tell an entrenched and patronage powered bureaucracy that we need to actually organize in ways that haven't been attempted in decades, ways they've not seen in their professional lives.

But the only thing really worse than a two party system is a one-party system, and as long as the Prime Directive remains perpetuating the system, the smart money is on massive and crushing losses the likes of which we've never known before.

President's Message--Get on Social Media!

Hi it's me, your old pal "Punchy" Mike Mulgrew! Put em up! Nah. Just kidding. You didn't think I was really gonna hit you over that Common Core stuff, did you? I was just showing everybody I was, you know, passionate and stuff.

Anyhoo, I'm just writing to let you know that we're gonna do a Thunderclap against that bad old Betsy DeVos. Because it's really important we all take to social media and let them know that we're opposed to Betsy DeVos. Do you know that she supports charter schools? Can you imagine? Hey, that's outrageous. Now it's one thing when we support charter schools, because we support, you know, the right kind of charter schools. She supports, more like, you know, the wrong kind of charter schools. Yeah, that's the ticket. Do you support the wrong kind of charter schools? Of course not.

Because, you know, charters divert money that could go to public schools. That's why we sort of oppose them sometimes, except really we don't. In fact, the UFT Charter School (which is one of the good charter schools) is co-located in a public school building. But because it's, you know, a good charter school, well, you know, it's not a bad one, so it's, you know, OK. And we firmly oppose privatization of public schools except, you know, the good kind, like, when we do it.

So anyway here's the thing--Betsy DeVos supports vouchers, and vouchers are bad. Why? Well, they take money away from public schools, and that's bad. Except when it's done for good schools, you know, like the UFT charter, which is OK. So we need to, you know, get on our computers and do the whole social media thing and do a Thunderclap, whatever the hell that is.

Well, OK, when I say that we need to do it, what I actually mean is that you need to do it. You know, I'm the President and stuff, and I'm really busy. I have to, you know, go places and do stuff. And lots of the stuff I do is, you know, important. For example, I missed one of my own Executive Board meetings because I was out traveling around the country campaigning for Hillary. And it was vital that I did that because if I didn't, who knows, maybe Donald Trump would be President and we'd be facing an Education Secretary who supported privatization and charter schools. Not that that would be bad, you understand, if it were a good Education Secretary supporting privatization and charter schools, like, say, Arne Duncan.

Now you remember Arne Duncan, who did that Race to the Top thing. That's why we have this evaluation system. And this evaluation system is much better than the old one. I know, because I helped write the law that created it. Then I thanked the Heavy Hearts Assembly when they passed the new version, and now I've negotiated this new thing with the Matrix and a bunch of new stuff that doesn't exist yet. And who better than me to judge it, because I'm like, objective and stuff because it doesn't affect me at all. How cool is that?

But anyway, like, what I'm saying is, you know, you need to get on social media. Jeez, I use a flip phone and I don't even know what the hell social media is. All I know is that bloggers are purveyors of myth and while I don't read the blogs I know none of them are true, so, like, don't read them.

Oh crap there's another Executive Board meeting on Monday. I'm gonna have to take the elevator all the way down to the second floor and say some crap about something or other. Man I am sure glad to be the President so I don't have to sit through the whole meeting and, like, you know, vote on stuff or speak or listen to anyone. I hear those MORE/ New Action people want to do stuff like, you know, reduce class size and fight against abusive administrators. What a bunch of losers.

Anyway, like, get on social media and do the Thunderclap thing, and, like, say whatever we tell you to say because that's, you know, what activists do. Thanks for all you do, and please keep doing it, because I sure as hell don't want to have to do it myself.

Being Observed in NYC

Last night I went to a chapter leader training about the new evaluation system. I heard a few things. One is that the new portfolio and student achievement stuff doesn't actually exist yet. I'm not sure how I missed that. So not only does that stuff sound odd and potentially time-consuming, but no one actually knows what it is yet. Will it help teachers or students? It's hard to say, but I doubt it. When you make up a program out of whole cloth, when you haven't got any studies or research to support it, when you then enact it and hope for the best, it's hard to vouch for its validity.

Another is that MOTP reform is supposedly coming later. So maybe we won't have to worry quite as much about random drive-bys. I saw no indication that this was a UFT goal, but teachers would like to see fewer, and so would administrators. There are a whole lot of them who are overwhelmed by the demands of these observations. A single department in my school has 54 members. Can you imagine doing 200 observations and writing up reports? I guess you could do it, and I guess you could meet 200 times with teachers. I guess you could also do the rest of your job too. How well? Who knows?

If UFT leadership wants to improve this system (and who knows what they want, what with a President who doesn't answer email or attend his own meetings), they will meet the law's requirement of 2 observations per year. They will arrange for additional observations on an as-needed basis. A principal, not mine, told me that she could observe someone once a year, and if there were no issue, she could leave it at that. If they needed additional help, she could do more observations and work with the teacher in question. This was someone I respect, and I always remembered that.

Thought the MOTP reforms are supposed to come later, at least one of them is already here. Though presented as some kind of improvement, the four informals option now included two visits from colleagues. I'm not bothered by that. But I'm one person, and I'm not as sensitive as some of my colleagues. Teachers are beaten down and demoralized and terrified. This has been happening over time, and the new evaluation system hasn't helped. UFT reps can stand and talk about what an improvement this new system is, but that shows how out of touch they are. I don't know a single teacher who likes it better. I hate getting a checklist, and if it says I'm effective I don't much care what else it says.

This is not the only reason that UFT leadership is out of touch with how working teachers feel about this. You can't overstate the fact that no one in leadership has actually been subject to this system. No one. No one knows how it feels. And all their feedback comes from those in the Unity echo chamber. Since they've all signed loyalty oaths, their judgment is suspect. How can you trust someone to represent you if that person has signed an oath to support Michael Mulgrew in all things? How can you trust people who've agreed to speak one way even if it negates your personal experience? How can you trust people who've taken patronage jobs that depend on loyalty to leadership? Shouldn't someone who represents members be loyal to them first?

The first time we got an evaluation system we went to 52 Broadway to vote on it. That was kind of a pro forma exercise, as UFT DA is dominated by loyalty oath signers, and it was very clear how they were supposed to vote. When that didn't work out, Michael Mulgrew left it in the hands of Reformy John King. Evidently Mulgrew thought the reformiest man in New York was a fair arbiter. Chalkbeat reported that neither UFT nor DOE wanted so many observations, but John King knew better.

The system was revised two more times. UFT sent their band of negotiators, none of whom had lived under this system, because they know best what's good for us. Always. They didn't bother putting it up for a vote, because why bother? Democracy is for losers, and America should know that, having cast 2.9 million more votes for Hillary Clinton than President-elect Donald Trump.

My mind keeps running to Friedrichs two, and what will happen when dues are optional. If leadership wishes to help itself, it's gonna have to be responsive to us, to say the least. I'm not sure a dynasty can change its spots. But I'm always hopeful.

Don't Laugh at the Probationers--You May Be Juggling Portfolios Too, and Soon

 Mulgrew says that we'll hear about the new evaluation system any moment now. I'm going off that topic for a few paragraphs, but I promise I'll come back to it.

Our school sent 21 probationary teachers to a tenure workshop last week. They all went and listened to our superintendent, our third superintendent in three years, tell them exactly what she wanted to see in their tenure folder, or whatever it is they are supposed to do before they get it. I myself am not acutely aware because it's been a while since I got tenure. Nonetheless, I'm sure I'll be dispensing a lot of apologies if next year we get a fourth superintendent with a fourth and distinct list of demands.

In fact, it took me a lot longer to get tenure than it took my colleagues. That's because I started out as an English teacher, but spent very little time actually teaching English. My first semester I taught four preps of English, but my supervisor shortly gave me one ESL class, so that I had five preps the very first semester I ever taught. That was a pretty tough gig. I distinctly remember being asked if I'd like to teach ESL, asking, "What's ESL?" and being told, "Give it a try."

Of course I had no idea about anything regarding the UFT Contract, and my first contact with union was with the chapter leader, who approached me in the men's room, handed me a postcard and said, "Psst, wanna join the union?" At the time the principal of Lehman High School was Robert Leder, and teachers were leaving in droves. I wasn't a drove, but I left too, and in retrospect, I'm really glad I did.

Anyway, new teachers sometimes complain to me about putting together portfolios and of the extra work it entails. I tell them that I'm sorry, but they really have to do it. I know they have enough to do, and I know well how much harder it is to do the day by day of teaching when you have little to no experience. I remember spending hours after school writing lesson plans, and I also remember back then that we were required to write weekly capsule plans. I had to churn out 25 of those a week, and it was no fun at all. And then when I rejected my first English appointment and decided that I wanted to be an ESL teacher, I lost a few years toward tenure. I think I lost another waiting for the city to give a test, which was a thing back then.

Personally, I'm grateful I don't have to put together some tenure portfolio. I've paid my dues and I lived through the craziness of my first few years. I'd rather no one had to go through such nonsense, but I'm glad mine is over.

Or is it?

If we're gonna be rated by portfolios and/ or projects, we'd better polish up both of them. It's funny, right after Michael Mulgrew tells teachers he's had it with excessive paperwork, that we're gonna have to come up with portfolios, something we've never had to do. This, of course, is between meetings and PD and teacher teams and hoping not to get a drive-by observation from some Boy Wonder supervisor, we have nothing to do but collect lesson plans and put them in some folder. Thanks for filling all that free time I didn't know what to do with! What's better than more paperwork?

Who on earth knows what will be judged or by whom? Are we looking for pictures? Original ideas? Grammar? Who knows? You can't use the same old tests, because Mulgrew is against them this year. And to be clear, I'm not against tests. I'm against standardized tests, particularly those that don't measure anything resembling what I actually teach (like the one on which I was last rated).

Mulgrew speaks of "authentic" learning measures. He speaks of a great new evaluation system that, alas, none of us have ever seen. What will it be like? Of course the specifics have been top-secret so far, so I'm not privy to them. Do they consult with real working teachers who haven't signed loyalty oaths to support whatever Mulgrew tells them to? Who knows? Given my experience with UFT leadership, I suspect not.

But what if we now have to put together portfolios every year? I suppose, to someone like Mulgrew who doesn't teach and hasn't in years, that doesn't seem like much of an imposition. After all, he won't have to do it.  Nor will any of the UFT officers making the decisions. Nor will your district reps. They teach, at most, one class, and as such are exempt from the evaluation system. They get rated S or U, and have no personal stake in how it affects you or me.

And if it's not portfolios, maybe it's projects. And if you aren't rating them, someone else is. Who will that be? Only Mulgrew knows, and so far he hasn't shared it with us lowly footsoldiers.

Now I want you to imagine your 170 students, 200 if you have a sixth class, or up to 500 if you're a PE teacher on an alternate day schedule. There you are with your 170-500 portfolios, or maybe one big old portfolio containing continually updated records of your 170-500 students, and you now have to not only find a place to physically keep them, but you also have to monitor them and check that whatever the hell it is you are supposed to produce is in there. Sounds like fun, doesn't it? And if you're a probationer, you also have whatever they want from you for tenure to handle. Of course they could be digital, which means you'd store them on DOE computers, and as someone who uses them regularly, even with a Mac genius tech guy in my building, I say good luck with that.

Mulgrew also talks about teacher-created tests being used, but discusses how teachers grading their own tests is ridiculed. I have no idea what on earth he envisions, or what the geniuses sitting around 52 envisioned for him, but here's what I know for sure--it's not based on science, research, or practice. UFT leadership has a decades-long history of bad decisions and worsening working conditions for teachers. Every time I think morale has bottomed out, some new and baseless directive comes down the pike to make it seep even lower.

By the end of the week, or maybe even today, we will know what monstrosity Mulgrew has in mind. Again, he won't be rated by it and neither will any UFT officers, district reps, or special reps. If they teach at all, they're still rated on the old S and U system, you know, the one that didn't cause teachers to have nervous breakdowns and heart attacks. Though they claim to hate that system, they in fact negotiated so that they themselves would be rated by it anyway, because leadership.

And also because in today's UFT, some animals are still more equal than others.

DA Takeaway--Through the Looking Glass with UFT Unity

Given the volume of outlandish and contradictory statements from the Unity loyalty oath signers, it was very hard to take notes quietly at the DA the other day. Mulgrew opened with sexist statements about Betsy DeVos, calling her, "our own beauty," before launching into ridicule of her name. This mirrored the UFT Unity Twitter feed, which took down a tweet or two after being called on them right here on this blog. You can still see what they said, though. (In fairness, there was later a PowerPoint with actual information.)

Mulgrew then drew us into his dream world, effusively praising the new evaluation system which, alas, has not only never been tested, but also does not yet even exist.  Mulgrew, who has never taught a single class under any evaluation system he negotiated, spoke with complete confidence about "authentic" measures that would be used to evaluate our teaching. He is no longer using the phrase "growth model," but continues to contend that growth can be measured via portfolios or project-based learning.

Remember that this is the same Mulgrew who boasted of taking part in writing the law that brought all this nonsense upon us in the first place. This is the same Mulgrew that called the system wonderful when Reformy John King created it, with his blessing, the same Mulgrew who ridiculed those of us, including Diane Ravitch and the American Statistical Association, who labeled it junk science. This is the same Mulgrew who boasted of getting every aspect of Danielson in as opposed to the seven or eight Bloomberg wanted, and the same Mulgrew who later boasted of getting it reduced to seven or eight, like Bloomberg wanted, after he was gone. This is the same Mulgrew who boasted of getting artifacts in, and then of getting them out.

Mulgrew is now saying, even though he deemed test-score ratings wonderful when they came out, that we will not use tests to rate teachers. He has finally concluded, as many of us did long ago, that this would result in teaching to the test. He says, though, that some teachers love being rated on tests. It's really remarkable that we're basically advocating a crap shoot because it's that risky to have administrators evaluate us. With such an absolute lack of faith in the ability of administrators, you'd think they'd want to do something about that, but they refuse to move on our resolution addressing it. Somehow it's OK to shout to the skies about how unfair they are, but wildly undiplomatic to take general action on it. 

Again, there is no research or practice to support anything Mulgrew says. I have no idea whatsoever how projects or portfolios will be rated or who will rate them. Mulgrew spoke derisively of those who ridicule us that we will actually grade the work ourselves. On the other hand, unlike Mulgrew, I'm a teacher and I actually spend hours grading things. I wonder, if we are not grading the work, who is? Is it the supervisors, the ones who he wants to make sure don't rate us? Is it the geniuses up in Albany? People from other schools? Space aliens? Who knows? Mulgrew, right on the heels of the most catastrophic failure in our union's history, continues to speak with total confidence, and we are expected to trust him absolutely and hope for the best.

Despite the punitive evaluation system pushed by Governor Cuomo, Mulgrew says he continues to support us. It's obvious to me, at least, that Cuomo is a creature of convenience who will do or say anything at any moment to advance his own personal ambition. Mulgrew mentioned in passing extending the moratorium he claims we are responsible for, but which actually was put in place to try to appease the statewide opt-out movement. Though Mulgrew claims to be meeting with parents, and I hear he is, he then said that it was dangerous for more than 5% of New Yorkers to refuse the test. This is no different from what he has been saying since opt-out appeared.

We then came to the discussion of the Resolution for Respect for All People. The history of this resolution is pretty interesting, to me at least. I wanted to jointly initiate such a resolution with Unity, so rather than write it, I proposed it to leadership. They said they'd get back to me. Days later, at an Executive Board meeting, where I rose to promote this idea, they had the resolution already written, with no input from us. (So much for trying to cooperate with Unity.)

This notwithstanding, the resolution was very good. With a few adjustments from Ashraya Gupta of MORE, all of the high school reps supported it enthusiastically. The next day, though, instead of crediting Donald Trump with his racism, bigotry, and misogyny, it was edited to attribute this to "the Presidential Election" instead. This was, of course, absurd (and still is).

Peter Lamphere of MORE rose at the DA to restore Trump's name. Mulgrew, ever the student of Robert's Rules, called on several Unity Caucus members to speak against it and never once asked for a voice of support, and it wasn't as though there weren't any. I saw several close to me with hands raised, ready to speak. One Unity member said it was obvious this was about Trump, so there was no need to add his name. LeRoy Barr, though, said we couldn't place his name because we were trying to get everyone on board, including Trump supporters.

I have to say Barr is a gifted speaker, passionate and persuasive. I saw him speak in Minnesota at the AFT Convention and he was great. Here, he spoke off the cuff and was just as effective. Yet he contradicted the other loyalty oath signers by saying we didn't want to alienate the Trump supporters. So which is it? Is it so obvious that we're talking about Trump that we need not name him, or is it important that we refrain from speaking his name so that the Trump voters continue paying dues once He Who Shall Not Be Named makes the United States a "Right to Work" nation? There is, of course, a third possibility--that UFT leadership thinks Trump voters are too stupid to attribute the racism to Trump. Maybe Unity assumes they will think it was Hillary or Bernie Sanders who advocated grabbing women "by the pussy." Who knows what goes on in those top-secret Unity meetings?

All I know is that they rise to support whatever they're told to. I was pretty surprised when Barr touted debate at the Executive Board as a reason to stifle it at the DA. While I did appreciate his willingness to enable it, and while that certainly sets him apart from Mulgrew, who can't even be bothered to sit through his own Executive Board meetings, the fact is the result of any Executive Board debate is a foregone conclusion. There are seven of us elected by UFT high schools against the will of leadership, and 95 loyalty oath signers who must vote and speak as told.

There is no logical reason to withhold criticism of the execrable and anti-democratic Donald Trump. However, anti-democracy is a quality that Trump and UFT Unity share. This, sadly, is just one of the qualities very likely to result in our losing on the NY Constitutional Convention, and maybe the pensions for which we've worked our entire careers. Another is our dogged insistence on falling down well before anyone has even pushed us.

The very worst quality of UFT Unity leadership, though, is that they just bet the farm on a candidate who stood for nothing, lost the farm, and still can't bring themselves to take clear and principled stands on issues that, debate notwithstanding, aren't even debatable.