Another Day, Yet Another Abusive Administrator

Lots of us wonder exactly what administrators have to do to face consequences. As a chapter leader, I'm well aware of everything that happens to UFT members, but I have little to no idea what happens to administrators, if anything. Actually, it's none of my business. I only know what people tell me and what I read in the papers.

Given that, all I can say is holy crap, administrators are getting away with murder. I sit at Executive Board and marvel that people who are so narrow-minded and hostile can advance. It's an odd system. I always think that people who want to "get out of the classroom" are not only the worst teachers, but also the worst leaders of teachers. (I understand a little better the need to make more money.)

Then you read stuff like this, and you think, "How do these people end up in these positions?" You wonder how they get away with so much crap for so long. Here's an assistant principal accused of sleeping with four teachers and up to four students. Who knows how long people knew about this, and how would they not? Evidently it didn't become an issue until someone brought a $2 million lawsuit against the city.

This is important, I guess. The alleged actions, not so much. After all, Mayor Bill de Blasio says this stuff is all blown out of proportion, and that 98% of sexual harassment complaints at his DOE stem from a "hyper-complaint dynamic." I don't know exactly who gets paid 200K a year to sit around and dream up phrases like that, but you have to admit that it beats working.

This notwithstanding, it reflects pretty poorly on the mayor that he doesn't listen to ideas like these, say, "What are you, out of your mind?" and throw the overpaid morons who say this stuff out of his office. What this phrase does is stereotype 80,000 working teachers as a bunch of whining windbags. So what if your boss propositioned you? Why the hell can't you just laugh it off and get with the program?

Actually, in the case of this particular administrator, it's not merely the sexual harassment, but other elements as well.

In 2016, the suit states, “Morrison was caught creating fake online classes and passing 172 students in the fake classes in order to boost the graduation rates of the school.”

The Education Department found the accusations were substantiated, and he received counseling, the department said.

Wow. This is what you call a renaissance administrator. Not only is this person said to be fluent in the sexual harassment that fuels the "hyper-complaint dynamic," but he's also been found guilty of education fraud. What's the result? Counseling. Don't create fraudulent online classes and pass scores of kids to make yourself look better because it's, you know, bad.

I'm trying to imagine what would happen to me, a lowly teacher, if I got caught committing fraud. Somehow I'm thinking reassignment and 3020a.

It's funny because you read the papers, you hear about all the teachers who can't be fired, This one was accused of that, and that one was accused of this. How can the city continue to hire people accused of this or that? It's a horror, enough to motivate failed journalist Campbell Brown to splash it all over the papers, before finding a better-paying gig over at Facebook.

Yet when administrators are not only accused of misconduct, but also convicted of it, they continue on their merry way, get in more trouble, and don't get removed until taxpayers shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, to bail them out. Then they sit in cushy offices and twiddle their thumbs, for full salary.

Nice work if you can get it.

Co-Teaching

It's a marriage, you know. Sure, it can end after a term, or after a year, but it's a marriage. Even if you only do it one period a day, if the chemistry isn't right, you may need a separation agreement. But even if you get one, there you are every single day, having to lead a class without killing one another. That can be harder than you might imagine.

A few years ago, a co-teaching couple I knew had irreconcilable  differences. The principal, after various interventions, decided there was no way they could work together. He determined to break up this couple and leave them each with half the class. The teachers each selected an advocate, and I was one of them.

We were tasked to sit together in the principal's conference room until we'd worked out a division. We sat and looked at the records of each student. We rated them in terms of their records. I don't remember exactly how we did that. We flipped a coin for who'd get first pick. We then went down the list, making little adjustments and deals as we went, and split the class in two. Neither of us were happy for the kids, who'd have to feel the palpable hatred embedded into that division.

More recently I've been called to other feuding couples that weren't working out. In some of these cases, one teacher was assigned to lead the class while the other was given a supporting role. There were various factors that went into these decisions, but I felt like there was a winner in each. I wasn't at all sure this was a victory for students.

There are a lot of co-teachers now for two reasons. One is that special education students need to be in least restrictive environments. These days, for a lot of these students, that means being assigned to a general education class with extra support in the form of a second teacher. The other is the new version of CR Part 154 that reduced a whole lot of my ESL colleagues to co-teachers.

I'm much more familiar with ESL situations. In small schools, this often entails giving an ESL teacher five co-teachers. That's because there's likely one ESL teacher who simply has to do everything. In these situations, there's really no possibility of co-planning. Often the ESL teachers go in with no idea what's going to happen in a given class, and no possibility of planning how to support the teacher.

A lot of subject area teachers are now taking the magical twelve credits and becoming certified to teach ESL. This is often because it's easier to get hired when you have this certification. A supervisor can pick you up and save the expense of a dedicated ESL teacher. It's practical. Of course it doesn't necessarily mean that teacher really wants to pursue anything other than a job opportunity. I'm not remotely confident that these teachers can take, for example, my place.

I'm in a very large school, and we handle this situation better than most. We pair ESL with English. I'm certified to teach English, and a good number of my colleagues either have the certification or are pursuing it. But we still have co-teaching for both ESL and special ed., and with a large number of pairs we have our share of problems.

In fairness, our school does continue partnerships that work. I'm thinking of one pair that's been together for years. Despite this, new pairings are often made via the tried and true "eenie, meenie, miney, mo" method. Alas, this does not always achieve the optimum success level. It's kind of like, well, you're free and she's free, so there you go. There's no particular training and no compatibility test.

One day, after refereeing a particularly mismatched couple, I told my AP that I never wanted to co-teach. This proved an irresistible temptation for her to prove me wrong. She paired me with a new teacher who I'd told her I found smart and quick-witted. She knows I like people like that. It turned out we got along very well. We didn't follow any particular program. We would discuss our plans and whoever was going to lead that day would get the fun task of writing the lesson. I was persuaded co-teaching could be a thing.

Alas, not everyone thinks or plans like my AP. And no matter how well you get along with anyone, no one can successfully navigate more than one or two co-teachers. It's probably not a good idea for the state to declare from now on, there will be co-teachers. There ought to be more regulation on the roles and responsibilities. While I was fortunate enough to fall into something thoughtful that actually worked, it's just as easy to step into quicksand.

I'm not saying it's necessarily good or bad. I'm saying there needs to be more direction. There ought to be mandatory training, even if the state has to (gasp!) pay for it and/ or give teachers time off to learn about it. The current status quo, saying, "You and you, go teach together." is short-sighted and untenable.

And that's being nice. I know a lot of co-teachers who'd use much stronger language. If you have any co-teaching stories, please feel free to share in the comments.

Puerto Rican Day Parade 2018

I really loved the parade last year, so I went again this year. Post Hurricane Maria, there was a markedly different tone, My friend and colleague Mayra, who's from Puerto Rico, has the message in her hand. At this point, we were in front of Trump Tower.

A lot of people were wearing hats that said 4645. That was well over the President's cheery estimate of forty some-odd lives lost. Throwing a bunch of paper towels was far from an appropriate response, and his profoundly insightful observation that Puerto Rico was a big island surrounded by water was not particularly helpful either.

Puerto Rico is under siege by vulture capitalists set on bleeding the island dry, closing the schools, reducing services, and doing pretty much whatever they can to squeeze every last drop of profit from the island. The United States could pay off the debt and free them from this nonsense, but chooses not to.

I was curious about the different colored flags. You can see in the picture at right that some are lighter blue than the others. I'm not sure why that is or what it signifies. Maybe nothing. My Puerto Rican friend couldn't explain it either.

I also saw some in black and white, and a lot of people dressed in black and white. I'm told that's a sign of militancy, standing against the vulture capitalists who have their eyes on decimating the island because they haven't yet acquired sufficient millions of dollars. A group pictured below sends that message to the President.

And despite that, there was still a lot of visible celebration. Though I didn't see him, I heard Andrew Cuomo was around. A lot of people had signs that said Cuomo's name and proclaimed Puerto Rican pride.I was very glad not to have seen him because I hear if you accidentally touch Andrew Cuomo you have to scrub your whole body with Brillo pad. (Otherwise, you might find yourself eating Sandra Lee's Kwanzaa cake,  which can be detrimental to your health. Lee is a Food Network personality and Cuomo's girlfriend, the one who helps Andy evade taxes by locking out home inspectors checking for unlicensed and untaxed improvements to their house.)

Here's the thing about parades--they involve a whole lot of waiting. Here you see the front of the UFT parade contingent. I don't remember what time it was when we took that photo, but UFT asked us to get there by 8:30. I missed a train and didn't make it until ten. We were supposed to start marching at 11, and I don't think we made it out until 12. So my advice, if you go to the Labor Day Parade in September, is get there at 9:30 instead of 8:30. The toughest part of a parade is standing around and waiting for it to begin.

This notwithstanding, for us it was a great celebration. We gave away t-shirts, flags, fans and bandanas. I tried to give them to children and the elderly, but there's something in America that pushes us to do anything for free stuff, and I sometimes gave in to demands. The most treasured item appeared to be the "Yo soy Boricua" t-shirt that most of us were wearing. Next was the bandana. My friend Mayra had a huge stack of them, but seemed to give them only to people who either cheered relentlessly or praised teachers. She criticized me for giving away stuff faster than I could replenish it.

We still haven't fixed the sign at left, which says, in English, "Union of teachers and professionals." It should probably say, "Union of teachers and other professionals." As is, it kind of says that guidance counselors, nurses, paraprofessionals, secretaries and others are professionals, but teachers aren't. That's not really fair. I mean, just because I'm unprofessional, it doesn't follow that you are. Actually, I'm not always sure it's to our advantage to call ourselves professionals. It's kind of in opposition to calling ourselves working people who need, you know, unions and stuff.

This is an odd year, and I find myself in an odd place. As a longtime critic of union leadership, I've disregarded a lot of warnings. "We're facing Giuliani, so now is not the time for criticism." "We're facing Bloomberg, so now is not the time for criticism." "We're facing Cuomo, so now is not the time for criticism."

I found none of that persuasive. In fact now, very much like Puerto Rico, we're facing an existential crisis. As far as I can see, there's never a particularly good time to stop telling the truth. Side effects of ignoring truth include Donald Trump and the crisis in Puerto Rico, among other things. But we're still the biggest teacher local in the country. Our fight for survival is crucial to us and all who'd follow in our footsteps.

At the parade on Sunday, we saw protest and celebration come together as one. On the right is my friend Alexandra, who was dancing to the ubiquitous loud music while a whole lot of us were standing around and complaining about how long we had to wait for the parade to begin.

In times of crisis, it's always hard to find a balance. I think the Puerto Rican Day Parade struck it on Sunday. Now all the rest of us have to do is figure out where the balance is each and every other day from now on.

Piece of cake.

Cuomo Wants Teachers to Have Guns Removed from Student Homes

A teacher friend told me a story, after we heard about Anthony Bourdain. He was teaching his last class on a Friday before a break. He wished the students a great break. Everyone was happy, giving high fives, and walking out of the classroom with smiles on their faces. One girl lingered behind.

When everyone left, she remained in her seat. "I'm gonna have a great weekend," she told the teacher. "I'm going to kill myself."

He sat and talked to her for a while. When she became quiet, he managed to get up and call the principal's office. They sent in a social worker and a guidance counselor, who took charge of the situation. They sat and spoke with the girl for hours. The parents came and got her. My friend doesn't know what happened during the week off, but he remembers that the girl came back, not having killed herself.

The girl's parents both called and visited the school to thank him. I don't suppose there were any Danielson points for this. After all, no one had observed the questioning, and no one can accurately determine the degrees of knowledge the questions in this conversation entailed. Most importantly, there's no evidence any of this actually raised test scores.

Now Governor Cuomo has burst into the arena, on his 2020 white steed, proposing that teachers should be able to have guns taken away from the homes of troubled students. This is not actually a bad idea. If there were fewer guns, there would be fewer suicides. But it's kind of a small niche Cuomo's forged with this, a remarkably small one actually.

My friend's story is unusual in that few students are likely to just open up like that and give a direct warning to a classroom teacher. It's actually a great and lucky thing that the girl decided to open up to him at that particular moment. What if he didn't stress the great weekend? Would she have said anything? Who knows?

Cuomo's idea is likely directed more against school shootings than suicide, though who knows what exactly is rattling between Andy's ears? How many school shooters are likely to drop hints or tell a classroom teacher they're gonna come in tomorrow and kill everyone the next day? I'll take a wild guess and say few indeed. Cuomo may earn some brownie points with some voters for this, but it's not likely to fix the issue.

In fairness, this issue can't be resolved at a state level. With other states having relatively lax laws, with the gun show loophole, and with a Congress bought and paid for by the NRA, anyone can cross a border or two and buy whatever. There's an issue that really needs to be addressed.

Meanwhile, in the rare to nonexistent instances that a student advises a teacher that he's got an arsenal at home to shoot up the school with, I suppose teachers will be able to request they be confiscated. I guess if it happens, we shall all be relieved. It seems, though, very much like a band-aid on a gaping wound--like it will affect virtually nothing. How does Cuomo even think of this stuff?

We've got a President who's in the bag for the NRA, along with a whole lot of Senators and Congresspersons. Until we dump them, we're not going to be able to do much but apply band-aids. Cuomo will probably get some Brownie points with someone or other for doing this, but I'm left wondering how we live in a country where this is even possible.

When I posted the article on Facebook, I got a bunch of responses wondering where this would fit into the Danielson rubric. Will you get rated effective if they find guns in the student's home? Ineffective if you don't? Who knows? Will you get a letter in your file for making the student feel bad after they took the guns out of his house? Isn't it incredible that our minds even go to those places?

And yet there we are. I suppose it's better than the usual "thoughts and prayers" nonsense. How much, though, is an open question.

Two Observations

That's the state minimum, and that's what a lot of us would like to see in the next Collective Bargaining Agreement. If I were a supervisor, I'd jump for joy at the prospect. I don't know how it is where you work, but my school is enormous. I think my AP has 40 people to observe four times a year, and then she has to write each one up and meet with everyone. I write very fast, but I would find that daunting. So I don't think CSA will be fighting us on that.

There's a school of thought that if administrators are kept busy doing observations they won't have time to do other stuff, like put letters in people's files. Alas, I'm here to testify that's not true. If it were, I might be asking for fifteen observations. In fact, if they had to observe us fifteen times it might work. But it still wouldn't help.

Teachers are nervous wrecks. No matter how many times I see people say only one percent of teachers were rated ineffective, or whatever it is, I have people come to me nervous and unhappy. Why am I developing for this? How could I have been doing this for fifteen years and be told I'm making baby steps? I understand. My former co-blogger Arwen wrote a great piece comparing old and new observations. There's quite a difference between thoughtful and/ or spontaneous reactions and a checklist.

Most teachers I know look at the thing, check to see everything is effective, take a deep breath and move on. Then they relax for a few days, thinking the supervisor probably won't come in so soon again. That, of course, assumes the observation from January has been written up before June, which it may or may not have.

Anyway we're stuck with this system. The rubric thing may or may not change with the next contract, but who knows how? Assuming it stays the same, every working teacher I know would like fewer observations. Maybe two, with at least one announced, would be reasonable. Who wants to sit around and wonder when Boy Wonder is going to come in, put on his blinders, and record whatever utterances the voices in his head make? Even teachers with great supervisors and great ratings feel the stress.

We have to look closely, though, at the option of two observations. Supervisors come and go, and if your Not Insane supervisor decides tomorrow morning to travel to Arizona on a Vision Quest, Boy Wonder could take over your department. What if you've taken the two observations and they both suck?

I think the two observations should be an option if you and your supervisor agree. Two good observations and your minimum is fulfilled. Let Boy Wonder observe everyone four times. He can't and won't help anyone anyway. Let the good supervisors focus on helping those who need further support.

An argument I've heard against fewer observations is that people do better with more. I don't doubt that. So let people who need to do better have more. If I've gotten rated effective twice, let's cut bait and start again next year. If students report that I'm dancing instead of teaching, let the supervisor come in and check. Let her write me up if it's true. If it's not, we've still got our two done.

Make no mistake, I'd like to scrap this law and system altogether. Meanwhile, this is my best idea of how to improve the current system as long as we're stuck with it.

What's yours?

Leadership Academy Is Dead. Long Live the Leadership Academy!

I've spent quite a bit of the last year mystified as to why I needed to spend hours, days, months and perhaps years fighting blatant violations of the UFT Collective Bargaining Agreement. Given that we can no longer grieve letters to file, you'd think that the few exceptions we know about would be respected. 

For example, the CBA says incidents not reduced to writing within three months cannot be later placed in the file. I think my school has three grievances outstanding over that. There are others, but I'll spare you for now.

Why does Mayor de Blasio hire a legal department that has no respect for the contract he's agreed to with teachers? Is he mad that UFT originally supported what's his name, the guy who told the Daily News editorial board that teachers didn't merit the same raise police officers and firefighters got? I mean, we did support de Blasio after what's his name lost. 

Personally, I supported de Blasio before what's his name lost, despite a series of phone calls urging me to do otherwise. He seemed like the perfect alternative to Bloomberg. He opposed charters, was going to slow them down, and won a pretty persuasive mandate. Of course, when he actually tried to stop charters, he learned that Andrew Cuomo was willing to push laws forcing the city to pay rent for charters it rejected. Maybe that's what changed.

Now, certainly, there could be other factors. One might be his senior education policy advisor, Karin Goldmark. Who is this person? Well, she used to be the Vice President of the NYC Leadership Academy, And why shouldn't she be instrumental in training principals? I've read she has three years of teaching experience.  She also seems to have worked for Tweed in some other capacity. So what if she's never been principal herself? You don't have to be a dog to read Call of the Wild.

I was pretty surprised to learn this. It might explain why de Blasio has never cleaned house at Tweed. I mean, if his senior education policy worked there before he got there, is she gonna say, "Hey, I have a great idea. Why don't you fire me and everyone else who worked here for Michael Bloomberg?" Alas, it doesn't appear that idea crossed Ms. Goldmark's mind.

We've all heard the horror stories about Leadership Academy principals who know everything despite having little or no experience. Goldmark seems to personify that. It's kind of remarkable that a senior education policy advisor can have as little (or less) school experience as Leadership Academy grads, some of the worst principals anyone's ever seen, but that's evidently good enough for Mayor Bill de Blasio. 

Is it good enough for new Chancellor Richard Carranza? I suppose it had better be, since he serves at the pleasure of the mayor. You can tell how smart Carranza is just by listening to him speak. He has a great memory and thinks on his feet. Yet he repeatedly says charters are public schools, and that's just not true. Charters are public in the sense that they take our money, and that's pretty much it. How many times do public school leaders bus children to Albany to push their agenda? How many public schools don't follow chancellor's regulations and therefore allow kids to pee themselves rather than take a test-prep break? How many public school leaders refuse to sign city agreements over pre-school? 

Eva Moskowitz does all of the above and more, and Carranza says she's running a public school. Hey, it's a pretty good deal to take public money and be answerable to no one.

I really have no idea what role, if any, Karin Goldmark plays in any of that. But I was pretty shocked to learn that a former Leadership Academy big shot is advising Mayor de Blasio in education. It really explains the "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" feel so many of us have these days. 

Bloomberg's gone, but judging from teacher morale you'd hardly know that. Does Carranza want to change that? Will de Blasio let him? Is Karin Goldmark keeping all of Bloomberg's pawns in place even as de Blasio deludes himself that he's making a mark?

Only time will tell, but de Blasio's had four years to leave an imprint on Tweed. Thus far, few if any teachers are feeling the difference.

The Terrible Education Reporting of the New York Times

I have not always been involved in educational politics. Still, I remember some time in the eighties when we were granted a February break for President's week. The Times ran a story about how inconvenient this would be for parents, and how it would have been better if the DOE ran with keeping schools open. Absent in this story was the fact that the DOE was not, in fact, pressing to open schools. Rather, they wanted teachers to come in for PD, while all students stayed home anyway. Every teacher in the city knew that, but the New York Times didn't.

Some time later, I read a column about how, in the Bronx, children were being placed in bilingual classes that were not, in fact, bilingual. The writer claimed that anyone who wanted to learn English had to pay and go to a nearby Catholic school. I found that very curious. I had just gotten my first grade niece out of a similar bilingual class. I went to the school with her mom, and was met by a formidable secretary. The secretary advised me that it was unwise of me to ask for ESL placement, and that she was much better off where she was. I said I was representing the mom, who was with me, and that she had the absolute right to opt her child out. At that point, the principal came out of her office and helped us.

This process took about five minutes. The Times columnist said I was able to do that because I was an ESL teacher. The truth is I was able to do it because I knew the rules. The Times columnist could have let his entire readership know the rules, but chose rather to leave them with the fiction that the only way to avoid bilingual education that wasn't really bilingual was to go to Catholic school.

Now the Times is busy defending awful principals.  Amazingly, they reference Bill de Blasio's remark about a "hyper complaint dynamic." This was how de Blasio dismissed the bulk of sexual harassment complaints in the schools, and it's disgraceful. I am close to victims of sexual harassment and abuse, and dismissing them as cranks is just about the worst way possible to treat them. I'm very proud of initiating a UFT resolution standing against that nonsense.

Perhaps you wouldn't expect it, but the NY Post has much better education reporting. Sue Edelman digs for the truth, and if it falls on administrators, so be it. In fact, the Post just ran an editorial defending their reporting. The Times says Elvin was exonerated, but that's only part of the story.

DOE confirmed that the students were listed on class rosters and given “packets” of work but no actual instruction time by certified teachers. Elvin and others reportedly orchestrated the scheme in order to boost the school’s graduation rate.

Yes, a hearing officer dismissed the charges against her — not because they weren’t true. Rather, she claimed the central office had approved of her actions — and DOE refused to turn over the relevant records.

In short, it seems then-Chancellor Carmen Fariña was a de facto accomplice, rubber-stamping the sham credits — and DOE let Elvin skate rather than reveal the truth.

Then there is Santiago Taveras, who the Times says changed only three grades, but may have changed up to 900. It's galling that the Bloomberg "no excuses" types get into schools, the same ones they themselves would work to close, and push them to survive via systemic cheating. 

The Times goes to Shael Polakow-Suransky, a Bloomberg employee, who says all the principals are doing a great job and that it's just a bunch of cranky teachers acting up. Of course no one under Bloomberg ever did anything wrong except for those uppity whining teachers. 

Let's go back to the story about John Dewey, and how those awful teachers railroaded Katherine Elvin. Evidently Ms. Elvin just wanted to do the right thing, and rating over half the school developing or ineffective was part of her crusade for good. So what if there was a grade-fixing scandal? What's a few phony grades if we're targeting all those awful teachers?

One thing you won't see in the Times story is the fact that Dewey now has a new principal, and there is no mountain of complaints. I've been chapter leader of a very large school for nine years now. I don't know much, but I know this--there are complaints about me, you and pretty much everyone, but you don't see a pattern of complaints about a supervisor unless said supervisor is doing something really wrong. 

It's disgraceful that the Times would run such a shallow puff piece. More disgraceful still is their consistent lack of curiosity to uncover the truth.

UFT Executive Board June 4th--Forest Hills Rises Up

6 PM—Secretary Howard Schoor welcomes us.

Speakers

Fran Myers—Adult ed—impending Janus decision—possibility UFT may have to cut budget and staff—Janus would be paper tiger if UFT had solid support—has been playing to corporate interests. Getting card or app are good ideas for ordinary times but not enough now. 13 to 17 adult ed. teachers have private lawyer for age discrimination. UFT said was hard to win. Chapter members say 26 0r 28 U rated teachers in 50s, 60s and 70s. Where was union? Only two consultations this year. Was in NY Post. Larry Becker attempted to have rep barred, and we lost consultation because he was not available. Mills says 29 teachers trending toward U. Another 20% loss of membership. Members wonder why they should pay dues. ATRs also want CL, but Exec. Board voted them down. Judge questioned why union was not part of suit for PS 25. Why not? Some people won’t feel need to pay dues. 60% of new teachers leave after 5 years. Many see no future or pension. If UFT doesn’t address concerns they will question commitment to pay dues. UFT sowing seeds of own destruction.

Jim Hogue—Forest Hills HS—3 other teachers here. 25 year teacher. Presently battling with principal Ben Sherman. Trying to destroy union. Has history, drove CL out. Our CL under assault and all who complain get punitive observations. Asks UFT to rise to challenge, interview them. SBO rejected, principal threatens punitive schedule. Prefer personal hardship to his leadership. Please contact me. CL received two LIF for insubordination after SBO vote, one for putting time card upside down, one for studying wrong skedula training.

Schoor—Asks for anecdotal to bring to DOE, More receptive now with new boss. They want specifics.

?—List of grievances by all teachers in school—use of intimidation, not just gratuitous observation, but also student perception survey data. Have letter from other staff member, pressure to rearrange data so more students can pass.

?—Safety—We had a bomb scare—lack of communication, told to stay in classrooms, notified by multiple deans principal stayed in office. Turned off door alarms, despite increasing gang problem. Allows students to wear hats, including gang colors. Stopped manning bathrooms, vaping and marijuana issues.

Marcel Latesse—Retired—FHHS was joy to teach at. Colleagues optimally motivated, creative, bring energy to classroom. Was known teachers and students were talented. Could teach as they saw fit within guidelines. Sickened by new tone. Not groups, cliques, but 90-100% upset with principal. Dysfunction everywhere, people disgusted being there, drug problems, searches prohibited, clubs curtailed, C6 manipulated in violation of CBA. Turning teachers against students. Principal told student government if you get out late it will be teachers’ fault for voting down SBO. UFT rep accused of being anti-Semitic. Principal reported him because there was a board with a picture from East West. FHHS was flagship large high school. When teachers are allowed to do their job they can do wonders. We now face destruction. Will go to media, elected reps. Asks union to work with us.

Janella Hinds—Thanks FHHS teachers. James Vasquez, Amy Arundell and our team will work with you so activism can continue into this and next school year.

Minutes—approved

President’s Report—Mulgrew not here.

Staff Director's Report—LeRoy Barr—Rallied at Marty Golden’s office based on facts you will hear in resolution to change APPR. Thanks members, reps, Brooklyn UFT. Saturday, School Sec Luncheon, UFT Pride Brunch honored Danny Drumm. D12 scholarship breakfast. DA June 13 EB 18th

Questions

Mike Schirtzer—Union position on PS 25?

Schoor—glad it’s open, not sure it will be kept open

Camille Eaddy—District 16 Rep.--First day letter sent out Deputy Chancellor Rose, reiterated judge’s decision. Nothing final. Children not being mandated to attend other schools. Keeping to stay but nothing is final.

Schirtzer—Are we advocating to keep open?

Eaddy—Nothing is final.

Arthur Goldstein—Mayor de Blasio’s DOE is not acting in good faith in the grievance process. It hires lawyers who may or may not have read the collective bargaining agreement. They routinely advise principals to ignore it utterly. Thus, in my building alone, there are outstanding grievances for incidents that occurred over three months before being reduced into writing. There are outstanding grievances for not consulting with members before placing letters in file. There are outstanding grievances for letters in file over three years old not being removed.

Considering that we have no recourse until and unless there is a 3020a proceeding if principals simply fabricate incidents, and considering we have no recourse until and unless 3020a if principals write up incidents so petty that they do not even merit discussion, it’s doubly outrageous that Tweed engages in these practices.

I watched a hearing officer engaged by the chancellor suggest rationales to my principal for ignoring the contract. Some of these officers don’t even pretend to be fair or impartial. Because we lose so many solid grievances to a rigged process, we have to waste limited and costly arbitration time. Not only that, but because arbitrators have to rule on so many black letter cases, it’s not a huge leap of logic to imagine we lose on more gray areas than we need to.

DOE does not even bother acting as though they respect the CBA. My question is this—why don't we take the DOE to PERB or to court, or to both, for their obvious, consistent and blatant bad faith?

Schoor—Maybe we should use grievance process for this. Maybe only your school has all these grievances.

Jonathan Halabi—School calendar—Can we talk to NYSED and NYCDoE and resolve this - June 26 is the last day of the 2019 school year (and an attendance day) but the State has designated it as a regents “Rating Day” (no kids in attendance)?

Schoor—still fighting—They want to extend work year by five days not counting passing time. We are fighting.

Ashraya Gupta—Excited about integration in specialized schools—what is union’s take on DeBlasio’s comment on changing state policy?

Schoor—press conference yesterday, Janella, Mulgrew there. Watch it if you like. President will address that.

President’s message—Michael Mulgrew—Speaks to FHHS—biggest issue we’ve had with de Blasio is nothing changed in legal process. A lot of people, unqualified, get positions of power. Combine that with unchanged legal process. Who you know made you principal under Bloomberg. Frustrates us to no end. System can’t move forward until we have a whole different way of choosing people who can work with others well, lead. We need an observation system to reflect that.

Amusing to me that union according to NYT is so horrible with principals. These principals did very bad things. We cannot celebrate when someone is removed from a job. I was at a district scholarship luncheon on Saturday. PTA Pres, others have petition to remove superintendent. Got to this place because DOE was completely unresponsive. Working on this issue, had volunteers from schools, de Blasio has some of our recommendations for new plan. Chancellor and mayor now support us. When mayor says chancellor will now listen, it means they haven’t been fro four years. Dealing with this issue.

Why is it who you know makes you principal or AP? We created a ladder position. Most teacher leaders don’t want to become admin, but have proven track record of getting along well with people and moving instruction. These are important qualities. Under their legal dept., when we push, it’s a pushing match.

Disgusting SBO goes down and CL gets LIF an hour later. I know what NYT principals did. Every one of them should’ve been gone.

Mind boggling that no one does what we do. Best ed. institutions in this country would never use single criteria test for admission. We used to have programs before Bloomberg to help people.

Albany tough. Had great rally against Marty Golden. We want APPR done. 9 other demos across state. Golden introduced voucher bill after Assembly passed APPR.

Moving into official negotiations. Good we have new chancellor. He doesn’t have ties already. Not part of pre-established club. People at DOE suddenly collaborative.

Janus not out today. Does not have to come on Monday. Can come any day. Moving slowly. Counsel says SCOTUS always finishes docket. Must have school conversations. People will try to get them to drop out. Leafleting outside of NYC saying give yourself a raise. Must educate members. Will be hectic, but we’ll deal with it. See you Thursday at negotiating committee.

Report from Districts—

George Altomare—Last Friday UFT players had 20th anniversary. 400 members and families. Go and support.

Rashad Brown—coming to report on Drumm scholarship brunch—over 100 people, gave two scholarships. Drumm overwhelmed by support, says this was best honor, from union he loves so much. Next one June 1, 2019.

Rosemarie Thompson—Thanks Pat Philomeno.

Schoor—Drumm said mother was also teacher, very honored.

Sterling Roberson—CTE Expo Evander campus, thanks all schools and participants. Met with industry partners and leaders. Great effort. Teachers rock the runway made union hall into fashion show. Collective responsibility, but Jeffrey Bernstein put it together. Were lots of others.

Jonathan Halabi—Specialized HS—sometimes things work correctly. Janella began task force and we had volunteer teachers come in and work out things. We saw number of students of color plummet. Put out good report, because UFT policy. hears parts of what we said showed up in proposal mayor used.

Evelyn de Jesus—June 10th Puerto Rican parade—will be very special, president of teacher union grand marshall, Iris deLutro honored. AFT and NYSUT will be there. Hope to see you. 44 between 5 and 6.

Paul Egan—Thanks EB for sponsoring Chelsea, shows banner on podium. Chelsea won cup, Eagles won super bowl.

Everybody needs to remember—federal congressional primaries in June. Take nothing for granted. Get right people elected. GOP race in SI interesting. Dan Donovan endorsed by NYSUT. Has allowed NYSUT and AFT and UFT voice to be heard.

Resolution in support of APPR bill

Evelyn de Jesus—Bill sitting in Senate. Bill says should be local control over teacher eval. We know teachers want to get rid of mandate. Locals should have other options. If doesn’t pass, moratorium will expire. We want to control our own destiny. Please vote for resolution.

Mike Schirtzer—Why are we not calling for repeal of 3012d and c? Agree it should be local. Trusts UFT to work out system for us.

Schoor—Lot of moving parts, some state law, some local negotiations. Some will be on table, some not. We try to do things that can actually get passed. That’s why it’s part of law. Other part would not get past State Senate. Trying to get what we can passed. We feel it can get passed now, other things not.

Schirtzer—Would bring back some local control?

Schoor—control over tests. Will no longer mandate Regents.

Passes

We are adjourned. 7:00.

Another Day, Another Abusive Administrator

I've been hearing about Rose Marie Mills and adult education for some time now.

The adult education teachers have been getting the runaround from the city at least since last school year. UFT has gotten involved, but the adult ed. teachers don't seem to have tenure, and they've been dropping like flies at the hands of a leader who seems to confuse herself with a fly swatter.

Fired adult ed. teacher Roberta Pikser has been coming fairly regularly to Executive Board meetings. I've gotten to hear a lot about this firsthand. A lot of what I hear seems outright scandalous, so was pretty happy to read about it today in the Post. They say sunlight is the best disinfectant, and this particular branch of the Department of Education seems infected to the core.

Last June, the city Department of Education settled for $362,000 a suit from an office director, whom Mills had terminated after he was diagnosed with a medical condition requiring brain surgery.

That's not enough for DOE to act, of course. You may remember that the city didn't reassign the principal of John Bowne until settlements over sexual harassment allegations hit 830K. Teachers, on the other hand, might face termination if they sell students copies of Frankenstein for $2 a copy. It doesn't matter if such things are common practice in your school. Once someone important at DOE finds out about horrible infractions like these, they leap into action.

People wonder what makes Boy Wonder supervisors. Wonder no more. Superintendents like this, evidently, seem to not only encourage, but also require them.

One former OACE assistant principal, Luckisha Amankwah, has filed a suit claiming Mills demoted her for refusing to give bad reviews to two teachers whom Amankwah believed didn’t deserve them.

We often hear stories of supervisors giving ridiculous and unfair observations. This suggests that, in the cesspool that is still Michael Bloomberg's Department of Education, they are directly told to do this. I remain incredulous at Mayor de Blasio's failure to not only clean house, but also his evident lack of awareness that a house cleaning is necessary.

Reached by phone, Mills told a reporter, “Have a wonderful day,” and hung up.

Abusive administrators couldn't care less, evidently. You're gonna report on my actions? Fine. I haven't cost the city 830K yet, so what, me worry? The arrogance and indifference is palpable. It's disgraceful that, four years into his term, Mayor de Blasio has allowed Michael Bloomberg's ghost to linger at Tweed and set the tone. Screw teachers. We are in charge, we know everything, you know nothing, and that's the way we do things here.

“I want blood,” Mills allegedly told a former principal, the teachers’ lawyer, Bryan Glass, wrote last month to the state Division of Human Rights, which is investigating.

You can't win with people like that. Some supervisors blame others for everything and take personal responsibility for nothing. As far as I can tell, that was the way to go in Michael Bloomberg's New York. Is new chancellor Richard Carranza going to step up and change the tone? Or will we continue with supervisory abuse and the lunatics at DOE legal advising administrators to wipe their asses with the UFT Contract?

Only time will tell, but I've yet to see any action or statement from Carranza that indicates a new deal or even fresh eyes. It serves neither us nor the 1.1 million NYC schoolchildren to have teacher morale at such a low ebb. Hopefully, someone at Tweed, or better yet, someone in the mayor's office, will wake up and smell the stupidity.

Watching the River Flow

Toby gets philosophical this time of year. I'm only learning that now because this time last year he was somewhere in Puerto Rico. But it's a long walk from my house to the end of the pier on Freeport's Nautical Mile and it's super hot today. Toby's usually a good little walker but today he'd had it.

I have this little combo water bottle and bowl, and after he drank what he wanted, he just wanted to sit and look at the water. It was kind of peaceful except we overheard some band in the park playing Pink Floyd songs. I never liked Pink Floyd playing their own songs, so listening to some band cover them wasn't my cup of tea either.

Today the Nautical Mile is closed off to car traffic. Every year there is some kind of festival, and it pretty much gets worse each year. It used to be a very big thing, and restaurants would sell food on the street. Almost none of them do that anymore.

The best part of the festival was the fish store which sold whole lobsters. They stopped doing that last year, and this year they didn't put out anything at all. There's some guy running for Assembly or something with these handouts that tell you how great he is but don't identify which party he's running with. Whichever one it is he must be ashamed of it, so if I remember his name on election day I'm not voting for him.

The most exciting part of the day was when a cop stopped Toby and me. He told me I wasn't allowed to walk my dog on the street during the festival. I told him I walked my dog on this street several times a day every day. I pointed to a woman a block away walking her dog. He said he was supposed to tell people not to walk their dogs on the street. I told him that I lived here, that Toby lived here, and that if he wanted to get rid of someone, he ought to start with all the people who don't live here. Then we kept walking. I thought he might arrest us for our horrible crimes, but he opted not to.

When we were in front of our house, there was a huge noise and some guy said, "Watch your back." Five guys with motorcycles were behind me riding on the sidewalk. I kept thinking about the cop bothering Toby and me when all we were doing was walking down the street. Why are these guys endangering pedestrians and dogs OK while we are criminals?

I'll bet Toby knows the answer. But he's not talking right now.

Blogger's Day Off...

...but you're free to read my new piece in Gotham Gazette, A Chance for Chancellor Carranza to Restore Teacher Trust.

College Teachers Issuing High School Credit

In my school, we have several College Now courses. What a great deal. You take one class, and you get not only a high school credit, but also a college credit. Sign me up! What's not to like?

Well, there are a few things, actually. One is you might have 40 students in a College Now class. I wouldn't know this except that I count class sizes several times a year, and often the English class with 35 kids in it is a College Now class. The NYC Department of Education, which puts Children First, Always, sits across from me and tells me it's exempt from the contractual class size limit.

It's a college course, they say. We don't need any of your frivolous rules and regulations. Kids need to learn what it's like to be in obscenely huge classes. It will build character. They'll learn how to sit down, shut up, and be anonymous. It's a WIN-WIN!

Of course I don't actually see it that way. I don't actually believe it does college students any more good to be in oversized classes than it does high school students. I was fortunate in that most of my college classes were not in huge lecture rooms and I was able to participate in class discussions. But I guess it's good to learn how to function in a huge room with hundreds of participants, even though it goes against everything I've ever been asked to do as a high school teacher, and even though it's totally contrary to everything demanded in Danielson.

Of course these classes aren't rated by Danielson, because even though Danielson is the bestest thing ever, these are College Now classes. They meet a higher standard than mere piddling high school classes. Except, of course, that's absolutely untrue.

First of all, allowing oversized classes reflects a lower standard, not a higher one. Ignoring what New York City has deemed to be the bestest way to rate what's desirable in a classroom means that standard, whatever you may think of it, will not be upheld in that classroom. But that's not even the biggest part.

The biggest issue with College Now was one I discovered earlier this year, when I found a health class with 39 students. This can't be right, I thought. But no, it turns out it's a College Now class. Most of our College Now classes were taught by teachers in our building, or retired teachers who used to be in our building.

This one, it turns out, was taught by a college teacher. Is the college teacher certified to teach high school? No. Has this teacher been trained as we have? Has the teacher received PD? Was this teacher schooled in the all-important Right to Know? Is this teacher informed on Chancellor's Regulations? Has the host school given any training whatsoever to this teacher?

No, no, no, no, and so forth and so on.

Do you know what the regulations are to get a job as a college teacher? I'll tell you. The regulation is you have to get someone to hire you. When I taught at Queens College you needed a Master's Degree in TESOL or something related to work at the English Language Institute, but when they couldn't find someone who met the standards, they hired someone in the Master's program. I know because that's how I found out about the job. I went and asked for one, but they wouldn't hire me until I got my MA. (In their favor, they kept me around for 20 years. It was only when I became chapter leader that it became too much.)

So in my school, we have uncertified, non-UFT members teaching our kids. Hey, maybe they'll do a good job. Who knows? But honestly, why do we need all this training, why do we need to pass all these tests, why do we need to follow Danielson, why do we need to make tenure portfolios, why do we need to put up with Boy Wonder supervisors when they can just take anyone, qualified or not, stick them in a classroom, and say, "Poof. You're the teacher."

I've filed a grievance. We'll soon learn whether state and city regulations apply only to us, or to everyone working in a UFT school.

Imperial Principals and Double Standards

Principals could do no wrong in Joel Klein's Universe, and when Bill de Blasio came into power, he left Joel Klein's Universe utterly intact. He even brought back Carmen Fariña, who was somehow supposed to represent change even though she'd played part in JKU. I primarily recall Fariña as the worst weather forecaster of all time, but it's significant that she failed to move any of Klein's deadwood out of Tweed.

Thus you find stories like this one, of principals who do the most awful things, keep their jobs for years, and when finally caught, are reassigned to shuffle papers somewhere at full salary. Nice work if you can get it. Teachers caught committing such acts would go to 3020a and lose their jobs. I've seen people lose their jobs for far less.

Many more problematic administrators manage to fly under the radar. Every teacher knows the stories. Every teacher knows who the abusive administrators are. Of course not all of them are Harvey Weinstein. But you really don't have to be sexually abusive to be callous, cruel, or stupid. And even if you are, being reported in the press once or twice is not necessarily enough to get you moved. Who even knows how many have not yet been reported at all?

I can think of several principals who need to be removed right now. Some of them have been in the papers, but evidently that's not enough for the DOE to take action. It's different for lowly UFT members. We can be accused of virtually anything, be it true, false, or a product of a voice in a supervisor's head and there you go--a letter in your file. Stack the letters high enough and it's 3020a--they try to fire you.

Most people don't get fired. Most people get fined a few thousand bucks for minor or meaningless infractions, and are then placed in the Absent Teacher Reserve. That's still a win for the principal who put the person up on charges. That principal doesn't have to deal with that individual anymore.

I would fare very poorly in the ATR. A central facet of my daily life is being a teacher and I hate to sub. I do it twice a year, as the contract requires, and I'll cover for my friends in a pinch. But I just hate it. I don't love dealing with people who don't know me and who feel obliged to test me. I like to get that over with in September.

I've seen the ATR do terrible things to some people. After floating around in it for a while, they aren't who they used to be. I'll spare you specifics, but it does something to you. I also know people who've learned to deal with it very well, people who've made it a life project of some sort, but I only know a handful of such people.

I'm not sure exactly what to do with abusive principals, but I'd argue giving them jobs at Tweed doing crossword puzzles and going out to gala luncheons would be far from my first preference. It's funny that we get dragged through the mud on such a regular basis for our supposedly cushy working conditions, yet principals have it so much better.

There are a few reasons for that. One is that there are so many more of us than there are of them. Another is that we're a female-dominated profession and America is rapidly moving back to the nineteenth century. Equal rights? Fairness? Reason? Due process? What do any of those things have to do with Making America Great Again? Also, a whole lot of education reporting doesn't bother to consult with those of us who actually do the educating.

I'm chapter leader of a very large school. We have some administrators I'd certify Not Insane, and no, I'm not naming names. Still, the most frequent complaints I get are about administration. It's rare that's not the case, and it ought to be the exception rather than the rule.

If I were Chancellor Richard Carranza, I'd get right to work changing that culture. Of course I'm just a lowly teacher, so I'll deal with the hand I'm dealt.

But I'll do my bit to change that culture anyway.

The Dignity in Teaching

Here's a very sad story about a teacher who was treated badly. It's not the first story of this sort I've heard, and I'm sure it won't be the last. A callous school district full of tone-deaf administrators dismissed her. She had a dying child and took time off to care for him. There was no good reason for her dismissal, but since she was untenured, they did it anyway. The writer concludes there is no dignity in teaching.

I'm not sure I can agree. Is your dignity defined by the actions of other people? If so, you're in a very bad situation. Let's say you have a Boy Wonder supervisor, as many people do. Let's say Boy Wonder criticizes you because you asked a question and only two people raised their hands in response. Let's say 14 people actually raised their hands, and just to make it interesting, let's say you have video evidence.

Who does this reflect on? Does place your dignity in question? Is it your fault if Boy Wonder forgot his glasses? Is it your fault if he listened to the voices in his head rather than observing objective reality? Is it your fault that admin hired him instead of finding someone Not Insane? If so, you have an insurmountable problem.

I've actually known people who said they wanted their dignity back. They didn't like something a supervisor said or wrote. I understand that, at least somewhat. I've been the target of withering criticisms. These criticisms can come from supervisors, or pretty much anyone. Sometimes they're valid, in which case you have to think carefully and adjust future behavior. Other times, as in the case of the teacher cited in the story, they are nonsensical.

It's very tough to take criticism, but it's important to be able to discern which criticism is and is not worthy of consideration. Some people, like the Boy Wonder supervisors and the President of the United States, cannot take criticism at all. They deflect everything without a thought. They dismiss all questions as fake news or whining. Thus they never learn anything, and wander on their merry way.

As teachers, we need to do better. Can you imagine what your classes would be like if you routinely dismissed questions as stupid and unworthy of consideration? It's our job to get students to open up and examine their feelings and ideas. It's our job to encourage them to think and reflect, so they don't grow up to be Boy Wonders or Donald Trumps.

There's a little controversy now about Donald Trump blocking people on Twitter. Evidently when he does that, he's infringing on their First Amendment rights. Me, I'd love to be blocked by Donald Trump. I've been blocked by Campbell Brown and Dr. Steve What's-His-Name, the charter school guy who jukes the stats to show 100% college-bound in his test prep factories. I'm proud to have offended them to the point where they can't even bear to read my comments.

It's different, of course, when you work for a Boy Wonder supervisor. It's especially tough under the new observation system, where you can be observed, sometimes literally, to death. You then have to listen to him lecture you on why the kids need to hold up the green cards when they understand, the red cards when they don't, and the yellow cards when they aren't sure. You have to nod your head and act as though this isn't complete nonsense, or face even worse Danielson interrogations.

And there are indeed people who lose their jobs as a result of crazy supervisors. The woman in the story is just one. Again, she's not the first and won't be the last. There are distinct disadvantages of being untenured. One is the fact that some supervisors need to get up on their high horses to condemn and fire people simply to show they can do it.

I know a teacher who got several extensions of tenure because she was in a so-called failing school. When she transferred, a superintendent said that many extensions constituted a red flag. She instructed the supervisors in the school to discontinue the teacher. The genius supervisors observed her several times while she was giving tests, and rated her unsatisfactory both times. That was it, and she was discontinued.

You have to ask, though, does that reflect on her dignity? If you measure your dignity based on what crazy people think of you, you're bound for disappointment. If I give a big loud hello to Boy Wonder while I'm walking down the hall, and he turns, sneers and saunters away as fast as he can, I'm good with that. If he can't deal with me, that's not my problem.

I hate seeing union members abused, and I do what I can to fight back. This notwithstanding, there is certainly dignity in teaching. It's one of the most important jobs there is. This story also underlines the need for teacher tenure. When crazy supervisors undermine us it's difficult. Nonetheless we have to make our own decisions. Sad though I am that this teacher was treated so poorly, I'd argue she showed great grace and dignity.

Her supervisors, on the other hand, don't seem to know the meaning of the word.

As Opposed to Gas Station Sushi

I'm kind of glad we're off tomorrow. If we weren't, I might not have gone in anyway. I'm a mess. I'm constantly sneezing, occasionally coughing and all I really want to do is enjoy a good sulk. Despite this, Toby is constantly demanding I take him our for walks. Even though he's my best bud, he clearly places his needs before mine.

Today was pretty awful in the morning. It was raining, and Toby does not much care for the rain. Truth be told, I'm not so crazy about it either. The only thing Toby hates more than the rain is the red raincoat I make him wear. He's horrified by the little hood, and constantly shakes it off. When it's really bad, he will absolutely refuse to move. He wills himself to Be a Tree.

That didn't happen today, though, Things were pretty clear outside by three PM, so we were able to do full walks on the Nautical Mile. I'm fascinated by that sign I pass each and every day. Fresh sushi available. To me, that suggests they serve some other kind of sushi unless you specifically request the fresh kind, for which they surely charge a hefty premium. Otherwise, they serve you the gas station sushi they give everyone else.

Are we serving fresh sushi in city schools? Not by a longshot. Forget about the actual food. We're placing kids in classes of 34, though there was actually legislation demanding we reduce them to 25. Man, if that isn't gas station sushi I don't know what is. Why is it hard for teachers to focus? Why is it hard for students to focus? Because we have a two-tier education system in this country. The pols who run it place their own kids in private schools with classes of 20 or fewer, and then they say we can't afford to help anyone else's kids.

Most mornings I walk Toby all the way to the end of the canal. There aren't that many people out there at 5:30 AM. I have to take him at that hour because if I don't get to work an hour early, I will have no chance to do schoolwork. I never know what's going to happen during the day, but if I get in by 6:30 or 7 there are only crazy people like me trying to prepare before 4600 students join us.

Every morning I see a man collecting deposit cans and bottles from the garbage cans. The man looks to be 80 years old and he drives a recent model midsize Japanese car. I wonder why a person who can afford a relatively new car has to spend mornings collecting cans. I mean, it's certainly more efficient here in suburbia to use a car rather than a shopping cart, but it still makes me sad to think of being that old and having to do that.

Nonetheless, the folks who brought Janus envision that as the future for all of us. They want fewer dues-payers and then they'll target collective bargaining. Trump's lunatic Supreme Court will deny working people anything they can. Next they'll go for pensions and we'll all be collecting aluminum cans, because that's how you Make America Great Again.

I remember the first day I woke up and saw that Donald Trump was going to be President of the United States. I thought he'd be the worst President ever, but I also thought that about GW. Trump makes GW look relatively tame, and that's a tough thing to do. But if there was someone worse than GW, there's also someone worse than Trump. It might be Pence, and we might find out after we impeach Trump.

I hope I get better, and I hope the weather gets better. Here's a word to the wise--Don't eat the gas station sushi, and in November, don't vote for it either.

Measuring a Chancellor

I got to see Richard Carranza up close and personal the other night. I'm not going to write exactly what happened at our meeting, because I've pretty much agreed not to. I will say he took some pretty tough questions and answered most, if not all, very well.

I'll go out on a limb and predict there will be no gaffes on the level of, "It's a beautiful day. Macy's is open." He's very smart and has instant recall of more statistics than anyone really should.

Here's what I'd like to see from the Chancellor--I've spent the entire year fighting grievances that ought not to exist. I've heard so much preposterous blather from the cowboys at DOE legal that I'd just as soon fight it out with them face to face at the OK Corral. Of course that won't happen, because it's their job to sit around in offices giving principals telephone advice on how to get around the UFT Collective Bargaining Agreement. Here's how they do it--by blatantly disregarding clear and unequivocal language.

It's not necessarily a bad strategy, particularly if it's your goal to let people know you don't give a golly gosh darn about violating their rights. I mean, I file a grievance, the principal listens. The grievance might be about a letter to file. Letters to file are tough ones, because you aren't allowed to grieve them simply because they're outright false. And yes I have seen letters that are outright false. I've also seen letters that paint nothing as though it's something, and you can't grieve the letters simply because they are preposterous beyond belief.

So what are you left with? You're left with things like the right to remove letters from file after three years. You're left with the right to remove letters if they fail to consult with you about them. You're also left with the right to remove letters if they describe occurrences over three months old. I've been at Gold Street fighting all of the above.

Now here's the problem. Step One is with the principal. The principal is right no matter what the contract says, because legal says it's perfectly okay to interpret things that aren't at all open to interpretation. So that's all good. Then you go to Step Two. You take a whole day and go downtown. You're with a UFT rep, and I've been with some pretty aggressive ones who were very much on point. Although DOE has lawyers, they don't argue any better than teachers.

On the other side of the table is a rep from the Chancellor, who presides over the hearing. There's also a representative of the superintendent. The principal does not actually have to show up, and can call it in, literally. After all, who do you think the DOE is gonna side with? You or their own? In fact, the person supposedly judging the hearing might rationalize things to the principal, and say you did this because of that.

What's the principal supposed to say. "Yes of course I did this because of that. The only reason I would do this would be because of that." You walk out thinking, well, the decision will come back and say the principal did this because of that. After all, who wouldn't do this because of that? Then you think, wait a minute, it's still a violation of contract, and neither this nor that has any relevance.

And then you wait. They have 48 school days to write a decision. But they don't, because rules are for the little people. Rules are the things they use to give UFT members letters in file. Actually, they don't even need rules. They can say they didn't like the tone when you said good morning to the security guard, place a letter in your file, and leave it there for three years. Then you can have it taken out, and they can just put it back. I mean, how the hell would you know? And if you checked and found it there, well, that's another grievance, another 48 school days, and another decision to await.

So the thing happened more than three months ago? No problem. They can say the thing that happened wasn't an occurrence. After all, just because it happened, it doesn't necessarily follow that it occurred. You understand that, right? Yeah, neither do I. Of course they don't have to do that. They can simply say that the thing didn't become an occurrence until the principal found out about it. You see the beauty of that?

This way, if you said good morning the wrong way to the security guard, and it was twenty years ago, but the principal found out about it yesterday, you still get a letter in file. That makes sense, right? No? Well it makes sense to DOE legal, and when the chancellor affixes a signature to it, you have to figure it makes sense to the chancellor too. Who cares if it's a rubber stamp and the chancellor never actually read the thing? If the chancellor's signature is attached, that's pretty much approval.

The issue is, though, that these things tend to be overturned in arbitration. Of course, you may not get to arbitration for a year or more. You have to be really determined to fight this sort of nonsense.

Let's say the arbitrator reads on at least a fourth grade level, and thus dismisses these nonsensical letters. Still, you've placed members through a year of hell for no good reason, and that's a win for the DOE. More importantly, when things that are not entirely ridiculous come up, when there's a gray area, maybe the arbitrator rules for the DOE, just to balance things out.

And maybe that's the game. Here's the thing, though--it's a dirty little game, and a chancellor who respects working teachers simply will not play it.

Signing People Up

I've been using an app to get people to pledge to stay in the union. A lot of people in my building seem to know about Janus, and I haven't had to do a whole lot of explaining. I send a weekly email with links to articles about education, and I've focused a lot on Janus. I've had to stop sending my 400 plus member list via Gmail, and I now know that about 60% of my members actually open and read my email. This explains why some have never heard of it.

May is slipping away and I can't keep up. I There are 30 or more people in our school doing this job. I'm very proud of them, especially the ones who are actually doing the job. There are so many of them that it's impossible to keep track. But I kind of like doing it.

Do you know about the SCOTUS case called Janus?

Do you think it's fair that people should enjoy all the benefits of union without paying?

Can we count on you to stick with UFT once Janus passes?

The app words these questions better than I did, but that's essentially it. (They also ask if you're willing to receive texts or calls from UFT, but I don't care much about that.) At the training, we were told to approach people, ask how they were doing, focus on whatever the problem was and work toward some sort of solution. Likely any such solution would involve union. This is probably a good strategy for door knockers, who don't know you and have never, ever seen your face.

I don't think it's the very best strategy for dealing with people in your building. Everyone doing face to face in my school, for the most part, is in the same department as the people they're facing. I certainly hope we know each other better than having to introduce one another and find out what's bothering the other person. If we don't know one another better than that after working together for months, years, sometimes for decades, there's a deeper problem, likely one with our culture.

I've been walking up, starting a conversation, and going right into it. I've gotten some very nice compliments about my newsletter. Evidently, not all chapter leaders are insane enough to do this every week. It's important, though, for those of us who obsess over education to share what we find out there.

It's my goal to sign 100% of the people in my building for union. I honestly don't understand how you go to work every day in a big building and say, "Screw you all, I'm not paying." I would feel pretty uncomfortable. I suppose you can go the other way, get no one to pay, and say, "Screw every other building in the city, our school isn't paying."

I'm pretty sure the Koch Brothers will put out a whole lot of propaganda saying you can give yourself a raise, or whatever. I guess you can take the $1400 and buy yourself some thing or other. That's pretty short-term thinking, though. With all its flaws, the UFT is all we have. We can work to make it better, or we can abandon one another and hope for the best.

The latter alternative, given what's happening in West Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and half the country does not much appeal to me. With all our complaints about UFT, we're much better off than they are. With no union, we will be exactly where they are. If you think this mayor, or any mayor, will grant us raises just because it's the right thing to do, I have a historic bridge to sell you.

If you don't pay, you are essentially giving the Koch Brothers a very early Christmas present. You're giving Donald Trump exactly what he has wet dreams about. If that image isn't sufficiently disgusting, imagine what it will be like to deal with your Boy Wonder supervisor with no union behind you.

I know some people who probably won't pay. Some complain of one incident where union didn't help. I know how they feel. I try to help a lot of people. I'm very happy when I'm successful but alas, I'm not always successful. I always try, though. I try a lot of things. I seek advice everywhere. If one thing doesn't work, I think of another. Sometimes I fail. I don't like it, but I don't give up.

Almost nothing I do would be possible without union. Now that Janus is literally trying to destroy us I value it more than ever.