Class Size and the ATR

In New York City, if the last numbers I heard are accurate, we have 800 unassigned teachers. Now those numbers are from last year. They don't include teachers newly unassigned, and they don't include teachers who were temporarily assigned for last year only. The number could be far different in September. Just for the sake of argument, though, let's call it 800.

One single teacher can teach up to 170 students under our current contract. That's too many already, but in a whole lot of schools teachers are teaching even more than that. That's because, under our contract, when there are oversized classes they don't always have to be resolved. There could be a "plan of action" on the part of the city, and if some arbitrator likes it, well, that's the plan.

Here's the thing, though--the only "plan of action" that solves the problem is bringing the class size down. And once we do that, we still have the highest class sizes in the state. We should be focusing on bringing current class sizes down, something we haven't bothered with in over half a century. I'm forever amused by UFT leaders saying we sacrificed money to win class size limits, because if they were even born, they were in diapers when that happened.

Let's get back to here and now. Let's give our 800 ATR members a small break, and say they only have 150 students each. 800 times 150 is 120,000. If ever class in NYC is oversized by two, and we give them to ATR members, we could fix sixty thousand oversized classes. Personally, I doubt we have that many, but if anyone knows better, feel free to correct me.

Now it isn't altogether that simple, of course. ATR teachers are all over five boroughs, and it's highly unlikely that whatever they teach is exactly what students in oversized classes need. Not only that, but if you're an ATR in Queens, the city can't simply send you to Staten Island. We have agreements, and not even Donald Trump can have Whatever He Wants, Whenever He Wants.

So if I'm a Queens ATR, you can't send me to Staten Island. You could, however, ask me if I want to go to Staten Island. The worst I could do is say no. I work in a generally desirable school. Sure, we may get a Boy Wonder supervisor now and then. We might even get a Girl Wonder. But I once watched a principal tell a young teacher to be careful, because there were a hundred people who wanted his job. I'm sure the principal was right. So maybe someone would travel to come to us. I know a lot of people who do, and I'm one of them.

Let's say that doesn't work. Just because I like my school, you don't have to. Maybe my school sucks and I'm delusional. Who knows, really? Wherever you are, kids need you. It's beyond ridiculous that the city won't put you to work because some principal might get his feelings hurt. If you're a Queens teacher, you should go to a Queens school. If that means an actual reduction in class sizes, well, so be it. Why is there a single oversized class when we have an Absent Teacher Reserve? Why are there classes of 34 and 50, the highest in the state, when there is an Absent Teacher Reserve?

Let's put the ATR to work tomorrow, and stop worrying about the scare stories from Families for Excellent Schools, or their well-reported rallies of nine people. Let's give jobs to our teachers, and teachers to our students. This is what you call a win-win. If I'm an ATR and I suck as badly as stories in the tabloids suggest, let some principal slide off his imperial keester and prove it.

Otherwise, let's make sure there are enough classes for teachers to teach and students to attend.

Am I naive? Are there further complications I haven't anticipated? If that's the case, it's on DOE and UFT to sit down and figure out solutions. These are two huge problems that can be used against one another to cancel each other out. If it's not a total solution, it has to be at least a partial one.

If it isn't, I'd like to know why.

Screw Children First, Always, or I Wouldn't Treat My Dog How NYC Treats Kids

In a system that claims to care about schoolchildren, it's unconscionable that special needs classes are sitting around in a scorching heat wave with no air-conditioning. I'm lucky to work in a school where that doesn't happen quite as frequently as it does elsewhere, but good intentions are no substitute for modern electric wiring. I've therefore found myself in sweltering miserable classrooms as recently as last year.

I'm in Ontario now, and I wouldn't subject my dog to what the system puts these kids through. You can see him in the picture at a fruit stand, saying I'm not gonna eat any of this stuff and asking why I brought him here.

Granted, I love my dog, so I'm off on a quest to find him Freshpet dog food here in Ontario. But jeez, don't we love our children? Shouldn't they be treated with the same consideration I give my dog?

There are certain fundamentals in education. One is, that in a miserably hot classroom, it is incredibly hard to concentrate. I'd like to just blame kids for that, but the fact is it's as hard for me as it is them. How do you focus on some story about other people when all you can think about is how soon can I get out of here? If it's hard for us, it's harder for kids. I'm not an expert on special-needs kids but it's not a big stretch to say it's at least as hard for them. Maybe the city feels that special needs somehow preclude basic human needs. Hard to say, since I work every day instead of sitting around Tweed somewhere.

I didn't speak at my very first Executive Board meeting. I wanted to bring up air conditioning in schools. I can't remember why my colleagues talked me out of it. I do recall, though, a few months later, the city saying it would place AC in all classrooms at some point in the future. I have news for the DOE--the future is now, and you're leaving children behind.

My daughter went to some summer program in a nearby elementary schools when she was very young. On extremely hot days, we'd get a call. Don't bother coming in. We're not making kids sit in miserable hot classrooms on days like this. That makes sense to me. Of course, NYC would never do such a thing, even though it wouldn't hurt anyone, even though keeping the kids in classrooms is likely as not making them hate school.

Did you know that New York City has a protocol for a delayed opening? I remember hearing about it when it started. It was utilized exactly once, when there was a transit strike. All those years, when you drove to work with cars crashing to your left and right, when Carmen Fariña discussed how beautiful the day was with her chauffeur, the city could have eased things not only for you, but also for 1.1 million schoolchildren. They didn't, of course, because if Carmen's chauffeur could come in, why couldn't the kids? They could easily have booked limos just like Carmen did. Teachers? Them too.

Granted, Bill de Blasio seems to have learned from Carmen's amazing lack of perception for the obvious. He now closes schools when there are raging blizzards. He doesn't even wait until 5 AM like Klein used to do, because he seems not to be a small-minded, nitpicking, self-serving automaton concerned solely with his own advancement. That's a step forward.

Nonetheless, we can do better. Years ago, I installed central AC in my home. I see how my dog reacts when it's above 90 outside, so don't turn off the AC when the dog is home alone.  Now I work every day, so I have no idea what the thinking is at Tweed, if indeed there is any. This notwithstanding, the AC at Tweed should be turned off every single day until every city kid is learning in a comfortable environment. If we wanted to torture children, we could just dump them into Moskowitz Academies.

But we don't want to do that, do we? And if that's the case, New York City's children deserve at least the same consideration we dog lovers provide our canine companions.

UFT Contract--What's Worth Paying For?

I'm going to speak strictly for myself here. There are a lot of things we've called "givebacks." These usually entail giving up rights or privileges for money. Leadership will sometimes say things are better this way, but I'm not generally in agreement. It's never popular to accept less money, but there are some things I think would be worth it.

Number one on my list is class size. I realize this has played part in no giveback. But jeez, it's been 50 years with no change whatsoever. Not only that, but the exceptions are so broad you could drive a fleet of Mac trucks through them, side by side, and still have room for Trump's military parade. It's common sense that the fewer students you have, the more time you can spend helping each and every one. If that's not enough, there is rigorous research that will tell you (duh) that reasonable class sizes help students to learn.

Let's also note that we have the highest class sizes in the state. How do DOE hacks claim to put "children first, always," and stand by that? In some cases, our class sizes are 60% higher than those of other districts. Parents consistently tell the DOE that class sizes are their number one priority. The DOE ignores this and places its collective head in the sand.

We, UFT,  really ought not to be paying for this. As a result of the C4E lawsuit, the city submitted a plan in 2007 to reduce class sizes across the board. It was approved by the state, but the city just ignored it. It's kind of amazing they come to us with Danielson, sit around and tell us just how much we suck, but won't bother spending a dime to make things better. I would forgo part of a raise to push class sizes back.

If the DOE cares about children, it must then care about class sizes. If it doesn't, it's on us to work something out, or beat them into submission. I don't care which. 

It's ridiculous we cannot grieve letters to file for being (a.) inaccurate, (b.) stupid, or (c.) all of the above. If the principal accuses you of throwing a cheeseburger at a student, and you did not, in fact, throw said cheeseburger, that is not grounds to have the letter removed. You have to wait until 3020a to contest it. Meanwhile, all you can do is write a response. If the principal doesn't like it, he can put another letter in your file, because why not?

I used to read a book called Go Dog Go to my daughter when she was very young. In it, there is a pair of dogs that keep meeting. One dog repeatedly asks the other, "Do you like my hat?" The other replies, "No, I do not." If you told a dog you did not like her hat, your principal could place a letter in your file. How could you respond? Could you write an impassioned response explaining what you didn't like about the hat? Could you write how stupid you feel the letter is? Guess what? If the principal doesn't like that letter, you could get yet another letter in your file, because why not?

In fact, there are things you can grieve. You can grieve if the occurrence happened over three months ago. You can grieve if the administrator failed to meet with you before issuing the letter. Here's what happens then--the principal calls "legal," and some DOE employee who likely as not has never bothered to read the Contract will say, "Sure you can do that. You're the principal. You can do whatever you want."

You will then go to Step Two, where another DOE employee will say the thing that happened was not, in fact, an occurrence, and therefore it doesn't matter that three months have passed. Or they may say that the thing that happened did not actually become an occurrence until the principal found out about it. Because guess what? They haven't read the contract either so they do Any Damn Thing They Feel Like.

I'd pay to open further grievance for letters in file. I'd pay to stock legal with people who knew ass from elbow, and hearing officers who knew the same. I'd also pay to place each and every ATR. It's a crime we have even one while a single class is oversized. I understand we can't place ATR members just anywhere, but I'd reach out and offer for every opening.

I know, the city has a surplus, and we shouldn't pay for anything. I think some things are worth paying for. Whatever we got for givebacks is blood money and I'd just as soon give it back.

What do you think?

Overlook Our Racism, and We'll Overlook Your Treason and Criminality

That seems to be the deal with Trump supporters. Otherwise, how do you explain photos like this one? They guy on the right, by the way, is wearing an RNC pin on his MAGA hat. So in case you think they're fringe lunatics, think again. They may well be mainstream lunatics in 2018 America.

Trump himself is in rare form, which is to say, exactly the same form as always. He appears to be throwing his son under the bus, while, as usual, denying any culpability on his part.

Fake News reporting, a complete fabrication, that I am concerned about the meeting my wonderful son, Donald, had in Trump Tower. This was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics - and it went nowhere. I did not know about it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 5, 2018

So politicians routinely get together with foreign powers and try to figure out how to sink their opponents. That's a new one on me. This comes from a guy who stands in front of rallies and demands that voters use photo IDs, despite no evidence of voter fraud. In any case, it's evidently fine that the Russians influence our elections, as long as they do so on Trump's side. And it's looking like there's a market for those shirts, so it's not a big jump to see that diehard Trump supporters don't care about that in the least.

And after a newsroom was shot up, Trump is still trashing the free press. Though he's a chronic and serial liar, his supporters seem good with believing him. After all, making racism great again hasn't been easy to achieve.

As a direct result, Trump's base is energized. We see sentiments like those spouted yesterday in Berkeley:

By 12:30 p.m., several dozen right-wing demonstrators amassed at the marchers’ intended destination, wearing “Make America Great” caps and waving signs with slogans such as “No to Marxism in America” and “Slave labor made America great.”

I'm at a loss for words that, in 2018, people muster the audacity to broadcast messages like that. Make no mistake, it's Trump telling these people that's okay. There's a message when he calls Maxine Waters and Don Lemon and Lebron James dumb, and low IQ, and whatever juvenile ramblings happen to cross his feeble mind.

It's embarrassing to have Donald Trump as our ostensible leader. I would not tolerate his behavior or language in my classroom. When I compared his tweets to something you'd hear in a junior high rank out session, a junior high school teacher on Facebook took umbrage, and said his junior high school students are more mature than that. I apologized to him.

There's hope, personified by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Zephyr Teachout, and others who stand for decency and fairness. But it's a long road for us. Millions of Americans are willing to vote against their economic interests, against the future of their children, and against the future of their country simply to have a high-ranking voice of authority tell them their racism and hatred are socially acceptable.

It's on us to change that. Our next chance comes in four short months. Don't forget to vote.

95% Satisfaction With NYC Schools

That's what the survey says this year. Given that, are the editorial pages going to be full of praise for the work we do? Shouldn't the News, the Post, and the Times be doing cartwheels and telling the mayor to give us a substantial raise for our great work under often harrowing circumstances? Will they finally say, hey, let's revise the evaluation system so that it's something to support good teaching, as opposed to sneak attacks by Boy Wonder supervisors who couldn't teach their way out of paper bags?

Personally, I won't be holding my breath to read that. I know, though, that 55% of teachers approving of Carmen Fariña is extraordinarily high. You know what that says to me? It says that we are far more generous of spirit and understanding than those who make careers out of judging us. Sadly, I can't include myself among all those high-minded educators. I thought Fariña did an awful job, I said so on the survey, and it's nowhere more evident than in her declaration a raging blizzard was a beautiful day because Macy's was open.

Nonetheless, the overwhelming majority of parents are satisfied with city schools. What can we conclude from that? For me, it's obvious. If parents are satisfied with public schools, it's time to celebrate and embrace them. It's also time to stop frittering away precious resources on reformy nonsense.

Exhibit A is Moskowitz and her plainly failed mission. The overwhelming majority of those who start with her finish with us. That's because we simply take everyone. We don't make ridiculous demands of children and their parents. We don't make parents come and work in our schools because we know they have to work elsewhere to make ends meet. We don't make children do test prep until they pee their pants, and we don't ridicule them if they need more time. We don't make "got to go" lists and we don't humiliate students by hanging up their names for progress or lack thereof. In fact, we don't even take our students on buses to Albany on school days to lobby for our self-serving interests.

And then we come to bullying. I haven't got a simple solution to that. Kids can be cruel. I will say, though, that charter schools ought not to practice bullying.  It certainly appears Moskowitz Academies do. Charter schools ought to follow chancellor's regulations. Not allowing a child to visit a bathroom ought to be considered abuse. We need not encourage that, even in the name of "no excuses."

In fact, charter schools ought not to exist at all. New Yorkers voted in Bill de Blasio overwhelmingly, and he ran on a platform of opposition to charters. Governor Andrew Cuomo, after having taken who knows how many suitcases full of cash from Eva's hedge fund BFFs, decided that was unacceptable. Cuomo hated Bloomberg for being the reformiest guy in the state, and here was his chance to claim the mantle, along with whatever financial rewards it brought. So Cuomo and the Heavy Hearted Assembly passed a bill that NYC would have to pay rent for charters it disapproved.

This week, however, Cuomo is posing as Bernie Sanders Lite. He's now the bestest friend labor unions ever had. Given that, maybe it's time for him to renounce Moskowitz and her rich pals. After all, it's becoming pretty trendy to reject tainted money. Zephyr Teachout may well take the Attorney General nomination, solely with contributions from people like you and me. Who knows? Maybe Cuomo's finger, perpetually up in the air to see which way the wind is blowing, will direct him to represent, you know, people instead of money.

It's pretty clear, though, that if 95% of parents are happy with their schools, it's time to stop bashing working teachers. We must be doing something right. Maybe it's time for the editorial pages to slow down all that bluster about how incompetent we are and how much we suck. Maybe it's time to allow educators to make decisions about education. Maybe it's time to step back and trust us a little bit.

That is, unless editorial writers have some interest in an agenda that does not actually reflect the beliefs and interests of the public. That couldn't be, could it?

Time will tell.

UFT High School Reps Letter to Leadership on Opposing IDC

You've probably heard of the IDC, or the Independent Democratic Conference in the NY State Senate. They were elected as Democrats but caucused with the Republicans. There are a whole lot of bills that have been passed by the Assembly but withered and died in the Senate, not the least of which was one proposing universal health care for New Yorkers. We support candidates who oppose those who allowed this to happen. Here is our letter, to date unanswered.

Primary elections for New York State Senate will occur on September 13. NYSUT makes endorsements for state-level offices. The NYSUT Endorsement Conference is on August 6-7. At that conference, the UFT will be making some recommendations to NYSUT. We are especially concerned about NY State Senate primaries in New York City Districts.

We have not had an opportunity to speak to the recommendations that the UFT will make. Endorsements go through the Executive Board and Delegate Assembly. There is no such formal process for recommendations. But these recommendations carry nearly the weight of an endorsement, as NYSUT concurs with the UFT’s recommendation in the overwhelming majority of cases.

We are the elected representatives of high school members of the United Federation of Teachers, directly elected by those members. We would like to have voice on these recommendations. 

We particularly would like to urge NYSUT to endorse: Alessandra Biaggi, Robert Jackson, John Liu, Zellnor Myrie, Jessica Ramos, and Jasmine Robinson in their respective New York State Senate primary races. Especially since the victory of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, there has been heightened interest and a groundswell of support for progressive challengers to the status quo. Each of these candidates is running on a progressive platform.

We would like to highlight the career and contributions of Robert Jackson in particular. Jackson is an activist who has dedicated his career as a public servant to public education and children. In 1991, as CSB6 President, Robert Jackson co-founded the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE). Jackson was lead plaintiff as CFE sued the State of New York for failing to properly fund NYC's public schools. The trial court agreed. Jackson walked 150 miles from New York City to Albany to dramatize the case. Jackson served in the NY City Council for a decade, where he earned our respect as Chair of the Education Committee. Jackson was honored with the UFT’s John Dewey Award in 2012.

Their opponents are former members of the Independent Democratic Conference (IDC). Tbey helped the Republicans control the State Senate for several sessions. They rely on anti-teacher union funding, either directly from Democrats for Education Reform (anti-union, anti-public schools), New Yorkers for Putting Students First (Michelle Rhee), Great Public Schools PAC (Eva Moskowitz), or indirectly through the Senate Independence Campaign Committee, which may in fact be an illegal campaign financing scheme (https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Sugarman-cracks-down-on-former-IDC-campaign-13100468.php)

The Executive Board is not scheduled to meet before the NYSUT Endorsement Conference, nor before the September 13 primary elections. The Delegate Assembly is not scheduled to meet before the NYSUT Endorsement Conference, nor before the September 13 primary elections. 

We do not know how our voices can best be heard, but we have a few ideas:  an in-person meeting, a call-in meeting, an e-mail discussion, or by allowing one of our representatives to speak for high school teachers at the conference in Albany. We are open to others.

We look forward to your positive response,

KJ Ahluwalia, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Arthur Goldstein, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Ashraya Gupta, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Jonathan Halabi, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Marcus McArthur, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Kate Martin-Bridge, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

Mike Schirtzer, United Federation of Teachers, Executive Board, High School Division

No Excuses for You, Multitudes for Moskowitz

In yet another piece about its favorite subject, Eva Moskowitz, Chalkbeat runs Eva's answer to her critics. Fortunately for Eva, nothing she does is ever wrong and it doesn't matter at all that she's managed to leave behind 78% of her students. Also, in a single year she's managed to shed most of her high school teachers, with over 2 of 3 moving to greener pastures. This also makes no difference whatsoever. Despite this, for some reason Eva felt the need to write the parents.

It's disappointing to lose your favorite teacher. However, some did not quit out of desperation. Some were not fired for what we call incompetence, and what other people call inability to work 20 hour days or have a life. And if they were incompetent, and we hired them, it's not our fault. After all, nothing is.

You see, at Moskowitz Academies the important thing is to give the very best quality education. Evidently you do that by shedding all the losers who don't measure up. It's not our fault if your kids are losers. After all, dumping losers is how many charter schools manage to get those incredible 100% 4-year-college admissions. You'd better believe anyone who didn't make it to that four year college didn't make it out of the four year high school either.

So this, evidently, is how you make miracles. This is how you trod all over a public school system, grasping and taking whatever you wish, displacing neighborhood children, stealing libraries, and keeping your noses so far up in the air that a good rain would drown you instantly. The other part of the miracle, of course, is an educational leader who's willing to play ball. For a long time, that was Mike Bloomberg, who tolerated Joel Klein's hot line to Eva.

When Bloomberg left City Hall to try to buy his way into becoming President of the United States, Andrew Cuomo grabbed the mantle, stood with Eva in Albany, and made it impossible for Bill de Blasio to oppose charters without paying their rent. And there were all the miracle stories. They passed the test. They had higher percentages than those crappy public schools. It was a civil rights issue. Eva herself echoed GW Bush, speaking of "the soft bigotry of low expectations," in her letter to parents.

Evidently, it does not occur to Eva Moskowitz that a 22% graduation rate is an indication of abysmally low expectations. It appears to me that Moskowitz Academies take no responsibility whatsoever for their students. Were they really running on the magic they claim, they'd graduate 100% of their students. There would be no "got to go" lists.

Last year I had terrible troubles with some of my students. I had a class of 34, par for the course in Fun City. Yet several of them were not keeping up. There were various reasons for this, the most common of which was that the students were SIFE, or students with interrupted formal education. This could easily mean the students had not been in schools in their native countries in years, if at all.

Ask me how many SIFE students are in Moskowitz Academies. Ask me how many beginning English language learners are in Moskowitz Academies. Anyway, I had seven students who could not keep up, seven students who'd certainly have failed. Despite the proven wisdom of Moskowitz Academies, we did not write up a "got to go" list. We did not call up the parents and ask them to move their kids elsewhere. In fact, we didn't even make them sit and do test prep until they peed their pants.

What we did was find an empty classroom, a minor miracle in itself for us. It was a very small room, but that was okay because we only had seven students. I taught the class, took all the kids back to square one, and moved very slowly. I gave fewer tests than I usually do, but I spent a lot of time making sure these kids knew material well before doing so. And rather than drill them to death, I was consistently kind to them.

Every one of those students passed that class. Several thanked me for giving them a class they could understand and follow, unlike others they were taking. I could have taken the approach Moskowitz seems to favor, judging from her letter. Hey, it's a tough world, so you just have to do whatever I force you to do. That's the only way to prep you for college, which is going to be even worse. This, of course, is to prepare you for life, which is going to be even more miserable.

Here's the thing--even though Moskowitz musters the temerity to label her test prep factories "success academies," they fail four out of five who enter. This is nothing to boast about. The papers can praise them in editorials from now until doomsday, but the fact is we public schools, even the ones closed by the city, have better records than Moskowitz.

I, for one, value academic achievement. Nonetheless I'd rather see my own kid, and probably every kid I know, fail in a public school than be tortured in a Moskowitz Academy.

On the Cool Kids and the Organizers

According to this chart, it's barely cool at all to be a cool kid. First of all, calling someone a kid is a little demeaning. And being "cool" is kind of superficial. I'm reminded of times I sat in rooms with people lecturing me about what my priorities must be. Sometimes I walked into these rooms voluntarily in my free time. How can people tell me what my priorities are before they even know me? They must be extremely cool to have that ability.

My priorities are formed day by day. As chapter leader of the largest school in Queens, I get to hear what people's priorities are virtually all the time. I get my highest volume of complaints about the evaluation system. Even people with supervisors they love, supervisors everyone loves, feel under the gun most of the time. That's not helping anyone at all, not the teachers, not the supervisors, and certainly not the kids we're paid to serve. I don't know exactly which drugs Reformy John King was taking when he initiated this. If anyone knows please advise us so we can avoid them.

I know other city schools are not like mine. Our school isn't perfect, but our issues are vastly different from those of many other places. Unlike schools in danger of closure, we're in danger of explosion from sheer overcrowding. Our generally good reputation is a dual-edged sword. We have people in rooms without windows, people who rely on room air-conditioners that are so noisy they preclude communication. Not only that, but when they're on they still don't work very well.

I hear complaints from people in buildings that are under-represented or not represented at all. That is really troubling. A likely intentional side effect of Bloomberg's small schools staffed largely with newbies is the dearth of not only institutional memory, but also teachers with tenure. I wouldn't recommend a probationary teacher become chapter leader, but of course people can step up whenever they wish.

The question then becomes what happens if no one does? That's a thorny issue, and it's certainly not limited to schools full of newbies. Who is crazy enough to want the job of chapter leader? It's pretty simple--if no one will step up to enforce the contract, the contract will not be enforced. If the school is really full of newbies, I guess it falls on the district rep. If not, well, you'd better step up.

I had a conversation on Facebook with someone who said he was never paying dues again. I asked why, and he said his chapter leader sucks and allowed this and that to happen. I believe that, because it's far from the first time I've heard such a story. But the remedy for a crappy chapter leader is to oppose him, and we all had the chance to do that last May. Did this member step up? Of course not. Though May is past, you can still recall an incompetent chapter leader by organizing the teachers in your building. If you do that, though, you'd best have in mind someone else for the job.

Conversely, you can sit around and curse Michael Mulgrew for not coming over, waving a magic wand, and solving all your problems. I prefer the former. In fact, I'm on an ESL committee in the UFT, and a young teacher came to one of our meetings late last year complaining of a chapter leader who seemed to be in bed with the principal. I told her that this was a perfect time to oppose him. She came back the following month and told us she got a friend to do that, and her friend won. I was happy to have played some small part in that.

You can't always win, but you can always work toward it. I'm kind of fascinated by the contrast between building ideas and power in this chart. I don't really see them as mutually exclusive. We are educators, and it ought to be somewhere in our DNA to trade in ideas. Ideas motivate us. They're no substitute for getting out and talking to people. But I'd hope they kind of inspire it. I'd argue the ideas are what moves us off of our couches and into the arena. Without them, what would you discuss when organizing?

Social media, I'd argue, also goes hand in hand with getting people to show up. It's a powerful weapon, which is why scumbags like Trump's thugs want to do away with net neutrality. As a blogger, I'm not gonna trash talk social media. Any influence I may have anywhere likely comes from this place right here. This blog and people I've met through it have been what's formed my outlook and caused me to step up as chapter leader and in UFT politics.

As to the chart, I'm most touched by the note on excluding those who may not sufficiently agree. I saw that trait in leadership for years, and to me it pretty much defined them. I now see that loosening somewhat, even as the ostensible opposition in MORE issues what is tantamount to a loyalty oath--if you don't support their contract demands, don't bother running with them. I actually ran with them, and won. This notwithstanding, I was not consulted at all on their contract demands, and I'm not altogether sure what they may be.

Instead, I'm on the actual UFT contract committee, which I find a lot more interesting than I'd expected. I've agreed not to discuss specifics, but I will say that I'm a lot less cynical about it now than I was when I first started attending. While I hate Janus, I think it's done something many of us have been trying to do for years with little success--it's opened up leadership's ears. Would I have liked to see that sooner? Of course. Could there have been a more positive motivation? Yes.

But I'll take what I can get and run with it. Personally, I'm a whole lot more interested in results than trying to be a cool kid.

On Union Working With Conservatives

I was pretty curious when I saw this tweet, suggesting that unions and conservatives should band together, so I clicked and read the story.

Counterintuitive proposal from @maxeden99: After #janusvafscme, conservatives & teachers’ unions should collaborate to protect teachers https://t.co/OvaZTaOlIq @AFTunion @NEA pic.twitter.com/zciRz9YBO1

— Greg Toppo (@gtoppo) July 27, 2018

Of course, this is not actually such a new concept. For years we've tried to work with our political opponents. For example, we paired with Bill Gates to do the MET study. In my school, it was pretty odd. We weren't really sure what they were trying to do, and the people running the study didn't seem to know either. What we ended up with, of course, was a junk science evaluation system dotting much of the country.

I also recall former UFT President Randi Weingarten getting pretty cozy with Michael Bloomberg, going to baseball games or something, and a photo somewhere of Joel Klein kissing her. If Joel Klein kissed me I'd go home and wash my entire body with Brillo pad. Agreements we made with Joel Klein, particularly the 2005 contract, have moved us backward. We live with the ATR and hundreds, more likely thousands, of our members suffer for no good reason.

Let's get to the actual article:

Teachers’ unions are supposed to protect teachers — a good and noble role. Unfortunately, decade after decade of additional “protections,” often written to protect the worst actors, created a sclerosis in many school districts.

It's a "good and noble role," but it's "often written to protect the worst actors." This is an attempt to appear reasonable, but also implies that the "worst actors," whoever they may be, are not worthy of protection. Unfortunately for folks who feel like doing whatever they like, everyone has to follow the rules. This applies to administrators as well. Note that the writer, having gotten in his dig against bad teachers, follows this with an example having nothing to do with them whatsoever.

Michelle Rhee realized that the central office couldn’t get same-day attendance data from the paper-based reporting system, she suggested that teachers use their computers, but the Washington Teachers’ Union fought her on it, arguing that teachers were protected from doing data-entry work.

Hey, if those were the rules, those were the rules. It would be on Rhee to renegotiate them rather than doing any damn thing she felt like. Because she couldn't be bothered with rules, at least one teacher is getting his job back nine years after she fired him, and Rhee's now selling fertilizer. To the writer's credit, he admits to the systemic fraud that fueled Rhee's education miracle.

Alas there are other inaccuracies here:

On some issues, such as school choice, conservatives and teachers’ unions will never see eye to eye.

The fact is a whole lot of the reformy nonsense from which we suffer was initiated by Democrats. Cory Booker can scream and cry about Betsy DeVos all he likes, but the fact is he supports virtually everything she does. And Obama's administration, according to none other than Diane Ravitch, gave Bush a third term in education.

I don't think it's a good idea for us to team up with our enemies. It's been done. After we invited Gates to the AFT convention, he thanked us by attacking our pensions. More recently, Randi Weingarten wrote an op-ed with what's his name, the guy who runs E4E. Predictably, the guy thanked her by attacking the Absent Teacher Reserve. But that was not, in fact, my main objection to the piece. This was:

This kind of sidesteps the fact that so-called conservatives bankrolled Janus, and that their goal is not to find common ground, or to offer us options like "right to work." but rather to reduce us to the status of Walmart associates.

— Arthur Goldstein (@TeacherArthurG) July 27, 2018

The guy who wrote the article tweeted back, and I responded.

Yes.

— Arthur Goldstein (@TeacherArthurG) July 27, 2018

As you can see, the writer seems to have felt that sheer snark was somehow a substitute for argument. I'm here to tell you it isn't. The fact is that Janus was funded by people like the Koch Brothers and the Walmart family. If they aren't conservative, I don't know who is. We've known for a long time that "right-to-work" was anti-labor, and in fact Martin Luther King railed against it decades ago. As for the goals of these conservatives, one need look only to Wisconsin and various red states to see where they've driven union.

Sometimes we find common ground. But all too often we've been stabbed in the back for the offense of seeking it. We have to stand tall, we have to stand together, and we certainly can't be diverted by snarky nonsense posing as argument. I'll stand with people who support universal health care, a living wage, union, and affordable college. My first go-to, alas, won't be someone from a right-wing think tank. They may be good for propping up traitors like Janus and rewarding them with gigs, but I'm here to support my brother and sister unionists.

We can certainly do better than teaming up with those who work toward our destruction.

Supercow

Honestly I'm not sure people understand what it means to stand together. My biggest clue to this was reading objections to the parental leave program. People say well, I had my kids and no one helped me, so why should I have to support others? That's a remarkable attitude. To me, it shows not only what's wrong with us, but also what's wrong with the country.

For the record, I adopted my daughter from Colombia. I missed, probably, two months running back and forth to South America. There were a lot of things I did wrong, and a lot of things I wish I'd known before I began. Getting six paid weeks off that wouldn't have come out of my bank would've been wonderful. Nonetheless I'm very glad to be able to help people going forward. I don't care if I have to wait three months to get a raise. You can certainly argue that it's morally correct we get something for nothing, but I'm big on winning, and I don't believe for a moment that argument would have done it.

If you are outraged over paying for parental leave, let me point out that there are a whole lot of services you may use that I don't. First of all, I've been teaching since 1984 and I have never once been called in for a disciplinary hearing. Does this mean I'm wonderful and above it all? It doesn't, actually. I've done plenty of stupid things, and I surely will do many more. Nonetheless, I don't stand here and say, "Screw you. Why should I pay for a chapter leader to represent you?"

I can tell you that I've seen people I'd never expect to see issues in trouble. Given CR A-421, everything is in the eyes of the beholder. A few years ago, I had a student who reminded me a lot of my daughter. She looked like her, acted like her, and even had the same long, curly hair. She asked me a question. I don't remember what the question was, but I remember answering, "No, sweetie." That's something I'd have said to my daughter. As the words were coming out of my mouth, I thought I was going to the rubber room.

The girl in question, though, took my words exactly as I'd meant them. I was lucky, because if she'd complained I'd have gotten a letter in file at the very least. All I'm saying here is that getting in trouble does not necessarily mean you've done anything wrong, or that you're a bad teacher. That's why we have to stand together and help one another regardless.

Saying you ought not to pay to help our brothers and sisters who have children is like saying you haven't been mugged so you ought not to have to pay for police. It's like saying you don't get sick so you don't want to contribute toward health insurance. Just because things have not worked out perfectly for us is no reason to say, "Well, they're not gonna work out for you either." It behooves us to leave this place a little better for those who follow us.

Then there's the ATR. The ATR is kind of a terrible place to be. I've seen it do awful things to people, things so awful I can't and won't write about them. Here's the thing, though--it could be even worse, and it is in Chicago and DC.  In those places, there's a cap on the ATR, or whatever they call it, and people are fired after a certain period of not being placed.

Here's a fact--UFT could have had an on-time contract back around 2010 with double four percent raises if we'd sold out the ATR. And people like me could've said, "Well, I'm not an ATR, so screw them." Of course that would be stupid, because everyone is more or less ATR in waiting. We'd have been handing Bloomberg a way to fire a whole lot more teachers, and an incentive to close even more schools than he did.

Nonetheless leadership hung tough here. Now you'll say, sure, but the other unions would've hated us. if we didn't, and if we left them open to such nonsense. That may be true, though they probably hated us in 2014 when we dumped 10% over 7 years, the worst pattern ever, on them. It doesn't matter that much why we didn't sell out the ATR, but the fact is we didn't. Of course we have to find a way to fix it, and to end it. It's tough to patch up the holes in your boat you made back on 2005, especially when they've been left to fester for years.

The point is we stand together. We offer services to newbies that we ourselves did not have, and we try to leave this place a little better than we found it. If that's not our goal, why did we become teachers at all? Not everyone needs help with everything all the time. And help isn't always available when we need it. Let's move toward fixing it, though, rather than saying screw it all and placing our heads in the sand.

There's an old Russian story about two farmers. One has a cow. The other says, "He has a cow and I don't. I want his cow to die."

Me, I want the other farmer to have a Supercow so he can help both of us.

No More Speed Cameras

I have to admit, I paid two tickets over the last few years from those things. If the speed goes down to 30 and you hit 41, forget it. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, and that will be fifty bucks, please. In Long Island it's worse, because there's a $120 surcharge attached. I got stuck in traffic, couldn't move, the light changed and it cost me 170 bucks.

So do they really make anyone safer? Perhaps. It's my fault if I go over the speed limit, of course. But over where I got the ticket, on Horace Harding Expressway, the only time you can go 40 MPH is when St. Francis Prep is pretty much dormant. Any time the students are coming in or out, parents are dropping off and picking up, and traffic comes to a crawl. It's best to err on the side of safety, though, even if I get bitten every now and then.

That said, I don't trust the city at its word either. Are they really making things safer, or are they just raking in the bucks? If someone goes 41 MPH on Horace Harding at 3 AM, are there students out there? I doubt it. It's not like it's a Moskowitz Academy where students are chained to their desks for test prep. Would they compromise and only activate the cameras during school hours? Of course they wouldn't. These things are money machines.

In front of our school there have been some very bad accidents. Once, a student lost his leg. Our School Leadership Team asked the city for one of those things that tells you your speed. They turned us down but offered to place a camera at the traffic light. Unfortunately the traffic light wasn't where our issue was. It was pretty clear to us that the city was happy to collect money but didn't really want to bother extending any. Of course, that was under Bloomberg, and they needed to save up to put room air conditioners in his SUV window. After all, the comfort of billionaires is way more important than the safety of my students. (I love watching Bloomberg criticize Trump, contending Trump is more of an asshole than he is.)

It's tough driving home from my school. There's only one lane to make a left turn toward the LIE, and every day there are a million people other than yours truly who wish to go that way. For about fifteen years I would make the left turn from the middle lane. After all, there was no sign saying you couldn't. A cop pulled me over, and not only disagreed with my interpretation, but also gave me a ticket.

At that time, we knew a barbershop on the corner was selling drugs to our students. I asked him why he was focusing on me when that was going on. He told me they had undercover people working on it. I have no idea whether or not he was just making that up or not, but if he wasn't, what the hell kind of undercover operation is it where you tell people you just met what's going on?

There was one other reason no one was going after the barbershop, a cop told me. He said the precinct ended right at the LIE. If he were to go across the street and deal with the barbershop, he'd be venturing into their territory. This, evidently, was some kind of big no-no. I asked why the people in the other precinct didn't come down and deal with it. Oh, they couldn't do that. They were really busy in Jamaica, which must have more barbershops than our neighborhood, I can only suppose.

Why, then, was I talking to a cop all the way on the outer reaches of his precinct, at our school? Hard to say. Was it because it was important to cover schools? If so, why was no one at the junior high school right on the other side of the LIE? Or was someone there, and was it just too much to ask that he walk a block south to the barbershop?

I can't answer any of those questions. I don't oppose safety, and I certainly hope the loss of these cameras doesn't imperil any kids. I'm glad Flanagan will take heat for this, and I hope it bounces back onto the shoulders of all the traitors in the IDC who were elected as Democrats but caucused with Republicans. Like many UFT members, I thought Tony Avella was something special, and worked for him before he decided to stab us all in the back.

Safety first, yes. But I can't look at this process without a certain degree of cynicism.

Moskowitz Academy Retains Only 20 of 67 Teachers, Graduates 22% of Its Students

Why is that? Did they all suck? I mean, that's what Eva mostly says about us. We all suck. That's why we need Moskowitz Academies. After all, they will start off with 73 students and graduate 16. That's a stunning success record, isn't it? Wouldn't your principal offer you a raise and a bonus if you managed to pass 22% of your students?

Of course, now we're talking about a 12-year record. So they managed to hold on to that many kids. What happened to the other 80%? Well, for all you know, they're in your class. Are they passing? Who knows? But if they aren't, then you suck. They aren't Eva's problem anymore.

That's a pretty sweet deal, isn't it? I mean, Eva makes five times as much money as your principal, she has a 22% graduation rate, and the media treats her like a movie star. Hillary Clinton will stand up in front of God and everybody and tell the AFT we can learn from "public charter schools." Here's a hot tip--the only thing "public" about public charter schools is that they take our tax money. We get no say in how they're run, and if New York City dares tell Moskowitz she needs to sign the agreement everyone else did to run pre-K, she'll sue and win.

After all, she's got a 22% graduation rate. Who the hell are we to tell her what to do? OK sure, the school you worked at for twenty years had a considerably higher rate, and Mayor Bloomberg turned it into five Basket-Weaving Academies. But that's neither here nor there. Whatever Eva wants, Eva gets.

Mercedes Schneider, ever the optimist, finds light in the darkness:

At least the percentage of returning SA high school teachers is higher than the percentage of students who made it all the way through from first grade to high school graduation in 2018.

That's true, of course. On the other hand, we're talking about a one year turnover here. Should this rate continue, over the time these students had, we'll have a 360% teacher turnover. Now that's not bad for Moskowitz Academies. I believe that all lessons are pre-written, by Eva herself for all I know, so it doesn't really matter who teaches. Maybe a group of well-trained rhesus monkeys could do the job, literally work for peanuts, and solve the whole institutional memory issue. Who knows?

I doubt it, though. It's pretty cruel to make kids pee their pants because they're doing test prep. I love animals, and I'd never ask an animal to encourage a practice like that. City kids need people who understand and encourage them. City kids need people who accept them as they are. The Moskowitz Experience is an abysmal failure, propped up by incurious reporters who don't think things through, and politicians interested in just how many suitcases of cash DFER and all the hedge fund reformies can deliver.

Those of us who spend our lives serving the children of New York City are regularly vilified in the press for the offense of serving the children of New York City. The Moskowitz Model is unsustainable not only for children, but for adults as well. Grownup teachers are role models. They need to be able to pursue lives and happiness. Being a veritable slave in a test-prep factory does not afford that pursuit.

I want my kids to be happy, and the only way I can encourage that in them is to reach down deep and find it somewhere in myself. While I certainly hope they pass The Test, whatever it is, and while I will help them do that if that's what they need, happiness is more fundamental, and will lead them to success well beyond what "Success Academy" offers. In fact, "Success Academy" appears to fail the overwhelming majority of its students.

I certainly hope that we offer them something better when they come to us. It would be pretty hard work to offer them anything worse.

If Carranza's Concerned with Inequality, He Can't Ignore Part 154

There's an interesting feature on Chancellor Richard Carranza in the Atlantic right now. Clearly, in tackling inequality and segregation in our schools, he's got his work cut out for him. The writer, who seems to know nothing whatsoever about actual NYC education, compares him to Joel Klein. Were I Carranza, I'd sue for damages. We don't know that much about Carranza, but it's clear he's not a simple corporate mouthpiece.

The issue of segregation is a third rail, and no matter which approach you take, someone is bound to hate you for it. It's particularly tough in this climate, with a President intent on moving us back to the 19th century. No one knows that better than union. We're now clearly in the sights of the Koch Brothers and Walmart, who may as well make the rules for the astoundingly pro-corporate, anti-worker SCOTUS.

I see discrimination played out every single day in my work. No, I'm not complaining about my administration. I'm talking about the third year of CR Part 154, which reduces direct English instruction by 33-100%, and replaces it with, essentially, nothing whatsoever (or perhaps even less than that). In high schools, we used to be required to give beginners three full periods of English instruction daily. Now we can give them as few as one period a day. And once they aren't beginners anymore, we can reduce that to zero.

We replace these English classes with nothing. But for each one, we dump an ESL teacher into one of their "core content" classes. Alternatively, we can place a single dual-certified teacher in. So that teacher might take 45 minutes to teach fractions to a native English speaker. In that same 45 minutes, the dual certified teacher, or the pair of teachers, is expected to teach both fractions and English to English Language Learners (ELLs).

I have been teaching English to ELLs for decades. It probably won't surprise you when I say it takes more time, not less, to teach concepts to people who don't understand the language you're learning. The possibility of teaching both the concept and the language in the same time it takes for native speakers to learn the concept is remote indeed. Not only that, but it's a blatantly stupid expectation.

In fact, I'd argue it's discrimination. Of course it's not Carranza's fault, since he had nothing to do with the regulation. I don't think it was the intention of the Regents to discriminate either. The rationale I've heard from them has been that they wanted to make sure students were focused on actual subject matter, the implication being that English is not a subject. I wouldn't call that discriminatory. Of course it's completely wrong, if not totally idiotic, so that's not much of a defense.

A friend sent me this comment:

 ...the rationale is to keep foreigners in their place. Lock them into dead end jobs and shove them into certain neighborhoods. This is especially true if they are of color. All of those wonderful sentiments about coming to America for a fresh start, the Statue of Liberty as a great symbol of hope- are a thing of the past. These days, it is called “stay in your lane and ensure that your neighbors look like you.” If they cannot speak English or have access to education, that is the first step.

I don't think that was the actual intent, but the effect is not much different. I can't speak for the Regents, but I think their focus was not so much on black and brown as it was on green. There is a shortage of ESL teachers, and every five classes that disappear under Part 154 means one fewer ESL teacher is needed. That means schools save money, and that means the state saves money, I suppose.

The piece in the Atlantic mentions that Carranza learned English as a child. It's actually a lot easier to do that than it is for the high school students I teach. Language acquisition ability begins a rapid decline around puberty. That's why Carranza speaks unaccented English while my students may never do that. But the fact is they need more support, not less, and this has been affirmed by resolutions passed by both UFT and NYSUT.

If Carranza is truly concerned about inequality, he ought not to ignore the ELLs. They are his brothers and sisters, they are our children, and Part 154 is an abomination. Maybe it's time to sue the state for discrimination. If he needs someone to testify, I'm available.

Kim's Convenience

I've had a lot more time than usual these last few weeks, and of course I'm wasting it watching too much video. I stumbled upon Kim's Convenience on Netflix, having never heard of it. I'm supposing you haven't either, but in these times, it's something you ought not to miss.

Every day we are bombarded with the atrocities committed by the lunatic in the White House. Every day we have to sit and wonder what new outrage our President will commit, what juvenile insults he will tweet from his phone, which vicious regime he will identify with, just which nazis are fine people, and who he will threaten war with on Twitter. In fairness, the President has a mandate by every standard (except votes cast). But I digress.

In the real world, no one's really finding happiness or fulfillment Making America White Again. We have to find some more efficient way to get along with and understand each other. It's a particular struggle for immigrants, relentlessly targeted by the Bigot-in-Chief. I work with immigrants every day, and it's a tragedy that we are so close-minded. I like the Andy Griffith Show, but we don't live in Mayberry anymore, if indeed we ever did.

Kim's Convenience is about a Korean-Canadian family running a convenience store in Toronto. Their friends and customers are from various cultures. No one is represented as perfect, and human flaws create character-driven comedy. It's important to see representation of real people, and I can't think offhand of an American show that does this remotely as well.

Mr. Kim is kind of a smarter Archie Bunker. He's very quick-witted and generally free from stereotype. Nonetheless he can't forget things the Japanese did in 1910, and therefore rages against Toyotas. But his Pentax camera was half-price, so that's somehow not an issue. He struggles to deal with his children, one of whom, alas, studies photography rather than medicine. He's estranged from his son, who's dealing with his checkered past. The Kims are a family, imperfect like everyone. But they're also clever and funny, so your time with them is well-spent.

I'm impressed to finally see fair representation of people with accents. There's so much prejudice against accents. I once knew a teacher who criticized a Cuban-born colleague of mine for her English. Her English was fine, actually. I found it really ironic that the guy criticizing her spoke one language while she spoke two. The irony escaped the critical teacher.

There's a line from a great underrated film, A Walk in the Clouds, where Giancarlo Gianini says, "Don't think that just because I talk with an accent, that I think with an accent." Kim's Convenience will make fun of certain language-related errors, but never portrays its characters as being stupid simply because of how they speak. It's important that we see characters like that, and sad that we generally do not.

If watching Kim's Convenience is not the best way for you to see true multiculturalism, you could always do what I did and teach ESL for a few decades. I have to say, though, that with Race to the Top, junk science, and an anti-labor SCOTUS, you might get fewer laughs from teaching 20 years than you would from watching a sitcom for thirty minutes.

This show will not only have you laughing out loud, but it's also sweet and timely. If you don't have Netflix, find someone who does, bring some popcorn, and settle in for a group binge-watch. NYC Educator guarantees you won't regret it, or we will refund your popcorn. (Since you watch other stuff on Netflix, or may even be mooching your friend's Netflix, well, the ten bucks a month is still on you.)

Another Day, Another DOE Fail

This one, oddly, had a pretty short shelf life in NYC. Evidently, if the DOE has not invested enough time to give a principal tenure, they will actually let one go simply because he presided over two stabbings and a murder, likely as not caused by one of his policies. Oh, and there was that grade-fixing scandal in which a kid handed in a stick figure rather than actual work.

This guy, in fact, was not set to simply be a principal. He was going to supervise or assess other principals. Did they meet the standard? Did they preside over more than one murder? Less than two stabbings? Did they demand two or more stick figures for makeup coursework? Or is stuff like that relevant enough to make the checklist? Or is there a DOE checklist already that may or may not contain that stuff?

Sometimes when I write about stories like these, I have to stress things that reporters wouldn't, to point out the ridiculousness, or elaborate on things that the story only implies. Not this time, though:

Despite the fact that a simple online search yields a number of stories about his past controversies, Richardson told The Post that a team of DOE interviewers never asked him about them.
“Those specifics did not come up,” Richardson said.
Apparently, the DOE decided to run its own Google search after The Post asked about his hiring.

That sounds like sarcasm, doesn't it? I mean, if you were hiring someone for a position that entailed supervising principals, wouldn't you do a cursory check? Wouldn't you be curious as to why someone would leave the DOE for a higher-paying position, then come back five years later seeking a lower-paying one?

Of course you would. But the New York City Department of Education, the one that makes decisions that affect your workplace each and every day, doesn't find that a productive use of its time. What on earth do they discuss at interviews? Do they talk about how many ineffective ratings they're willing to give? Do they ask whether they're willing to violate the UFT Contract with impunity? Do they ask them whether or not they're willing to listen to "legal" rather than read basic English?

Here's what I know to be true--the DOE is a morass of ineptitude. They hire lawyers who can't or don't read the UFT Contract, and they back them up with hearing officers for whom logic is a second language. I don't deal much with Tweed but it's hard for me to imagine that Bloomberg didn't stack it up with equally inept and incurious martinets who aren't worth half their bloated salaries. This recent bout of incompetence ought to get tongues wagging, but it won't.

Despite the fact that there are stories enough for Sue Edelman to humiliate Mayor Bill de Blasio on an almost weekly basis, and despite the fact that each one represents a dozen we've yet to hear, the mayor does absolutely nothing to clean up the mess left him by Michael Bloomberg. I hope the new chancellor reads these stories and does something about them, but his top-level shakeup does not indicate to me a readiness to clean house.

Of course, I can always be wrong, and this time I certainly hope I am.

Working Class Traitor Makes Good

Mark Janus, who lent his name to the anti-union lawsuit to screw American working people, has scored a really cool gig with a right-wing think tank. This should be a lesson to us all. It really pays to be the first one to sell out your brothers and sisters nationwide. You collect your union-negotiated retirement benefits, get some cool job sitting around an office somewhere, and you don't really have to do anything ever again. Was this a deal he made in advance? I don't see why not.

So Janus has really paid off for Janus. It's only the rest of us who will suffer. You see, if you actually study history, you find that Americans do better when they are unionized, not occasionally, not sometimes, but always. You find that unionized workers make more money than non-unionized workers, and you find that non-unionized workers make more money too when union flourishes.

You will also find that union has been rolled back since Reagan was President. This is part of a concerted anti-union program in the United States and it's sorely reduced the number of unionized workers. Now when government boasts of job creation it's often as not jobs that pay minimum wage and come without health insurance or any benefits whatsoever. In fact, many crappy fast food jobs make you sign disclaimers that you won't jump ship for other crappy fast food jobs. This removes the possibility of the competition that Republicans argue will improve the economy.

We are a selfish country, and we choose to be that way even when we are screwing ourselves. We have a national news network that caters to the needs of the uber-rich. It's somehow managed to persuade a great swath of the country that they too might be uber-rich one of these days, and that they therefore must support rules that expand the rights of the uber-rich.

Of course, that's not the only way you manipulate the public. You manage them through racism and xenophobia. You make them terrified of Muslims. You make a big thing out of not allowing them entrance to the United States, unless they come from countries with which you do business, in which case they're fine. You then ignore all terrorist acts committed by white people, because if you demonize white people there goes your base. How are we gonna Make America Great Again if we contend the characters on Leave It to Beaver were terrorists?

It isn't easy to get people to act against their self-interest. Fox couldn't exist, for example, if American hadn't done away with The Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present both sides of an issue, rather than simply spout right-wing propaganda. But we're way down that road now, and it will take a sea change to turn back.

Janus contended he had to leave his First Amendment rights at the door when he went to work. In reality, unions have separate political funds. I contribute to one. Even though I sometimes disagree with UFT endorsements, I want union to be able to fight things like the Constitutional Convention. Now that we're in an actual existential crisis, I want union to be able to fight even more.

What Janus contended was that union itself was inherently political. Thus, the Americans who wanted to fight for more work for less pay were never well-represented when they were compelled to pay union dues. It's kind of ironic that Janus, as soon as the Koch Brothers finished using him so they could keep money they'd otherwise have to give working people, gave him a gig for less work and more pay.

Of course, hypocrites will do things like that. They'll take more money for themselves while screwing everyone else. And now every American in a union will be able to follow in Janus's footsteps. They can withhold their union dues while making saps like me cover their expenses. The only problem is, in the long run, they won't benefit like Janus did. The less power union has, the worse working conditions will become for most Americans, Most Americans will actually lose more than the relative drop in the bucket represented by union dues.

And make no mistake, that's why billionaire Bruce Rainer started the lawsuit, that's why he set up a stooge named Janus, and that's why the Koch Brothers and Walmart bankrolled it. They want a Fox News-watching, self-screwing country of ignoramuses.

Don't forget to vote.