Notes from the May 6 UFT Exec Board

Published May 11, 2013 New Action , UFT Executive Board Leave a Comment

-       Excessed Teachers at Open Mike
-       UFT taking lead role in MLC demo against Bloomberg
-       Some questions from New Action members
-       Political endorsements
-       Debate on Bangladeshi garment workers resolution
-       2013 Gay Pride March

These are notes, not a full report.

There were four speakers at the open mike, including two excessed teachers (ATRs) – one spoke to ending the combination funding/hiring/transfer/excessing systems that caused the ATR pool to swell. The other spoke against “kidnapping” – the practice where a principal can take an ATR and keep him or her without that teacher’s consent. Michael Mendel spoke about the apparent contradiction (for forced placement or against forced placement). But the “kidnappings” result in temporary, not permanent placements.

During the president’s report, Mulgrew announced that the UFT, as part of the Municipal Labor Council, would be taking the lead role in a June 12 “Fair Contracts for All” demonstration.

Michael Shulman, New Action co-chair, during the question period, asked about ATRs (see separate report). Jonathan Halabi, the other co-chair, brought to the Board his concern that UFT Social Workers are being replaced by private companies are being brought in by the DOE to do their work, and mentioned a list of schools where this has happened. He asked what the UFT is doing, or could do, about this situation. The chair asked for the list. Maria Ramos, in reports from districts, read a thank you letter from some of those affected by the SESIS victory.

The following City Council endorsements were proposed and approved (New Action had been prepared to speak to ensure that Mark Treygor, a teacher, was included; this proved to be unnecessary as not only was Mark endorsed, but Paul Egan compared him to Danny Dromm.)

Borough           Dist      Candidate       Party Affiliation

Manhattan       02       Rosie Mendez              D
Bronx             15        Ritchie Torres             D
Queens                        20        Peter Koo                    D
Queens           22        Costa Constantinides D
Queens                       26        James Van Bramer      D
Queens                       31        Donovan Richards       D
Brooklyn           33        Stephen Levin             D
Brooklyn         35       Laurie Cumbo             D
Brooklyn           39        Brad Lander                 D
Brookly             41        Darlene Mealy            D
Brooklyn         42       Inez Barron                 D
Brooklyn         47       Mark Treygor              D
Staten Island   50       Steven Matteo             R

Sterling Roberson motivated a resolution in “Support of the Labor Rights of Bangladeshi Garment Workers.” The resolution, a response to the factory collapse last month that cost over 400 Bangladeshi workers their lives, called for the AFT, UFT, retailers, and international labor groups to work to improve safety standards and monitoring in Bangladesh. The resolution was generally well received by all members of all caucuses represented on the Board.

However, Abe Levine, a former UFT officer, rose and attempted to add an amendment. It highlighted the plight of US workers, the need for jobs in this country, and the need for free unions. The amendment called on corporations to pull out of countries that produce products for them.

New Action co-chair Michael Shulman took the floor to oppose the amendment. He cited the need for labor solidarity with workers in all countries. The UFT has passed numerous resolutions in support of workers’ struggles in the US as well as with those struggling in oppressive conditions in other countries. The amendment would be myopic and run counterproductive to where the UFT needs to be on international labor solidarity.

UFT Director of Staff Leroy Barr also spoke.  He said that he supporter 99% of what Levine said, but pointed out that it did not have a place with this resolution. He also indicated the amendment needed a thorough discussion at some later date.

The amendment failed, and resolution as whole passed.

There was a reso to support this year’s Gay Pride March, approved with no discussion.

 

by Jonathan Halabi, with Michael Shulman

Teachers in Excess – are we mistaken?

Published May 10, 2013 UFT Executive Board 1 Comment
Tags:

At Monday, May 6, 2013 UFT Executive Board meeting, New Action co-chair Michael Shulman reported that we have received calls from teachers in excess (ATRs) that they have been receiving U ratings for classroom observations from administrators FOR CLASSES IN SUBJECT AREAS THAT THEY ARE NOT LICENSED! New Action asked how prevalent this was and what steps have taken to address this problem.

The chair, Secretary Michael Mendel, responded that the union is aware of this but that there was NO citywide problem.  In fact he stated, ATRs have not received U-ratings for the year. In other words, NO PROBLEM!

New Action has a question for ATRs – are these isolated instances or are the problems related to observations and U-ratings  more widespread?

We’d like to hear from you! Please email us if you have had a problem with classroom observations or other problems with administrators at the schools you have been assigned to.

Thanks for SESIS victory

Published May 9, 2013 UFT Executive Board , United Federation of Teachers 1 Comment
Tags:

At the May 6, 2013 Executive Board, Maria Ramos, Executive Board At-large, New Action Caucus, read the following letter. It was signed by Maria, but written collectively – all the authors were directly affected by the SESIS decision.

I would like to thank Carmen Alvarez, Michael Mulgrew, Vanessa Pressley, my chapter chairperson – Thank you for giving us the tools like Carmen’s article in the New York Teacher The Time Is Now, and the guidance to fight back and win the SESIS debacle. All my co-workers at my schools say the money is really really really great– $38 million Dollars in all – WOW and we didn’t even expect compensation – we just did not want to get U rated for the work we could not get done during the school day.

This win exposes what our jobs and our caseloads are really like and how much time it takes to stay in compliance. It also shows how dedicated our members are to our children with special needs, knowing that SESIS has put the skids on their services.

Thank you!!!

Maria Ramos

Executive Board @ Large

School Psychologist P198/P245 K D22

The Fight for Salary Parity!

Published April 29, 2013 New Action , New York CIty Department of Education , Teachers Contract Leave a Comment
Tags:

(from the New Action leaflet distributed at the April 2013 UFT Delegate Assembly).
For a printable version click: NA/UFT Leaflet 2013 April

The Fight for Salary Parity!

In 1997, New Action began a fight to win salary equality with surrounding school districts. In March 1998, the seven New Action members of the UFT Executive Board proposed a resolution to make salary a number one bargaining demand. The leadership caucus (Unity) unanimously REJECTED that proposal.

In 2000 New Action organized informational picketing in front of schools for salary parity. The picketing began ½ hour before school. Picketing continued on the 11th of each month (our demand was raises of 11%, 11%, and 11%.) In January we started picketing in front of 30 schools, we continued in February and March, and by April the number of schools had grown to over 100. In May 2000, New Action cancelled our picketing because the union leadership announced picketing would take place in May and June. It was a great victory and lesson for rank and file educators.

Here we are again in 2013 and New Action is once again raising the demand for SALARY PARITY!  We need a thorough survey of surrounding districts, but here’s just one point of comparison (and the New Rochelle numbers are from 2010!):

Starting

5 years/MA

10 yrs/MA + 30

Top
New York City

$45K

$56K

$74K

$100K
New Rochelle

$52K

$67K

$90K

$130K

 

TWO FROM THE ARCHIVES

Fall 1997 –  SALARIES at ALL-TIME LOW! SALARY PARITY FOR EDUCATORS

Several school systems in the NYC metropolitan area have addressed the need to be competitive and raise their salary schedules to the level of surrounding districts. New York City teachers now earn up to 40% less than teachers in neighboring districts. Our union leadership, which has allowed this to happen, has yet to propose a solution.

Parity is Possible!

Levittown and Yonkers, two working class communities without large corporate tax bases, implemented parity plans in 1989. The Yonkers plan called for 4.5% salary increases every six months for five years. (This has nothing to do with just negotiated three year 11% package which raises their MA+30 salary to $80,963 next year). Salaries in Yonkers, which were lower than NYC and most Westchester districts, are now much more competitive and much higher than NYC.

The Levittown plan was based on first determining average salaries of 13 surrounding school districts. Their plan called for seven years of a fixed percent raise above the annual average raise of the surrounding 13  districts. Last year maximum salary was $80.,672.

Based on these two successful models NYC can develop a plan to achieve parity.

-develop a formula and determine the average salary of school districts in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, and Rockland counties-select a time frame (5-7 years) and a predetermined set raise, or

-select a time frame and pay raise that is a fixed percent above the average raise in surrounding districts. The fixed percent is calculated to achieve parity with those districts in the 5-7 year time-frame.

 

On 9/22/97, New Action/UFT proposed such a plan to the UFT Executive Board. It was rejected by the Unity majority.

The plan is necessary, reasonable, and achievable. It should be presented to the Board of Education, the Mayor, parents, politicians, media and the public. Now is the time while education is a top priority and money is available.

Educational Parity for `Students.

The plan for “pay parity for teachers” should be linked to “educational parity for students.” The UFT must also fight to achieve full funding from Albany, lower class sizes, and guaranteed safe, well equipped and uncrowded schools equivalent to those in surrounding districts.

It is more than two years before negotiations begin on our new contract. New Action/UFT believes that the campaign for pay and educational parity must begin now.

 

Resolution Presented On Salary Parity March 11, 1998

Whereas, New York City is experiencing a second year of record windfall surpluses of over one billion dollars, and

Whereas, the salary gap between UFT members and educators in surrounding districts ranges from 10-25% for new teachers, to 25-40% for senior teachers, and

Whereas, the need to attract and retain qualified staff has taken on greater significance, be it

Resolved, that the UFT establish a working plan based on Levittown, Yonkers or similar plans to achieve salary parity with surrounding school districts

 

UFT Elections – New Action wins 10 seats – Disappointing Turnout

Published April 26, 2013 New Action , UFT , UFT elections 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Based on yesterday’s unofficial returns (and as expected), New Action will have 10 seats on the new UFT Executive Board. New Action returns Douglas Haynes, Francisco Peña, Maria Ramos, Michael Shulman (at large) and Bill Goldman and Jonathan Halabi (high schools), and adds Joel Garcia, Regina Gori and Kate Martin-Bridge (at large) and Keith Fessel (high schools).

New Action’s vote was 9.4%, a decline from 2010, but better than the previous two elections.

The big story, unfortunately, is the overall drop in turnout. Less than one in four UFTers returned ballots. Among in-service members, just 18% participated.

This is symptomatic of many members not feeling part of the union, not being involved. But that is where a union’s strength should lie, in an active membership. New Action will continue to prioritize rebuilding chapters and organizing at the school level, to involve members in the life of our union.

The drop in vote is also symptomatic of members being overwhelmed, angry, and confused: Overwhelmed by the unreasonable and unceasing demands of a system that seems designed to punish educators with paperwork and impossible requirements, not to allow us to educate children; Angry about colocations and school closings, about the threat of being forced into the ATR pool, about losing 20 or more days each year to testing and test prep, angry about maltreatment at the hands of abusive administrators; Confused that our union is not doing more, and is cooperating with Danielson and a new, potentially dangerous teacher evaluation system. Each of these is a challenge to our strength. New Action remains committed to addressing all of these issues – be it by supporting the leadership, by urging a more active approach, or by opposing the leadership where they have taken a wrong stance.

There is much work going forward.

UFT Elections coming to a close

Published April 23, 2013 New Action , UFT elections Leave a Comment

For those of you who voted for us, thank you. For those of you who actively supported us, thank you.

New Action’s message – we support the leadership when they are right, and oppose them when they are wrong – got out to tens of thousands of UFTers. We want members to know we are progressive, influential, and independent.

Tomorrow is the last day for ballots to arrive at the American Arbitration Association.

The count will be Thursday. We will write something about the results here.

New Action and MORE representatives met in November

Published April 5, 2013 New Action , UFT elections 2 Comments
Tags:

Three representatives of New Action met with three representatives of MORE back on November 27.

MORE brought one agenda item: what was New Action doing in the upcoming election? At that point we were working on an agreement to run a full slate, cross-endorsing Mulgrew and Unity’s high school people, with some cross-endorsements in return. That agreement had not been finalized.

New Action brought 3 items. We asked about having a formal means of communication, when issues came up where the caucuses needed to reach other. That was achieved. We asked about assisting each other where we agreed on an activity (such as the petition campaign against mayoral control; MORE probably would have participated, but we did not have a way of getting each other involved). MORE was not as interested in that discussion, although they agreed in a general way. They were more concerned with the immediately upcoming election, but the discussion was positive. The third was what we would do if a bad contract agreement came down. We discussed a joint effort from almost 20 years ago that helped defeat a bad contract.

Then New Action added an item. We raised with concern the level of hostility from the last election period (2010). Kit Wainer said that MORE planned to attack Unity, not New Action. He thought that New Action would have a hard time campaigning without going after MORE – but we disagreed. Then we asked about the bloggers, we mentioned recent disparaging posts. Kit said he never reads the blogs, and that MORE does not control them. We pointed out that if the blogs support MORE and write outrageous things, and MORE does not dissociate itself from those comments, then it looks like MORE supports those comments. Kit did not respond.

Content Policy

Content of signed articles and comments represents the opinions of their authors. The views expressed in signed articles are not necessarily the views of New Action/UFT.
May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.