Archive for the 'NYC' Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Transferring? Know Before You Go

Published July 14, 2014 New Action , New York , New York CIty Department of Education , NYC , UFT , UFT Executive Board , United Federation of Teachers Closed
Tags: ,

(from the New Action leaflet distributed at the June 2014 Delegate Assembly).
For a printable version click: June 2014 Leaflet Front and back

Due to school closures, myriad mini-schools opening, and the creation of the ATR pool, more UFT members have needed to transfer in the last few years, including right now, than at any other time in our history. You should “know before you go.” Check the Learning Environment Survey, the Inside Schools review, any word of mouth you can find. In that spirit, New Action brought the following resolution to the May 19, 2014 UFT Executive Board:

Resolution on Identifying Schools with High Staff Turnover

WHEREAS, the Open Market period runs from the present through the beginning of August; and
WHEREAS, every year thousands of our members apply for schools to transfer into; and
WHEREAS, high turnover rates are an indication that a school may have a problematic administration; and
WHEREAS, our members seeking transfers may not know which schools have high turnover rates, but that information is available to the UFT; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the UFT will establish a procedure in which a member can call a borough office and learn if a school in that borough has a high turnover rate; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the UFT will publish a list in the New York Teacher which details which schools have exceptionally high staff turnover.

Unity argued that this would embarrass hard to staff schools, and voted it down.

Time to Fix School Parking

Published June 8, 2014 New Action , New York CIty Department of Education , NYC , UFT , UFT Executive Board , United Federation of Teachers Closed
Tags: ,

Of all the evil Bloomberg perpetrated on the NYC school system, and on us, the teachers, screwing with our ability park is pretty far down the list.

But the symbolism was immense. The City gained absolutely nothing by taking away many of our parking permits, no spaces were freed up for other purposes, no cost savings was accrued to the municipal coffers. Bloomberg inconvenienced us – because he could.

So, undoing this could be an easy priority for the UFT. Going back to a fair parking system will not cost the city any money. And there would be great symbolism, de Blasio undoing a piece of blatant Bloomberg spite. And, it needs to be done outside of contract negotiations.

So last Monday New Action brought a resolution, calling on the UFT to prioritize this. Unity asked to make one change, which we agreed to. The following became a bipartisan resolution, and passed unanimously.

UFT Executive Board Resolution on parking

June 2, 2014

Whereas, New York City limited parking placards for city workers, including UFT members in 2008, and

Whereas the stated intent of the change was to eliminate abuse of parking placards and to free up curbside spaces, and

Whereas several agencies had placards which could be used anywhere, and were sometimes used unnecessarily and

Whereas teachers had a totally different kind of placard, only allowing access to spaces in front of schools during school hours, on a first come, first served basis, (meaning the permit allowed the holder to park if he or she found a spot, not a guaranteed space) and

Whereas, unlike with other agencies, there were not major concerns about abuse of UFT/school parking, and

Whereas, the City forced a new agreement with the UFT anyway, changing the system from first come first served, to a system where many fewer had permits, outraging many of our members, and

Whereas, the City gained nothing tangible through this agreement, neither freeing up parking nor delivering any cost savings, and

Whereas, “preserving the number of spaces” did no good for those many members who lost their permits, but for schools without sufficient designated parking there is already an appeals process in place, and

Whereas, through this agreement Bloomberg was able to inconvenience thousands of teachers, consistent with his overall treatment of us, and

Whereas, Mayor de Blasio, Chancellor Fariña, and the new city administration have no interest in continuing to harass and inconvenience teachers and other UFT members,

Therefore, be it RESOLVED the United Federation of Teachers will work with the new administration to return to an equitable parking system, where spaces are not pre-allocated, and be it further

Resolved the UFT will push to have this improvement in working conditions in place as soon as possible, and be it further

Resolved the UFT will publicize the appeals process for additional spaces.

The Cost of Lowering Class Size

Published May 19, 2014 Contract , New York , New York CIty Department of Education , NYC , Teachers Contract , UFT , United Federation of Teachers Closed
Tags:

(from the New Action leaflet distributed at the April 2014 Delegate Assembly).
For a printable version click: April 2014 Leaflet Front 2014 and back

Lower class size is often at the top of the list when members are asked what changes could improve schools. There is more than one way to get this done, but we often think of doing it contractually, since there already are class size limits in our Contract. Article 7M caps kindergarten at 25, elementary at 32, junior high school at 33, and high school at 34, with larger classes allowed in Phys Ed and required Music, but with several (often frustrating) exceptions allowed.

We have been warned that lowering class size limits contractually would require a trade off in money. That’s as far as that conversation usually goes. But how much money? It turns out, reducing the class size limits by one student would cost about 1%. Now that would lead to interesting conversations in schools – if we tried to lower class size contractually, would members forego 1% for a decrease of one? 2% for two? 3% for three? 4% for four? or prefer to maximize raises and seek to lower class sizes through some other route?

Learn more about

our UFT Caucus

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.
Follow New Action – UFT on WordPress.com
December 2025
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Blog Stats

  • 401,575 hits