Posts Tagged 'Contract'



UFT Members – Why is UFT Leadership Misleading us on Contract? – Executive Board Minutes, 5-22-2023

Quick summary/analysis:

Tonight, UFT leadership disappointed many rank-and-file attendees when it came to contract. UFT leadership has been misleading us about something big, effectively lying (at least organizationally), and making us ask ‘why?’ and ‘what else isn’t being shared accurately with members?’

Specifically, during a report tonight, Carl Cambria claimed that only the UFT wants to get a contract before summer; that the DOE could care less. Cambria’s claim contradicts directly what the UFT has been telling us in official communications. In a Chapter Leader Update as recent as May 18, we were told “Negotiation meetings are taking place daily as the UFT, the DOE and the city try to reach a contract agreement by the end of the school year.” Notice, here it isn’t just the UFT who wants to reach a contract by summer – it’s also our employer. And at the May 17 Delegate Assembly, Michael Mulgrew told us directly that ‘We are trying, both us and the City, to get this done before the end of the school year.’ That’s two places now – two – where UFT leadership has told us directly that the City also wants the contract done soon. So why is Cambria now telling us the opposite? I can think of a few reasons: (1) it’s a good rallying cry to get a yes vote – now the timeliness of the contract becomes what we’re fighting for; it will seem like a win when we get it in June if members believe that we had to fight for a contract before summer. (2) It helps UFT leadership justify rushing out the ratification process. Indeed, while I had initially thought we’d get the ball rolling as early as this week, I’m now starting to think the UFT might actually wait until June to even start. (3) Alternatively, maybe the nontruth was earlier, when the UFT signaled that the City wanted the same things as UFT leadership (a contract before summer). Maybe our top negotiators misread things so badly that they put into print something that wasn’t true. And (4) Maybe UFT leadership is lying organizationally but not personally. Maybe Mulgrew is saying one thing he believes (and including it at the DA and in the CL update), while Carl is saying what he believes (and including it in the executive board update). If that’s the case, that means the top layers of our negotiation team aren’t in sync, and both are conveying opposite positions in official UFT forums mere days apart. That possibility means our organization is broken. It makes me equally pessimistic on our contract future.

I’m beyond disappointed. At some point, someone in leadership misled us. And that makes me extremely skeptical about the contract process. To add insult to injury, Unity voted down a basic common sense resolution on giving delegates time to read the contract before voting. Some of their arguments were frankly ridiculous. Liz Perez, for instance, noted that a no vote campaign already exists (it doesn’t – she’s likely thinking of UFC’s vote no if we don’t meet five basic demands campaign). And she suggested that one reason 2 weeks would be a problem was because then people might publicize negative things about the contract. But that’s precisely the point – if there are negative things in the contract, delegates deserve to know about them before we vote on them, no?

Again, I’m beyond disappointed – even more than usual – with Unity. For more information on contract, curriculum, class sizes, and other items, see below.

Open Mic:

Michael DeShields (PS30): Speaking on pride month. Currently on the exec board of the UFT pride committee and member of pride at work. Patty Crispino president. Looking for members. $5 per month membership fee. Pride night at Yankee stadium, June 31st. Stonewall organization presenting scholarship that night. $45 range for tickets, go to scholarship. Advisor for my elementary school’s GSA (Gay Straight Alliance). Opportunity for students at school to have a safe space. Students have a chance to express themselves and share on LGBTQ issues. Since Trump was in office, started tutu Tuesdays, wear tutu to school religiously. Women will wear shirts and ties. This is our opportunity to show solidarity with the transgender community. Would love to push out to rest of DOE. Many states trying to ban things for trans community and take away rights. Working closely with Rashad, chair of pride committee. This all comes from more support from above. Would love personally if everyone started using pronouns now. If we start using them as the leadership, then other people will start following suit.

Ben M: Pronouns he/him. Talk about the contract negotiations, critical moment with the rally on Wednesday. Expresses gratitude for everyone working on contract negotiations – on the negotiating team and on the CATs. I think salary mostly speaks for itself. What I want to talk about is the job survey from last year – workplace flexibility. Our work has low levels of workplace flexibility comparable to other jobs. We’ve all missed family events, have had trouble getting time to get errands done, etc. There are ways to give work flexibility that doesn’t hurt students. I think we should fight for discretionary vacation days. DOE created this as part of the spring break arbitration decision. Now that this type of day exists, we could add to that flexibility. It’s important. Help prevent teacher burnout. Help keep people in teachers. Want to also give credit that UFT has done to improve working conditions for C6/extended days – it’s something that’s very important to teachers, time. This is an opportunity that we have right now – this could make a big difference.

Moment of silence

Vince Gaglione: Passing of founding member of UFT. Rise to ask respect in moment of silence in memory of someone whose name is probably unknown to most people in this room. Bob Miller was one of the founding members of UFT, teacher at George Washington HS, first rep in D6, serving until 1990s. Mentor/friend to me. When I worked in district 6, he encouraged my unionism. He had a big presence in d6. Honor to serve as his successor, but no one could ever fill his shoes, including me. Memory is a blessing. Moment of silence.

Minutes approved.

Reports:

Michael Sill: DOE put out ‘plan’ on compliance for class-size legislation. DOE’s plan reflects their attitude towards this work – they did the least possible. Criticism needs to come from us. Principals have reached out to tell us DOE is telling them not to worry about things, because ‘nothing is changing. ‘ Approximately 39% of classes are in compliance here technically, but DOE shouldn’t be lowering class sizes because it’s their legal responsibility – they should be lowering class sizes because it’s their ethical responsibility. We’re going to be asking folks to get out to public meetings, including CEC meetings, to speak out. There will be fiscal conservatives there who say the City can’t do it. We need to show them that they’re wrong.

Mary Vacarro: Rollout of curriculum meetings. Final agreement, this summer we will have P credit/A+ on curriculum. Excited about that. Also, the three types of curriculum, books are starting to arrive. Some issues with digital portion of grades 3-5. Last thing, postings are up for district positions, for elementary or middle school, for people who want to work at the teacher center, teacher center for one year, then you return.

Carl Cambria: Rally on Wednesday the 24th. Start with where we are in terms of the negotiations. Meeting every day, all day. Members of 500 member negotiating committee have put a lot of time into negotiations, both internally and with DOE. We are trying our best to get a contract to ratify before the end of the school year. We want to bring the best possible contract that we can bring. The problem is that management/DOE does not share that same goal. They don’t work towards that goal. They are meeting us, having conversations with us, don’t have the same desire to get contract to our members. In terms of pace, they’d be fine with the contract taking 5 more years. They don’t have a desire to show they have some sort of vision for September. So we’re always the ones who need to drive this car. In this case, it’s that much more difficult. You’ve all had situations where you know how frustrating it can be at a school-level consultation. We are going back to them almost daily reminding them what we’re doing. Constantly. Don’t know if there’s going to be an agreement. As we stand at this moment, there is no agreement. Is there a path to an agreement? Path, yes, but we have to prepare it ourselves. Make no mistake, there is no agreement. We have a number of tentative agreements. That means that the rally is extremely important. I know it’s been said over and over again. It’s important not just for us to feel good, but to show the DOE and the City that we want a contract now. That’s been our slogan: fair contract now. Wednesday is about letting that be heard. They need to know it’s not just us at the negotiating table who care, but that all of us care. So continue emphasizing that to our members. Because they are not going to give that to us. The pattern is there – I’ve said that before. But it’s not in our pocket. The time is there for that to happen. Only have a few weeks until the end of the school year. If we get to an agreement in the next couple of weeks, we need a fast turnaround in terms of getting the information out. We have a lot of work to do. But we won’t have any work to do unless we get out in the street on Wednesday and force the City to an agreement.

Reports from Districts:

Rashad Brown: For first time in a while, UFT participated in AIDS walk, raised over $6k, which surpassed our goal. We had a good time. Thanks a few people. This is an annual event. Let’s have 50 out there next time.

Melody A.: Thank you to those who came out on May 13th for teacher leader action workcase. Good turnout, but also want it doubled. It’s important, I’m passionate about it. It deserves the attention it got and then some. Always around the same time.

Dave Walter: Update on school in d26 that won a union animus arbitration, 40 pages of a principal abusing an entire chapter. Thanks many. That principal went on leave and got a taste of what it means to have a collaborative environment. Took that to the streets to suggest what a positive environment they’re in. Got community behind them, in front of superintendent. Did not want the ‘abuser’ returned to their family; that principal is now no longer at that school.

Seung Lee: Sunday after spring conference, AAPI heritage parade was excellent. Families at event. Shouts out many. Teacher center will be releasing an AAPI curriculum that they’re field testing.

Daniel Rodriguez: Attended with some of my members at Bronx Health Sciences High School at Truman, rolling out AAPI curriculum. Well received. June 2nd, Bronx High Schools having celebration event. Everyone here is welcome.

Janella Hinds: Secretary soirée on Friday June 2nd in this room. Transform this room to celebrate secretaries from all schools. Hope you’ll join us if secretary from your school is being honored.

Special order of business – resolution on contract full disclosure

Ed Calamia: Common sense resolution that affirms our values, transparency, etc – gives generous amount of time to debate/discuss contracts that will determine their future. You want to read every line of a contract. Everyone in the union is busy, especially volunteers who do extra stuff. We need time to study these types of documents. You want to parse text, get together with others, bounce it back and forth. At the end of the day, it’s the members – rank and file. We want them to be able to understand the contract as if doing itself.

Mike Sill: Rise in opposition to motion. Understand where it’s coming from. Don’t think we should signal to DOE that we won’t ratify without 2 weeks. Don’t know what the intent is here, but don’t think we should signal anything to our opponents in this negotiation. As carl said, DOE is not anxious to come to a conclusion in these negotiations. If they wanted to put off a ratification vote until September, of course they’d use it.

Alex Jallot: In support. Think the spirit speaks to our union. Hear what the speaker was saying before about showing DOE how we’re operating. But this is an important resolution. This will dictate our lives.

Rashad Brown: I stand on a few negotiation committees form the last few years, and what I can say is that when we come back to the union hall we go through the contract language and how to bring that to our members. I don’t think there needs to be a reason to extend that time period. We are on the brink of a recession, this could stall the process. I think we should move forward with the Executive Body to bring that contract to our chapter leaders so that it can be brought to a vote.

Nick Bacon: I stand in support of this resolution in part because I’ve been through contract ratifications before. I remember the 2018 contract and that delegates didn’t have enough time. People didn’t know what they were voting on, especially around health care. Certain items were not understood such as first year teachers could not get plus 30 in the same easy way that most us were able to. Stuff like this leads to discontent. Teacher unionists work full days and can’t just read through a TA with 24 hours notice. If we’re going to vote on a contract that’s going to dictate so much of our lives, we need to be able to read it. At the DA when we voted to release the contract so our members could vote, a lot of us were saying that we didn’t know what we were voting on. We were told that we were not voting on it, we were giving members the ability to vote on it. But everyday members hear that we voted yes to let a contract go for a membership vote – they hear that Chapter leaders and delegates actually approved of the contract. For these reasons, we can’t give 24 hours notice to chapter leaders and delegates to vote.

Patty Crispino: There was not one time that I voted on a contract that I wasn’t aware what my union pointed out to me and what I chose to read. I don’t think any of our members need two weeks to look at what is important to our members. I think this resolution is somewhat insulting, that it would take anyone two weeks to read what is important. I trust our union leadership, and I trust our union.

Seung Lee: Two reasons I have issues on this resolution. Paragraph 4 talks about feelings, harmony, and think there’s an inherent contradiction in the writing. But aside, the last paragraph talks about the need for 2 weeks at every step. Perhaps lack of clarity? Misunderstanding intent? But this causes unnecessary delay – logistical nightmare. Unless I understood more of what was written here, I’d never vote for it.

Liz Perez: How many people presenting this have actually read the contract and the 2018 MOA? How could you possibly have harmony? How could we have that whenever we have exec boards and DAs things are reported out negatively? Imagine the negativity that will come out if 2 weeks notice are given. Right now we have a vote no campaign – you haven’t even seen the contract.

Question called.

Motion defeated.

UFT: Let’s Fight for the Contract We Deserve

On Wednesday, May 24th, our union will hold what is likely to be the UFT’s final organizing action for the 2023 contract. Members will assemble at five sites (one in each borough) to rally for a fair agreement. I am hopeful that attendance will be good – not just by staffers, but by regular rank-and-file teachers, paras, and related professionals. And yes, I plan to attend, and have encouraged members of my chapter to attend. I encourage you to attend too.

Sure, I have some reservations about whether the specifics of this event are good enough to get us the contract we deserve. I think it’s a mistake that our union’s leadership is so committed to keeping working teachers from having the right to strike. I think that their over-reliance on bureaucratic ‘Taylor Law’ tactics undermines the potency of our organizing. And, I worry that if UFT leadership is relying on the threat of PERB rather than the culmination of good organizing (i.e. the viable ‘strike’ threat), the City has little reason to react to the limited organizing it does see.

But strike threat or not, the more of us that show up to contract actions, the more of a reason the City has to listen to us. So, I’m showing up. I’m showing up, because, like it or not, this is the official organizing we have. It’s what we’ve put our entire union’s dues, staff efforts, and volunteer work into producing.

To that end, while Unity’s own communications (like this misrepresentative beaut of an Instagram post) may suggest otherwise, the May 24th contract action is not a Unity event. It is a UFT event. Yes, the contract actions fall short of LA’s and Chicago’s because of Unity’s failure to lead more than ‘soft’ union organizing in their dues-funded positions of power and influence. It falls short of what UFC would have done had we won more than just the high school executive board. But any non-voluntary labor that went into creating the contract actions was paid for not by Unity dues, but by UFT dues – by all of us. And, to the extent that the actions planned will work, it will be because of the strength of our entire union’s membership—which means all of us have to show up, not just Unity, and especially not just Unity-members who are paid staffers.

That’s why communications that suggest UFT-wide events are Unity Caucus property are a mistake. To the extent that our contract actions have any value at all, it is that they bring rank-and-file members out regardless of caucus affiliation. Unity propaganda that tries to reframe union-wide events as Unity events alienates non-Unity members. It reduces the numbers who show up. It reduces our union’s efficacy. And it exploits union resources for caucus gain.

So let’s not let Unity torpedo the union’s last 2023 contract organizing event by turning it into a caucus rally. Let’s go to our event. We owe it to ourselves and our families to participate in these last contract actions fully, in hopes that they might nudge the City—even a little bit—to get us closer to an agreement  worth voting yes on.

See you all on Wednesday.

UFT Contract Update: Countdown for ‘Chump Change?’

It seems like everywhere we’re getting signals that UFT leadership is readying for contract ratification. To get a ‘yes vote’ though, they’ll need membership to agree – whether it’s a good deal or not. And that work needs to start now – before we see the details and have second thoughts. At this moment, we don’t know much. We know that our raises are going to be bad -really bad. And we know nothing about changes to working conditions, except that our negotiators ‘had not necessarily heard back what they wanted to hear.’ So what’s that leave UFT leadership? They can’t promise us things we aren’t going to get if they want us to vote yes, so they have three ‘yes vote’ techniques:

  • Start selling the parts of the contract that they do know we are going to get, so that when it’s announced, members focus only on those few wins and forget the many demands that went unmet (or worse).
  • Begin focusing on when we get a raise, rather than how much will be in it. If we rush a bad contract, after all, we can get limited money quick. Summer is around the corner –a tempting time to dangle a few bucks in front of teachers and say ‘sure, we didn’t fix any working conditions, but wouldn’t you rather have this money now than wait until Fall to renegotiate?’
  • Host special events that serve to bring members together to feel good about the contract – and how successful we were in negotiating it.

All the data we have supports the inference that UFT leadership is using all three of these methods to rush a yes vote. As Carl Cambria put it during Monday’s UFT Executive Board Meeting:

 ‘The pattern is out there, it’s not in our members pockets. We have to wrap up negotiations and put something before our members so that they can have something to ratify and get that money in their pockets and everything else. A lot of people putting in a lot of time. We’ll continue doing that until May 23rd and will have a fuller meeting then.’

The emphasis here is on getting something before our members (not necessarily something of quality). As for when, one key date, May 23rd, is raised. On that day, the full 500-member negotiating committee will all be together with only about a month to spare before we break for summer vacation. Might we vote then on a tentative agreement? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps instead, UFT leadership will really push the limits and wait until June, as they seemed to suggest in a recent chapter leader update. But, with only about a month to hold votes in the contract committee, the executive board, and the DA, before sending it out for a full membership vote, I’d be more surprised if we didn’t get that ball rolling on May 23rd. Then, in the invitation to the May 24th contract action—a mere day after that negotiating committee meeting—this is the language used:

“How many lessons have been planned, students have been served and services have been provided since our contract expired? It’s been a full year without a raise in sight. The DOE continues to believe that if they aren’t micromanaging our time, we aren’t working. Every day, we give our all so our students can have what they need. We have had enough! Let’s make our voices heard. The time is now for UFT members to get the contract we deserve.”

The wording here is telling.

  • The email mentions one possible win: less micromanagement of our time. Therefore, I might infer that some sort of win is projected on working conditions. Micromanagement of time would seem to refer to C6s and/or the extended day. If we could get some serious wins on that, many of us would be happy. Maybe other more critical demands will not be met, but that’s why they aren’t mentioned here. If teachers are going to vote yes, UFT leadership needs them to be laser focused on gains we’re actually getting, however minor.
  • The email does not mention the amount of money we will get. (Indeed, that number is quite low). It just says that we ‘deserve a raise now.’ It highlights the fact that it’s been a very long time since our last wage increase – but leaves out that UFT negotiated the 2018 contract to not have raises in its final year. Why are they twisting their own bad negotiating to get us to agree to a new deal now? My guess? The decent raise option is already out the door. Therefore, UFT leadership is shifting language from talking about the amount of a raise we deserve to its timeliness. Timely summer money is really the only counter Unity would have to opposing ‘no vote campaigns, should they arise. If opposition unionists were to argue that the deal wasn’t good enough to approve, UFT leadership could paint us as keeping people from getting their money. That’s money we’d likely get anyways as retro if we waited, so the value of getting it early is dubious if it means also committing to mediocre gains elsewhere. So again, the only argument would be ‘money in time for summer.’
  • I’ve always said that we should use every tactic at our disposal to negotiate better terms for our members. But if UFT is signaling everywhere that we’re about done, and if we’re likely to vote on or close to May 23rd, why the strike style’ event a day later? I mention this, because word from NAC members/affiliates is that the preparation meetings for May 24th have been feel-good Unity-heavy events that seemed to lack substance. Moreover, using an event like what is planned on May 24th for ‘yes-vote’ purposes rather than negotiating purposes would keep with the MO of other ‘Taylor law proud’ union leaders, such as those of DC37, who held a major rally on Feb. 16, only to announce a tentative agreement with the City the next day (Feb. 17). That deal, we now know, cemented one of the worst patterns in the history of the NYC labor movement. That pattern, we’re now stuck with. But it’s OK. As Mayor Adams put it moments ago:

Thanks Eric Adams. And thanks UFT leadership. By not organizing for a pattern that would pay us what we deserve, you’d almost think they agreed we ‘don’t do it for the money.’ To close: A reminder that these are New Action’s contract demands. If we don’t get them in this contract, I don’t intend to vote yes in exchange for ‘timelier chump change’ and slightly less micromanagement during my C6. I intend to fight for better.

NEW ACTION/UFT PROPOSALS FOR CONTRACT DEMANDS

  1. Pay raises in line with surrounding districts
  2. Maximum salary should be reached in 10 years like many other unions
  3. Reduce class size in every division
  4. Reduce caseloads of counselors, school psychologists, and other titles
  5. No agreement to place new hires into HMOs 
  6. End Fair Student Funding/Return to Unit Costing to end discrimination/harassment of veteran teachers
  7. Fight the attacks on Chapter Leaders and chapter members
  8. Fight abusive principals and place abusers on a UFT Watch List/Send teams into these schools
  9. Reinstitute seniority transfers
  10. End ATR pool by placement in vacancies
  11. Work to end school segregation
  12. Work to increase staff diversity
  13. Restore the right to grieve letters in the file
  14. Allow members to challenge principal’s judgment on observation reports
  15. Remove the Danielson Framework and decouple test scores from evaluations. Reform the evaluation system to be teacher led.
  16. Set penalties for administrators who repeatedly violate class size provisions
  17. And NO MORE healthcare givebacks!!!!

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
January 2026
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 402,091 hits