Sunday, February 17, 2013

Dewey Chapter Leader On Union Capitulation

It is clear that the UFT will continue to engage in the Big Lie of "due process" with the rating sheets for as long as they can hide behind the veil they have perfected: they cannot over-rule the DOE, no matter the unjust nature of the rating- they can only "go through the motions" of giving you your "day in (kangaroo) court!!!"
 ---- Martin Haber, Chapter Leader, John Dewey HS, Brooklyn
Marty Haber was elected chapter leader at John Dewey HS this past fall, defeating the incumbent Unity Caucus candidate by more than a 2-1 margin. Marty's election, considering he is not a guy known for being light on the trigger, is a signal to Unity that people are just plain fed up.
Norm, and all,

Another example, close to home for me, of union capitulation: I went for my "sham due process" (my "U" rating "hearing" at the DOE); just the fact that my principal can sit back in her office and communicate by speakerphone while "the accused" has to be there in that little shite office in person says a whole lot about who holds the cards, and who gave up their hand; even "skype" would allow me to "face my accuser", she'd have to look me in the eye as she lies. 

And then to defend myself and have a really strong, lawyerly advocate take the principal's argument apart for a good hour, and THEN be told by that same advocate that "someone in the district office"- NOT the functionary "hearing officer", who is just a "ref"- decides if the "U" stands or not- and they ALWAYS decide (the first "U", at least!) that it STANDS, well, that's really the height of cynicism. So, I got "my day in court", and now that I'm "shop steward" at Dewey, I have to get ready for the 2nd "U". But maybe I will take the route that Peter Lamphere did, and hire my own defense. It is clear that the UFT will continue to engage in the Big Lie of "due process" with the rating sheets for as long as they can hide behind the veil they have perfected: they cannot over-rule the DOE, no matter the unjust nature of the rating- they can only "go through the motions" of giving you your "day in (kangaroo) court!!!"

Martin

15 comments:

  1. Everyone knows the old rating appeal hearing is a sham. It's one of the things the UFT leadership is adamant about fixing in a new evaluation system. But no, you MOREons just keep taking the stand that we shouldn't negotiate a new eval system. Can't have it both ways now, can we?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Considering it was Unity who "negotiated" the old agreements, why should anyone think you'd do a better job now? For people who complain that MORE is "attacking" the union when we point out your many shortcomings, you sure don't have a problem name-calling your fellow UFTers.

    I have to hand it to you, though. It only took you Unity shills a month to think of the term MOREons. I guess that's why you get those sweet double pensions while us teachers get U ratings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only one person using "MOREon", me. I made it up...and it fits. Who knows, maybe it'll catch on. I can put shirt designs on Cafe Press.

      And again, I'm a teacher with a single pension. It's fine if you want to react to my comments but stop making things up. Just because it's Norm's blog and he does it, doesn't mean you should. Damn blinkered ninny.

      Delete
    2. What is the MORE solution? Is there an alternative evaluation proposal? How would MORE overturn U ratings? Change laws to make them more favorable to teachers and students? Alter the Triborough Amendment to the Taylor Law? Compel a billionaire Mayor to accede to your demands, when he wants nothing but the creation of an at will workforce? How would MORE motivate a Governor with a 70% + approval rating to their views?

      Delete
  3. What we need is a major joint investigation by the NYC Council and the NYC Department of Investigation into the policies and procedures of the Office of Appeals and Reviews, and into the whole U-rating process, in general.

    Read the following report very carefully:

    http://nycsci.org/reports/10-91%20OLSHAKER%20RPT.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  4. Quite clever "anonymous". In any case, this story and many other stories of railroading teachers can only stop with outside investigations and continuing to publish and share the names of those principals, hearing officers, investigators and union reps involved. Sunlight is a great disinfectant. I'm putting the final touches on my post "Mikey Mulgrew, Where are You? " Protectportelos.org

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Mr Portelos -

    I agree. Unity is so corrupt. The truth needs to come out. I have never seen such misery working in a school building. And in my experience, the UFT pretending they're looking out for you and then taking the side of administration.

    The new tool against teachers - the formal observation - look for that weapon starting next year. Watch the U ratings fly. Since an admin can basically state anything they want on an observation report knowing you can't contest it, the situation will go from bad to worse for teachers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Chapter Leader at Dewey prior to Mr Habers election was a self serving opportunist who had the nerve to interview for the District Representatives position (BASIS) while serving less than a term as Chapter Leader. Charlie Turner the Brooklyn D.R. was fond of Robert, and saw great potential, no doubt he fit the mold of the current crop of Chapter Leaders the honchos at the UFT prefer. Mr. Haber, has some baggage, but, anyone who knows squat about Dewey understands he is for workers rights. Robert was no where to be found as Dewey fought for its existence and had staff and student protests every week for months prior to the DOE announcing its closing. The current princiapl is a hatchet bureaucrat who takes great pleasure in U rating the staff. The "U" rating appeal is a greater option for the department than the infamous Article "18D", which allows the suspect hiring panels to omit any staff member based upon dubious qualifications. Both articles in the current contract are useles as members are afforded little to no chance of winning often time against trumped up charges. I can only hope that the upcoming elections for UFT leadership shows a greater dissatisfaction and that the candidates opposing Unity receive a larger percentage of in service votes. By the way, the former chapter leader was well on his way to Unity heaven as he had a phantom 1st period class and showed up late almost every day. A charge by the way that was used against several staff members who were placed on the time card punch out for their suspected abuse of DOE regulation. There was I am told a CSI investigation against Robert, it would not surprise me if he was given cover by the UFT higher ups.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just had to add my experience -- at my U appeal hearing two years ago, the principal's charges were so absurd that after the tape recorder was turned off, the hearing officer was honest enough (and laughing at the absurd basis of the U) to admit that the principal is a crackpot and that there is clearly no cause for a U. But she stated very clearly that her "ruling" wasn't a ruling, only a suggestion, and "the DoE will do what the DoE wants to do." Despite a 20+ year of more-than-satisfactory teaching, under several principals and assistant principals, this idiot's U was allowed to stand, based on a single observation of a wonderful class in which his only criticism was how I interpreted a line of Shakespeare for the students. (My master's degree is in Shakspearean comedy.)My U was really based on my union activism. That was when I knew that I had to get out of this very sick system.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That's exactly why a new evaluation system would take out most of the subjectivity that we now have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are arguing both for and against yourself. on the one hand you say it is only 20% -- you brag about that. So then are you claiming Danielson which can be misused takes care of the other 80%? Exactly what is left that is subjective?
      And finally, you claim that the 20% is objective while you full well know that the pub of test score results shows that that is as subjective as anything else -- not only junk science of VAM but also the manipulation that can take place on who is in your class.
      Sorry, make that 3 sides of your mouth.

      Delete
    2. What is your plan? What does MORE bring to the table on evaluations?

      Delete
    3. I am not speaking for MORE but I take the position that the current system still doesn't give them an angle on getting rid of tenured people without a major effort. The system you advocate gives them the wedge they need. Why do you think the very people killing us want this so bad? Just think of who is lined up on your side - including E4E slugs. My plan would be a public relations blitz showing how VAM is bad for kids and teachers. Instead of selling snake oil and wasting millions on commercials tell the truth. Ask people if they want their engineers, doctors, etc rated on faulty statistics.
      No one says this is a short term battle and we might get defeated at first but in the process we would mobilize teachers to act with parents. On closing schools we would issue the same call Karen Lewis issued in Chicago -- every single teacher should be going to closing school hearings because they all are in danger. You sell "all will be better when Bloomberg is gone." A crock of shit given most mayoral candidates, Cuomo, King, Tisch, Obama, Gates, Broad etc -- all supported in some ways by the UFT/AFT.

      Delete
  9. The new evaluation will continue to be subjective. Unity hacks will claim new eval is so much better. NO. The formals will continue to be subjective as they have been. NOW the added stress will be the the growth percentile of scores. So now admin have two avenues at their disposal to go after a teacher.

    1) Lie on observation reports
    2) Set teacher up with a class where scores will not show growth

    Unity slugs , please stop lying to your members. They see through you!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why doesnt anyone use the case Elentuck v Green? Observations have no facts, therefore they can only be used in a limited way.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome. Irrelevant and abusive comments will be deleted, as will all commercial links. Currently, comment moderation is on, so if your comment doesn't appear it is because I haven't gotten to it yet. (Don't know how to do that from my cell phone.)