tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post257218111392128015..comments2024-03-26T11:07:03.496-04:00Comments on Ed Notes Online: Does the UFT Wish Tenure Would Go Away While Hoping the Taylor Law Stays for a Lifetime?ed notes onlinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15018047869059226777noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post-27712459599687880802012-08-17T10:30:58.483-04:002012-08-17T10:30:58.483-04:00I realize this is a sensitive issue, because HOPE ...I realize this is a sensitive issue, because HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL. But guess what? There's no hope NYC teachers can get their tenure back unless they do something about it, SOON!<br /><br />At this moment, tenure in NYC is just an issue because tenure (the extensive procedural protections of NYS Education Law § 3020-a) was dismantled for principals and administrators in 2000 through an agreement with their union and the addition of Subdivision (3) to NYS Education Law § 3020, and for teachers the enabling legislation was enacted in August 2006 with the addition of § 3020(4)(a) which eliminated § 3020 (1) except for one phrase: "FOR JUST CAUSE". § 3020 (1) is the real tenure, still operative for NYS but not for NYC. § 3020-a simply outlines the disciplinary procedures. NYC teachers should finally realize that the extensive protections of § 3020-a are no longer available to them because NYS Education Law § 3020 (1) is no longer operational for them, so what part of tenure is still available?<br /><br />It is simply wrong for the UFT to dismantle tenure without notice to teachers (who are public employees) and then continue deceiving the members of the bargaining unit. For example, in October 2005, NYC teachers were tricked into ratifying the 2003-2007 CBA with promises of financial gain but without notifying them that the UFT would soon go up to Albany (see MOA dated November 28, 2005) to push, along with the DOE, the enactment of NYS Education Law § 3020(4)(a), eliminating for NYC teachers only the protection of 3020(1) and establishing that the CBA can replace the disciplinary procedures of NYS Education Law § 3020-a. In addition, the UFT negotiated the 2007-2009 CBA that sealed the fate of NYC teachers not in 2007 but a year before, on November 18, 2006. See newspapers. <br /><br />In 2009, the New York City Law Department responded in a legal document I have cited before that "plaintiffs cannot establish their entitlement to the procedures set forth in § 3020(a)" [sic]. The New York City Law Department should have responded as follows: "After the enactment of NYS Education Law § 3020 (4) (a) NYC teachers have no tenure".<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post-48092139671841436362012-08-17T10:22:10.494-04:002012-08-17T10:22:10.494-04:00 Thanks for the info James. I agree with your post... Thanks for the info James. I agree with your post. However, I am still glad that I have tenure due to the fact that tenure provides a certain level of protection against retaliation for political affiliations and or beliefs. There are many vindictive administrators out there who would love to get rid of tenured teachers for no other reason than they are politically active and vocal. Are you going to run for UFT president again? (I voted for you on the ICE ticket during the last election) Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post-32279330434258896842012-08-17T09:51:44.212-04:002012-08-17T09:51:44.212-04:00Tenure gives you the right to a hearing before dis...Tenure gives you the right to a hearing before dismissal. If the state removes it that covers everyone unless the law grandfathers people in. But why would they do this when the very idea of getting rid of tenure is for them to remove higher priced senior teachers? For newbies as we are pointing out they don't even have to change the law -- just keep extending most people year after year. For older people, just make student performance a factor allowing them to fire you. So the idea of tenure can be worked around without a law and we are saying that the UFT is complicit in this move by agreeing to using data to eval tchrs even if 20 or 40%.ed notes onlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15018047869059226777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post-14996830648672169282012-08-17T08:57:39.098-04:002012-08-17T08:57:39.098-04:00Question: If New York State "officially"...Question: If New York State "officially" got rid of tenure by eliminating it from the law, would teachers who already have it be grandfathered in with it? My understanding is that some cities/states have had tenure laws eliminated but teachers who already had it get to keep it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33431390.post-31406364507478949482012-08-17T07:31:45.190-04:002012-08-17T07:31:45.190-04:00Tenure has been slowly chipped away at by the UFT,...Tenure has been slowly chipped away at by the UFT, NYSUT, the state and DOE. It is at the point where tenure will soon not mean much more than a two year delay when administration goes after a teacher. Teachers will not have much of a hearing in the end under the new evaluation system. If and when that system goes into effect, it will be much easier to get rid of us, whether we are good or bad. I have written about this on the ICEUFT blog for some time now.James Eternohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13578647381229034792noreply@blogger.com