ABC Candidates will hold leadership feet to the fire/ AMY ARUNDELL: Why I Am Running for UFT President

I attended a tribute to the late great labor organizer Jane McAlevey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_McAlevey) last night at the CUNY grad center and was inspired. But her story and history got me to thinking about Amy Arundell and how she was buried - her choice - inside a non-organizing union model for 20 years. 

Has Amy been a caterpillar waiting to burst out into a butterfly who will reform the UFT and allow it to reach its potential?

Amy flanked by Steve Swieciki and Leah Lin, all tossed out of Unity. Steve and Lia are chapter leaders in a high school and elementary school respectively. Steve and Lia are running for VPs of their respective divisions.

I ask people who question the Amy Arundell candidacy which candidate do they think is best equipped to run the UFT and even the anti-Amy people pause - and admit she knows the inside and out of the UFT machinery and would be in a position to handle it -- but also to know best what needs to remain in place and what needs reform. I'm not one of those people who want to toss the baby with the bathwater. 

But then they ask - but what if she's new boss same as the old boss? What if she is gaslighting you all? Even her most ardent critics admit she is super smart. One told me she is smarter than all of us and she still holds the same ideas and would keep the Unity machine intact, only with her in charge.

Well I certainly have faced down with Amy over the years and she is a touch cookie to argue with. She is one tough cookie in many ways and after getting to know her a bit over the past few months I see she has leadership skills that have been thwarted inside the Unity machine. When we see so many in the union, even oppo people, be like marshmallows who complain about being harmed because someone spoke to them in a loud voice and who melt at the slightest heat, one refrain I hear is "What will they do if they have to negotiate a contract with the awful and often nasty people at the DOE?" 

So I want feisty and even nasty - when its directed at the right places. 

One tough cookie is fine for me.

But if Amy resists calls for change and turning the UFT into an organizing model union, my response is we first try to pressure her and if we see stalling, we kick her out. 

And we have had no better chance of kicking out a union president we don't like than now due to the weakening of Unity caucus. I do not want to see any caucus be dominant again - even an oppo one. I like checks and balances. The ABC adcom is designed to have people on there who will never be a rubber stamp. The same with the ABC executive board slate. We have long and short time pains in the ass on there -- no rubber stamps with this crowd. 

What worries me about caucuses choosing the candidates is that these are often loyalists who will be rubber stamps if they win. 

If you examine the caucus led slates they are loaded with caucus loyalists. ABC is different. Many of us are just meeting each other -- it is an eclectic collection of people, some who have been in caucuses and either left or were purged for daring to disagree. Want to talk about new boss, same as the old boss? I've seen dangerous Unity-like tendencies including censorship and attempts to ice out those who don't go along with the majority. 

Believe me, if Amy strays she will hear it from me and others. ABC is not a "loyal to Amy" group.

But it says something when you get attacks from both Unity and the other groups running against Unity. You must be doing something right. Not only Amy, but ABC has come under attack from all angles. Makes us feel good about our organizing efforts. And it is all about organizing. ABC did not go into this thinking, "Let's win and then organize." 

No, ABC went into this to use the election process as an organizing tool -- one difference from the caucus models which use their caucuses to organize, which one would hope they are doing all the time instead of just for elections. The issue I have with that model is that it has not bore many results. Now you might say look at RA winning --- well they had a boost from Marianne. And the fix Para Pay victory was not from a caucus but independent actions, which is why FPP is with ABC. The caucus model means a steering committee choosing the candidates in closed meetings. While ABC has been also holding closed meetings, those meetings have opened up to new voices as they expressed interest.

I heard time and again last night at the McAlevey event that Jane hated sectarianism and thought sectarians were the biggest obstacle to union organizing. And ABC is non-sectarian. 

Here is Amy's statement.

 

A BETTER CONTRACT - UFT MEMBERS

AMY ARUNDELL: Why I Am Running for UFT President

Amy shares her story. Together we will build our collective power to deliver A BETTER CONTRACT with the City of New York and A BETTER social contract with union leadership.

Feb 18, 2025

 

 

For 34 years, I have been a part of the New York City public school system. I was a middle school teacher, delegate, and chapter leader in one Bronx school. I became a Teacher Center specialist in another. 

Never, during all this time, did I imagine that I would be in this position: running for UFT President. The culture of the UFT has long been one where leadership handpicks their successors, deciding who they believe should be the next to carry the mantle, and for years, I played by those rules, trusting that this process served the best interests of our members and that the best, brightest, and most committed to our work as a union would rise to positions of leadership.

Times have changed, our school system has evolved, and our union must evolve as well. More and more members are expressing deep dissatisfaction with the direction of our union. Decisions are being made that I can no longer stand behind. It has become increasingly difficult to look my fellow members in the eye and tell them that what’s happening is good for them because it isn’t. These decisions are not the result of listening to members and then gathering our experts and specialists and making decisions consistent with union values, and the interests of the members and their students. More often than not, the most important decisions are made by only a few, behind closed doors.

The recent election losses in the retiree and paraprofessional chapter elections were not a result of flashy slate names or strategic maneuvering, they were a direct response to the growing frustration among our members. The message is clear, the status quo is failing us.

Our union should be the beacon of fairness, inclusion, and strength. Instead, we have reached a point where sexism, harassment, and bullying have tainted our internal culture. Morale is at an all-time low. I’ve been around long enough to remember when we could come together, debate and discuss issues openly, and leave the room knowing we had made the best decision for our members and the union as a whole. Those spaces and that culture no longer exist under the current leadership. I’ve tried, others have tried but today, questioning decisions can end careers, and there are far too many examples of this reality. I refuse to silence my own principles and beliefs to campaign for anyone who perpetuates this type of leadership and these union values.

My candidacy is not about serving any particular caucus or ideology, it is about serving our members in the way they deserve and that furthers the cause of public education. Now that I have been ‘expelled’ from my former caucus, I stand as the only candidate who is beholden to no faction. My allegiance is to the educators, teachers, paraprofessionals, school-related professionals and retirees who make our union strong and to the students who we are all responsible for educating.

These values are not the only thing that make me the right person to serve as UFT president in this critical moment; I am qualified, experienced, and connected. I have served in a variety of roles, both as an educator in schools and as a union representative.

In my first year of teaching, I remember celebrating when the union negotiated that our lesson plans were no longer required to be collected. It changed my professional life. I was a chapter leader when the SBO process became a source of leverage for my chapter to have a voice in how our school was organized. I was a teacher center specialist in a school when the first 100 minutes were added to the school day and I was tasked with making those minutes as relevant and helpful to our school community as possible, despite our membership’s obvious unease with the additional time.

As a UFT staffer, I implemented the 2005 contract. I supported pedagogues in the ATR pool and advocated for them. I provided support to members in using the new transfer system. I educated people about the power of the SBO process and how to interpret school budgets. I helped hundreds of people with leaves and staffing issues. I am very proud of that work. I was part of the negotiating team on evaluation, and learned a lot about what members want and what others think is best for them. I tried to help members see the power in what we negotiated, and also acknowledged that what we negotiated did not achieve our goals. I was the union point person for the creation of teacher leader roles, and visited the many schools that implemented these roles. I was inspired to see what teachers can do when given the opportunity. I know many schools that have benefited from those roles.

Then, I became the Queens Borough Representative and learned how out of touch our central UFT representatives could be. Hundreds of people invited me into their lives and their schools, and we made amazing things happen. It was by far the role I loved the most and it allowed me to connect to members and students in deep, new, and meaningful ways.

I have a vision for our union. A union that is strategic about building power, that prioritizes members and their students above DOE management or city government desires. We build power by organizing and being connected to members above all else. That is why the leadership of ABC will fight tirelessly with our members for better working conditions, fair salary increases, and an end to the reckless practice of surrendering our healthcare benefits in exchange for inadequate compensation increases.

It’s time to reclaim our union. It’s time to have leadership that listens, respects, and truly advocates for its members, not one that demands blind loyalty and is deaf to their core needs. Together, we can restore integrity, transparency, and strength to the UFT. I ask for your support, not just for me, but for the future of our union and the dignity of its members and the future of the students we serve.

---

Thanks for reading A BETTER CONTRACT - UFT MEMBERS! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

 

Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism

Will posting this get me called a self-hating Jew? Not the first time I bet. 

 

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism is a tool to identify, confront and raise awareness about antisemitism as it manifests in countries around the world today. It includes a preamble, definition, and a set of 15 guidelines that provide detailed guidance for those seeking to recognize antisemitism in order to craft responses. It was developed by a group of scholars in the fields of Holocaust history, Jewish studies, and Middle East studies to meet what has become a growing challenge: providing clear guidance to identify and fight antisemitism while protecting free expression. Initially signed by 210 scholars, it has now around 370 signatories.

Preamble

We, the undersigned, present the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, the product of an initiative that originated in Jerusalem. We include in our number international scholars working in Antisemitism Studies and related fields, including Jewish, Holocaust, Israel, Palestine, and Middle East Studies. The text of the Declaration has benefited from consultation with legal scholars and members of civil society.

Inspired by the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the 1969 Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the 2000 Declaration of the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust, and the 2005 United Nations Resolution on Holocaust Remembrance, we hold that while antisemitism has certain distinctive features, the fight against it is inseparable from the overall fight against all forms of racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, and gender discrimination.

Conscious of the historical persecution of Jews throughout history and of the universal lessons of the Holocaust, and viewing with alarm the reassertion of antisemitism by groups that mobilize hatred and violence in politics, society, and on the internet, we seek to provide a usable, concise, and historically-informed core definition of antisemitism with a set of guidelines.

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism responds to “the IHRA Definition,” the document that was adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2016. Because the IHRA Definition is unclear in key respects and widely open to different interpretations, it has caused confusion and generated controversy, hence weakening the fight against antisemitism. Noting that it calls itself “a working definition,” we have sought to improve on it by offering (a) a clearer core definition and (b) a coherent set of guidelines. We hope this will be helpful for monitoring and combating antisemitism, as well as for educational purposes. We propose our non-legally binding Declaration as an alternative to the IHRA Definition. Institutions that have already adopted the IHRA Definition can use our text as a tool for interpreting it.

The IHRA Definition includes 11 “examples” of antisemitism, 7 of which focus on the State of Israel. While this puts undue emphasis on one arena, there is a widely-felt need for clarity on the limits of legitimate political speech and action concerning Zionism, Israel, and Palestine. Our aim is twofold: (1) to strengthen the fight against antisemitism by clarifying what it is and how it is manifested, (2) to protect a space for an open debate about the vexed question of the future of Israel/Palestine. We do not all share the same political views and we are not seeking to promote a partisan political agenda. Determining that a controversial view or action is not antisemitic implies neither that we endorse it nor that we do not.

The guidelines that focus on Israel-Palestine (numbers 6 to 15) should be taken together. In general, when applying the guidelines each should be read in the light of the others and always with a view to context. Context can include the intention behind an utterance, or a pattern of speech over time, or even the identity of the speaker, especially when the subject is Israel or Zionism. So, for example, hostility to Israel could be an expression of an antisemitic animus, or it could be a reaction to a human rights violation, or it could be the emotion that a Palestinian person feels on account of their experience at the hands of the State. In short, judgement and sensitivity are needed in applying these guidelines to concrete situations.

Definition

Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish).

Guidelines

A. General

1. It is racist to essentialize (treat a character trait as inherent) or to make sweeping negative generalizations about a given population. What is true of racism in general is true of antisemitism in particular.
2. What is particular in classic antisemitism is the idea that Jews are linked to the forces of evil. This stands at the core of many anti-Jewish fantasies, such as the idea of a Jewish conspiracy in which “the Jews” possess hidden power that they use to promote their own collective agenda at the expense of other people. This linkage between Jews and evil continues in the present: in the fantasy that “the Jews” control governments with a “hidden hand,” that they own the banks, control the media, act as “a state within a state,” and are responsible for spreading disease (such as Covid-19). All these features can be instrumentalized by different (and even antagonistic) political causes.
3. Antisemitism can be manifested in words, visual images, and deeds. Examples of antisemitic words include utterances that all Jews are wealthy, inherently stingy, or unpatriotic. In antisemitic caricatures, Jews are often depicted as grotesque, with big noses and associated with wealth. Examples of antisemitic deeds are: assaulting someone because she or he is Jewish, attacking a synagogue, daubing swastikas on Jewish graves, or refusing to hire or promote people because they are Jewish.
4. Antisemitism can be direct or indirect, explicit or coded. For example, “The Rothschilds control the world” is a coded statement about the alleged power of “the Jews” over banks and international finance. Similarly, portraying Israel as the ultimate evil or grossly exaggerating its actual influence can be a coded way of racializing and stigmatizing Jews. In many cases, identifying coded speech is a matter of context and judgement, taking account of these guidelines.
5. Denying or minimizing the Holocaust by claiming that the deliberate Nazi genocide of the Jews did not take place, or that there were no extermination camps or gas chambers, or that the number of victims was a fraction of the actual total, is antisemitic.

B. Israel and Palestine: examples that, on the face of it, are antisemitic

6. Applying the symbols, images and negative stereotypes of classical antisemitism (see guidelines 2 and 3) to the State of Israel.
7. Holding Jews collectively responsible for Israel’s conduct or treating Jews, simply because they are Jewish, as agents of Israel.
8. Requiring people, because they are Jewish, publicly to condemn Israel or Zionism (for example, at a political meeting).
9. Assuming that non-Israeli Jews, simply because they are Jews, are necessarily more loyal to Israel than to their own countries.
10. Denying the right of Jews in the State of Israel to exist and flourish, collectively and individually, as Jews, in accordance with the principle of equality.

C. Israel and Palestine: examples that, on the face of it, are not antisemitic

• (whether or not one approves of the view or action)

11. Supporting the Palestinian demand for justice and the full grant of their political, national, civil and human rights, as encapsulated in international law.
12. Criticizing or opposing Zionism as a form of nationalism, or arguing for a variety of constitutional arrangements for Jews and Palestinians in the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. It is not antisemitic to support arrangements that accord full equality to all inhabitants “between the river and the sea,” whether in two states, a binational state, unitary democratic state, federal state, or in whatever form.
13. Evidence-based criticism of Israel as a state. This includes its institutions and founding principles. It also includes its policies and practices, domestic and abroad, such as the conduct of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, the role Israel plays in the region, or any other way in which, as a state, it influences events in the world. It is not antisemitic to point out systematic racial discrimination. In general, the same norms of debate that apply to other states and to other conflicts over national self-determination apply in the case of Israel and Palestine. Thus, even if contentious, it is not antisemitic, in and of itself, to compare Israel with other historical cases, including settler-colonialism or apartheid.
14. Boycott, divestment and sanctions are commonplace, non-violent forms of political protest against states. In the Israeli case they are not, in and of themselves, antisemitic.
15. Political speech does not have to be measured, proportional, tempered, or reasonable to be protected under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and other human rights instruments. Criticism that some may see as excessive or contentious, or as reflecting a “double standard,” is not, in and of itself, antisemitic. In general, the line between antisemitic and non-antisemitic speech is different from the line between unreasonable and reasonable speech.

 For list of signatories:

https://jerusalemdeclaration.org

Welcome Ami Amy for UFT President

So we had the big reveal of the ABC officer slate last night at a meeting that had 900 register and more than half show up which breaks even out own mold of attendance at ABC events.

I'm a bit busy today with petitions so won't go into too much detail. After each of the candidates spoke, there was an intense Q and A and my faith in Amy increased by the way she handled them. She's been a candidate for only 2 days and I already see her growth.

She came under attack by what were clearly Unity trolls and dealt with it well.

And even after the meeting ended officially we were there until 10PM. Here is the leaflet for today

 

ABC Moves to the Next Step - Announcements of candidates and Petitioning - and you can help

Sunday - halftime - Feb. 9

ABC is following up on its successful zoom organizing events with a meet the candidates event this Tuesday at 7PM. Last Tuesday over 100 people attended the elementary school zoom focused on issues specifically related to that oft neglected division. 

This Tuesday, the entire officer slate will be announced. Come on down. rsvp.uftmembers.org.

We can use your help in petitioning and also you can run with ABC for AFT/NYSUT positions. Email me offline or leave a comment.

I am pretty happy with  the adcom ABC candidates - some old, some new, some borrowed, no one is blue. We've also seen a similar mix with the executive board candidates. I'm excited about the prospects of a diverse exec bd and adcom where we've seen the outcome of 60 years of loyalty to the ruling Unity caucus. That is why ABC is trying not to be a caucus but a collection of individuals. And open to all with no loyalty oaths. You can be in a caucus and also be part of ABC.

I've come under attack for having a vision on how to win and why I don't want to be tied down and forced to put my vision through multiple caucus filters and a closed steering committee.

 

I love the free way ABC has been operating - fits my nature of least restrictive environment. Sort of the way I tried to teach. I had times of an unstructured classroom and rather than chaos I saw amazing interactions between my kids who loved some freedom and flourished socially. 

Here is a group of people from a wide variety of interests, many who have only met recently, coming together and getting to know each other and having fun while doing it.

The loose structure of ABC - a floating group of people that keeps expanding - really bothers the structure people. How can you make decisions without a steering committee or no defined leaders? You know what's interesting? I've seen people show up in an open environment and show leadership and most importantly, be allowed to do so.

 

Somehow since November decisions have been made and carried out effectively and with wide outreach. Has it been perfect? What is? The process seems to me the most democratic internally I've seen yet. There is no formal steering committee but instead a batch of working groups and those groups keep expanding with new people. 

I love the process and the give and take and also the fun people seem to be having. Arthur, another old war horse like me and someone who often skipped meetings as boring, has been totally invested with this group. 

And the group is diverse in the sense that it melds a bunch of Unity expats with people from other caucuses, independents and newbies. That I did not know so many of these candidates before and still don't know many, is refreshing.

 

And very exciting to work with so many new people, most half my age. I'm getting a real picture of what is happening in the schools from wide ranging discussions. And building a slate through personal contacts and extending the network. That was our vision - not to build a slate by tapping the usual suspects in the caucuses but to use the campaign to build a slate with newly involved people, though caucus people have always been welcome. The fact I do not know so many of the people signing up to run is a good thing.

My aim since last March has been to focus on winning and not to mock any group that might vote for us. The votes are in the schools and like banks, that's where we have to go, not by stuffing mail boxes as in the past which yielded few results or even spend money on sending mailers - which some did last time with little results.

It's one on one conversations with people at the school level and that will take deep school penetration, a major goal of the ABC campaign and I'm seeing early signs of new schools coming on board. Trying to create a buzz through social media that penetrates is another tactic. How deep will this penetration go? Building a slate and an election campaign while flying the plane with lots of people chipping in. Votes in May will tell. 

Whatever level it does go, the process helps build a network that will outlast this election. Unity has a deep network into the schools, especially in the elem level which they win by the biggest margin. There are 34,000 elem teachers and last time in 2022 I believe about 7k voted. So there are a lot of potential votes to pick up. Using elements of the Unity network, which is one of the goals of ABC, to reach people, should not be mocked.

This was the original goal from way back in August for many of us was reaching out and opening the process to more people than the usual suspects. 

 

It is also a formula for winning.

 

Recent Ed Notes Posts:

ABC - Able, Buttkicking, Creative Running To Win Against Unity - Attend Feb. 11 Meet the Candidates - Arthur on How ABC Will Run the UFT

UFT Election Winning Strategy - As Simple as ABC - Go Where the Votes Are and Meet the Candidates on Feb. 11

Elections Count: Fix Para Pay Win Forces Mulgrew to Call for Non-Pensionable 10K Bonus

 

ABC - Able, Buttkicking, Creative Running To Win Against Unity - Attend Feb. 11 Meet the Candidates - Arthur on How ABC Will Run the UFT

 There were people who did not believe ABC could organize a slate for the election. Come to the Feb. 11 meet the candidates to find out.

ABC is following up on its successful zoom organizing events with a meet the candidates event this Tuesday at 7PM. Last Tuesday over 100 people attended the elementary school zoom focused on issues specifically related to that oft neglected division.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today's piece by Arthur delves into some detail on how ABC would run the union. It is an important piece and here are a few excerpts.

 

• ABC knows union power comes from members. It’s imperative we work toward member empowerment. We’re in this together. We stand together, we fight together, and we win together. Our first message is for Michael Mulgrew:

• We don’t work for union leaders—union leaders work for us.

• When ABC wins, we will no longer use our citywide union power as a vehicle to demean health insurance. Moving backward will no longer be a priority for the United Federation of Teachers (let alone something we seek to drag our brother and sister unionists into). As far as we’re concerned, organizing to make things worse is anti-union.
• When members call UFT, they don’t want to press buttons and hope to get connected to someone. Nor do they want to be on hold for 20 minutes. ABC believes it’s our job to be responsive to member needs. Like you, we hate hearing, “Your call is important to us,” particularly when a non-response indicates otherwise. When you call UFT, you will speak to a living, breathing person, not a pre-recorded, computer-driven robot.  
• ABC will actively support legislation that retains the health care members have been promised in retirement. There are currently bills to protect retirees in both city and state legislatures. We will not only lobby for their passage, but we will also support the organizations that brought them. We will do the same for legislation that protects in service members.
• When ABC wins, UFT boots on the ground will mean members actually showing up to work for and demand what we want and need. These days, it amounts to a dozen paid staffers showing up here or there. Years of Unity indifference to members have resulted in years of member indifference to union. That won’t happen immediately, but needs to change.
• For really important issues, like money and health care, we will show up en masse and let people know who we are and what we demand. We will grow our union into the activist organization we need to be. Again, when papers talk of the “powerful teachers union,” it needs to mean something.
• We will use union resources, including COPE, union lawyers, and UFT boots on the ground to support our causes.

• The caucus model has failed us, and continues to fail us.

• Unity has misled and betrayed us for years. They do this as though it’s their birthright, and barely bother to hide it anymore. They think they own our union hall, and if anyone else finds their way in, they build literal walls around them.
• We’ve had 60 years of minority rule and outlandish palace intrigue. ABC has a better vision.
• We are not a caucus, and will not demand loyalty to caucus. We represent UFT members, not some pre-determined philosophy that may or may not be representative. Member voice will guide us as we move forward.
• We are not indulging in some last-gasp attempt to rationalize our existence. We are not a stalking horse for some mysterious, arcane philosophy. We don’t require an elite and self-indulgent steering committee controlling everything and everyone. We formed our platform by surveying members, and we’ll continue doing that as we move forward.
• As UFT members, we’re looking to wake up the sleeping giant that is our great union, the United Federation of Teachers. That means empowerment and inclusion, not lip service and ignoring those who elected and worked with us.

Read the entire piece

Easy as ABC

Let's amplify member voice.

Arthur Goldstein

Feb 07, 2025

Elementary School Organizing Zoom Call for A BETTER CONTRACT, Tuesday, February 4 at 7 PM

Elementary school has been a relative strength for Unity Caucus in UFT elections. In 2022, UFC received about 33%, and that was its highest percentage in a long time and while the numbers didn't change for the oppo since 2016, Unity dropped by over 1000. ABC is trying a different approach for the elementary schools and trying to create a network in new outposts. An elementary committee has been formed and is holding an event. If you are in an elementary school or know someone register here: tinyurl.com/abcuftes.

A special shout out to our hardworking Elementary School educators!

You’re invited to our ES Organizing Zoom Call to join us in the fight for A BETTER CONTRACT.  It will take place on Tuesday, February 4 at 7 PM, via Zoom.

To register use the QR code or go to: tinyurl.com/abcuftes

We will discuss the critical issues in elementary schools today, including working conditions such as micromanagement, over-testing, the freedom to teach, scripted curriculum, being paid for our time and more!

With 2025 kicking into high gear, it’s time to get back to it! Our union proud, union strong, grassroots movement of working educators and retirees continues to grow and capture the imagination and heart of our beloved union.

Tell all of your colleagues, also. We hope to see you there!

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14rcV2NVHU/?mibextid=wwXIfr 

 

My analysis from the 2022 elections is relevant:

we missed a big opportunity as Unity dropped under 5k and we didn't even match 2016. I thought UFC had more outreach in elementary but if we did the GOTV didn't work. I got indications early on with the lack of contention in UFC by the caucuses for Elem Ex bd positions that there was not a sense of winning and when we struggled with petitions early on in that division, I pretty much gave up on winning this division.
34K elem ballots were sent out -- a lot of places to mine in the future. The oppos has a lot of work to do in elementary school. My suggestion: Choose a few key districts where UFC people have decent elem numbers and expand their networks with a local outreach program. Otherwise 2025 will be the same.

So there is a need for a new strategy to tap into those 34k potential voters. I do not believe the oppo can win whether one or two slates without reaching deep into the elementary schools where the bulk of teachers are.

In this chart note the 20 year drop in Unity votes.

Elections Count: Fix Para Pay Win Forces Mulgrew to Call for Non-Pensionable 10K Bonus

The dire need of paras who need a living wage is primal here. Then add working 2 or 3 jobs just to make ends meet. We organize to see this concept of a plan come to fruition but can also recognize it’s a band aid over the hemorrhaging.

Take the money and vote them out! -- Paras react to UFT/Unity 10K bonus plan

Expect this proposed concept of a plan to be the first motion in the February DA. Mulgrew will act like he’s looking around the room and magically call on John Kamps to motivate it...

Saturday, Feb. 1, 2025

Clearly, in response to the big Fix Para Pay win in the chapter election last June, fear has gripped Mulgrew and the Unity Caucus as they desperately try to move the 27K para unit away from voting for the ABC slate, aligned with the Fix Para Pay group, by offering a package of goodies to paras. 

You see, elections do have consequences because we know from decades of history of Unity not fighting to fix para pay, we wouldn't otherwise be seeing this move. Will paras be fooled less than two years after the most recent contract neglected to fix para pay or even make an attempt to do so? The joke is the Unity criticism of the 3% pattern bargaining which they used to browbeat people into voting for the 2023 contract. 

Of course some Unity trolls are on the attack, claiming the election had nothing to do with the UFT blitz of offering goodies. Sure.

While I have supported legal initiatives to improve conditions, the bottom line is that only the contract protects us. An example I often refer to was a city council law that reduced class size below the contract for grades 1-3 in the early 90s but was scrapped by Bloomberg. And the current class size state law which is not being enforced. At the time I railed against the reliance on city council as only temporary solutions. People will point to the contract not being enforced but when it comes to salary and class size, there is compliance.

Of course the 10k will not be pensionable as we've seen the UFT increasingly rely on non-pensionable bonuses as a way to buy votes.

Unity has shown a pattern since losing the retiree and para elections so badly by reversing themselves try to win back these units, both large blocks of UFT members whose votes will be crucial to Unity's winning the election this May. 

One of the funniest things retirees received yesterday from Mulgrew was this missive:

We are increasing your optional rider reimbursement by $60 - but he leaves out that they raised the monthly charge for the optional rider by $30 which comes to $360 a year - so he thinks people are so stupid not to notice that he is giving back $60 while we pay $300 more?

Marie Waunsnock of Fix Para Pay in their press release exposes the Unity gameplan:

“This isn’t a victory—it’s a distraction,” said Marie Wausnock, UFT Paraprofessional Executive Board Member and founder of Fix Para Pay. “If the city has money now, why didn’t we get real raises in our contract? Why were paras shut out of negotiations? We won’t be silenced with one-time bonuses that do nothing for our future.”

The so-called solution:
    •    Is not guaranteed—the bill hasn’t been written, introduced, or passed.
    •    Was made without consulting elected para representatives.
    •    Fails to address ongoing issues like inadequate pensions, LODI access, and fair longevity pay.

“This is a pattern,” Wausnock added. “Mulgrew ignored retirees until they voted out his handpicked candidate. He ignored members struggling with healthcare costs until it became a liability. Now, he’s scrambling to buy para votes after years of neglect.”

LODI - Line of Duty Injury protection is a prime aim of the paras. 

ABC is running a strong slate of paras for the UFT election. Meet some of them and the rest of the slate on Feb. 11. You can RSVP, here.

UFT Election Winning Strategy - As Simple as ABC - Go Where the Votes Are and Meet the Candidates on Feb. 11

When bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robs banks he answered: Because that's where the money is.

I apply the same logic in response regarding UFT elections. I don't put down getting votes from anywhere -- The aim is to win and for those who don't realize --

If you really want to win go where the votes are. 

 

Otherwise you are running not to win, but to make a point. 

\

Now I do see people turning their noses up at some voters -- like Unity defectors or the non-lock step ideologues or heaven forbid, the potential 30-35% UFT Trump voters.  If you turn up your nose at potential voters, you don't want to win.

Saturday, Jan. 26, 2025

 

Many critics who attack me for daring to think outside the box, assume that if two slates run in the UFT election, it is impossible to beat Unity. 

 

“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Sherlock Holmes

 

So let's look at how to to turn the impossible into the improbable into the possible: A win for ABC.

 

It may seem "improbable" for ABC to win, but I believe a win is impossible for ARISE in a 3-slate race. Thus, only a vote for ABC can turn the improbable into the possible and Sherlock says that must be the truth. 

Elementary, my dear Watson.

And on Feb. 11 you can meet the ABC candidates. http://rsvp.uftmembers.org

  

Unity Must Go in order to win

I've been accused of changing positions in mid-stream. I have always been in favor of one slate to challenge Unity. I also believed that we can't win unless we weaken Unity at its core -- in the schools where they have an army of chapter leaders and influencers, especially in the elementary schools where there are 36 thousand potential voters and Unity always wins big. (66% in 2022).

Going back to the late 90s and looking at a weak and ineffectual opposition back then, I decided that winning over people in Unity would be essential to winning an election and I initially aimed Ed Notes at appealing to Unity people who wanted change in the union. And I did get an audience. But the minute I made even the mildest criticism of the new leadership under Randi, I lost them. So I switched into full-blown oppo mode.  Now I see the first real opportunity for a permanent break in Unity at the in-service level to go along with the break in the retiree and para chapters.

 

In the past elections, winning a sliver, the high schools and maybe the middle schools was the realistic goal. But conditions have changed and I'm not interested in slivers. The idea of winning the entire enchilada is what has gotten people so excited. They seem to take winning for granted. I don't take anything for granted.

 

And conditions have certainly changed since the 2022 elections when every voice of the opposition was involved in United for Change.

 

I change due to changing conditions. And the numbers for UFC were not great. Somehow people think that the current version of UFC, a weakened ARISE - with 3 caucuses involved - two of which are no stronger than they were in 2022 - would win if they were the only ones running because the third caucus, RA, seems so much stronger based on its big win last June. My claim is that RA as an organizing group of 11, is not really stronger than it was in 2022 and in terms of a general UFT election it has the same limited direct outreach. RA won 63% due to the influx of voters, many from Unity, and many coming from Marianne's supporters. Many Unity voters may just drift back in a general election.

 

As a member of the RA org committee of 11, I was the lone dissenter from joining this coalition and urged RA to stay neutral, and could play a mediator role. MORE and New Action needed RA to be part of the coalition as a way to sell a winning strategy because both of them, which aim at the in-service people, understand they have failed to attract a wide enough following with in-service people to win without the retirees. My position has been that the oppo have opposed the impact of retirees on elections for decades but now are switching course in mid-stream and that to win an election loaded with retirees would be destabilizing and further alienate the in-service where a majority are on Tier 6. How do they feel about being led by people who are on Tier 1, as ARISE is offering?

I try not to stick with a pattern of a losing strategy. In 2022 I believed in all caucuses and non-caucuses should get together in United for Change. And the outcomes of that effort was disappointing, to the point I have been willing to look at alternate ideas. I am still for one slate, but not the same kind of election management under caucus guidance, like UFC was. Instead I believe in one slate under a broad based and group of individuals capable of growth from the ground up, whether people are in a caucus or not --- but not to allow a small group of people to make the basic decisions -- call it a steering committee -- instead to open up the process to the broader based UFT membership. In other words, we don't just want your vote in May, we want you involved from the ground up in the entire process.

 

So let's go back to the opening question: where are the votes? 

Certainly retirees where 39% return ballots and the recent flip from Unity in the RTC election is major. Clearly, many former Unity voters flipped over the Medicare issue and voted for RA. Will that flip hold for a general election? While those former Unity voters may have been pissed off enough at Mulgrew and Tom Murphy's role to vote them out, are they willing to turn over the entire union to a group consisting of RA, New Action and MORE, with MORE being the dominant player in this group? Frankly, I don't think so.

But given another alternative that includes a number of people who have left Unity, these voters may feel they have another place to go rather than go back to Unity. It's as simple as ABC.

Where else can we find votes? Remember the Para election where Fix Para Pay won 75% in an admittedly low turnout vote in a para chapter that has 27k potential voters? Unity has noticed and is suddenly showing interest in making paras welcome, though fixing their pay is not on their agenda. But there is a group that is very committed to fighting for para pay and to fight for other things issues they want - like ILOD - Injury in Line of Duty protection and other issues beyond pay like some prep time. Can the para unit be energized to vote in this election and where are those votes likely to go? It's as simple as ABC.

Now how about the disaffected anti-Mulgrew Unity Caucus people? I don't mean the full-time staff who are clinging to their jobs, but the rank and file Unity people who are often chapter leaders, some with after school jobs? How many potential votes do they offer? The important issue in this case is can they bring their staffs and other Unity friends along with them, which could add up to thousands of votes? While there's no way to tell since most Unity are silent (though sending private encouragement), there are underground indications of a growing revolt, that if it catches on, will make a major dent in the Unity votes. And we have been seeing an erosion of Unity votes over the past elections. But Unity voters will not go to a MORE tinged group. It's as simple as ABC.

How about retirees? The assumption since June was that the same massive vote would go to Retiree Advocate. But they've aligned with MORE, leading to these comments on my last blog post:

John Q Teacher: I thought that RA was Mariannes's baby? Why would she abandon it and secretly endorse ABC? I'm confused. I really wish she would speak publicly about where she stands on who she is supporting.  

 

Anon: This shit is just too complicated to follow. I was a retiree. I will vote for whoever Marianne recommends. Stick that up your ass, Mr. Mulgrew.

Marianne has clearly leaned toward ABC, and made reference to ABC in public comments, sparking the Unity attacks on her. So where will her followers go? It's as simple as ABC.

Now, let's look at the vast unknown -- the 80% of working UFT members who don't vote. This is the territory that both Unity and the caucuses, following the same formula in every election, have not been able to mine. Why would they be more successful this time? 

 

Can a new campaign paradigm make a dent in the 80% non-voters? Here I won't claim It's as simple as ABC because it hasn't been successful before, so let's call this an interesting premise, that if proven correct, will make it as simple as ABC.

 

What are these new tactics? I ain't saying just yet as many ideas are still in process, but turnouts for ABC events have been very promising. And email lists are growing. I will get deeper into the unique experience I've had working with ABC in future posts.

 

ABC has a chance to win in a 3 way race by draining Unity votes and winning new voters in the schools and old voters from the retirees. Whether it works or not, we will learn a lot.

For my money, a vote for any group other then ABC is a wasted vote.

Everyone is invited to run with ABC. Sign up here.

 

 

 

DA Chaos - Unity Goes Red-Scare Wilding In Dual Attacks on MORE Caucus and Arise - And also Aims Dart at Marianne

Mr. Welch: Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty, or your recklessness. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?...

Paranoia has struck deep into the hearts of our ostensible leaders. After suffering major losses in two elections, they are losing their shit all over the place....It's Witch Hunt Time for Unity!Get out your tin foil hats!   .... Arthur Goldstein

Al Shanker was a member of the Young Socialists.  The Unity red-baiting critique on the flier distributed at the Jan. 2025 DA saying “ARISE=DSA” is their usual tactic. That said, where was Unity’s outrage over outside influence when Bill Gates funded the E4E caucus? Or his failed interference that led to the mass closing of schools? Mulgrew’s got no problem with them.  But, a caucus that cares about working people? That simply won’t do for Mulgrew... Current NYC Teacher comment

The attack on DSA with current members elected to various offices is a naked political play to move the UFT to the right and to distract from the real issues - but also to pump up Unity Caucus members who might be straying

What a joke that leaflet was, though some are not taking it as a joke, but a genuine threat. Shanker and the founders of the UFT all came out of the Socialist party and a particular wing - the right wing anti-communist Social Democrats USA - SDUSA - the Max Schachtman acolytes -- Check the link to wikipedia for the full story. But here's an interesting rub:

Yetta Barsh Shachtman (1915–1996) was married to Max Shachtman and also held Marxist views. Barsh worked as the secretary of Albert Shanker, the president of the United Federation of Teachers.^[33] The money she earned from this job allowed Shachtman to focus on his political work.^[34] While working for Shanker, Barsh was responsible for the hiring of Sandra Feldman ^[35]

Yes. Future UFT President Sandra Feldman was recruited out of the Socialist Party into the UFT after one year of teaching. How's that for "outside" interference? And I'd bet Shanker was also recruited from somewhere.

 

Teaming this leaflet with the reso on outside interference that Unity sneaked into the New Motion period,  their usual manner of dishonesty, where Mulgrew makes believe he is looking around the audience and "accidentally" chooses the Unity CL of Murrow HS who acts like the reso wasn't planted by the leadership. Described by Arthur as:  

a very formally worded resolution about “union interference.” At first I thought I was mishearing, but I was not. The woman who brought the resolution refused to name which insidious forces were interfering. I’d bet she was talking about my friend Marianne Pizzitola and her group, NYC Retirees.

 Here is the reso (wow - got my scanner to work).

Some assumed it was aimed mainly at Marianne because her advocacy for retirees in the UFT was the difference maker in the big RTC win for RA. My guess is that without Marianne, RA would have garnered maybe 42-45% and Marianne helped bump that to 63%. So this was aimed at her and I suspect Unity will use some shenanigans in the election to attack A Better Contract, which she seems to be leaning to supporting. And coming from inside the UFT machine, they are most worried about ABC. 

 

So it was a surprise to see them also come out with a vicious Unity leaflet right out of the box and attack the MORE dominated ARISE, along with NAC, heavily loaded with retirees and RA, totally loaded with retirees, the group of caucuses running under the ARISE banner in the election, in such a vicious manner - so early in the election. I would have expected them to do it shortly before the ballots are sent out -- well, I guess they will again then.

 

Accompanying  the outsider reso with the Unity leaflet attacking DSA and MORE as somehow infiltrating the UFT, caused MORE's Peter Lamphere to see red and he called a point of order that Mulgrew shut down. Peter pointed out that every member of MORE was a member of the UFT, not an outsider.

Hell, I was a member of DSA for years, though less enamored now, as were UFT leadership types like Leo Casey, and the UFT has actually backed some DSA candidates and incumbents. In fact a strong candidate for mayor, 

Zohran Mamdani

is in DSA. Imagine the UFT, given a choice between Cuomo and Mamdani, will back Cuomo because of their 65 year history of vicious anti-communism and red-baiting. 

 

Some of you may remember the red-baiting sneak postcard attack on the ICE/TJC Presidential candidate Kit Wainer in the 2007 election. Here are some Ed Notes posts from those days if you want to dig deeper. I have a list of 60 years of their history of red-baiting to share at some point.

• Unity Propaganda Machine Treads in Dangerous Terri...
• Unity Uses Red-Baiting - Just Part of their MO
• Kit Wainer On the Non-Debate: Friday, March 2
• Red-baiting from New Action Supporter? You Decide 

 

Let me point out that despite the red-baiting attack by Unity - and I will give some credit to someone from New Action being critical of that attack, New Action still ran candidates on the Unity slate and won exec bd seats on the Unity line, and ran Weingarten as their presidential candidate. Talk about baggage.

I guess you can see the outside interference in the reso when accompanied with the Unity flyer as an attack on DSA and MORE. Some retiree groups who have personally benefited from the work Marianne has done are sniping at her for being too bossy and I even heard one tell me she is not really an organizer, just someone who goes to court. Really? 

 

I responded she has saved every one of us thousands of dollars and how is she not an organizer when she has tens of thousands of followers in multi municipal unions? I point to the retired fire fighter in my yoga class who high fives me about her. One leftist told me that Marianne has out organized the left and the Dem party and its subservient AFT/UFT/NYSUT by reaching deep into the working class and bringing people from many unions together, a leftist dream since the 30s. Marianne may have done something so unique in this country that people should do theses on her work.

 

I and many others knew this red-scare attack on MORE was going to come at some point. I would say knowing this attack was coming was a major reason the ABC faction wanted to run in the election without caucus attachment -- we argued with the caucuses that if we wanted to win we must try to minimize caucus baggage. RA won in June by focusing on one key issue. Unity did try to attach RA and Marianne to MORE but it didn't work.

 

For RA to tie itself to MORE and New Action, whose history includes a dozen years of supporting Unity and having key leaders being on the UFT payroll - in fact running Mulgrew as their presidential candidate in 2010 and 2013, so directly, is a mistake and will hurt the brand. 

 

But expect Unity to try to smear ABC the same way given that ABC is open to all points of view, so why not pick out one person and smear everyone? One reason ABC advocated individuals and not caucuses run in this election was to undermine these attacks, though stopping them entirely is not possible. And they tried the same tactic in the RTC election by trying to link Marianne to MORE and it clearly didn't work because RA was very careful to stick to the key issue and in fact we decided to reject any comments on our listserve that dealt with the middle east.

But the attack on DSA is so weird given the history -- DSA is an offbranch of the Socialist Party UFT leaders came from. UFT has endorsed DSA electeds who are incumbents (AOC, Bowman, and a number of state senators.

Rather than let it die, the scuzzy Unity Caucus blog doubled down, using the 50's era "card-carrying" phrase. Here they do line up with the analysis that the outside interference refers to DSA but I still think that is cover for the attack on Marianne. Who are they kidding? Do they have a bigger fear of DSA or Marianne? No one has been fearing DSA recently, especially after the Trump election.

About that flyer: DSA=MORE=ARISE?

Lets talk about the caucus behind the curtain

Unity Caucus

Jan 20, 2025

Each month the Unity Caucus shares a flyer at our union's Delegates Assembly. Last week was no different - we shared a flyer that seemed to cause a stir. A new coalition named ARISE announced that they would be running in the UFT election this coming Spring. ARISE includes 3 caucuses: New Action Caucus, Retiree Advocate and MORE. The flyer called out the fact that this new coalition is just a rebranding of MORE, in an attempt to hide their own problematic political baggage. When you start to look past the slick website and the new logo, it's clear to anyone paying attention that MORE is the driving force behind ARISE.

So what happened at the Delegates Assembly last week and why does it matter?

A veteran delegate rose to speak against a resolution written to oppose the fact that organizations outside of the UFT are trying to influence the outcome of the UFT Spring election. No one objects to working with and being aligned with organizations outside of the UFT. The issue is that there is documentation (Politico Article: Democratic Socialists look to take over New York’s powerful labor unions | DSA Memo linked in politico article) showing that there is an outside organization ( the NYC DSA) actively strategizing to use the UFT as a tool for its own political objectives [see flyer below]. To flip something that this same delegate said at the DA: JWe are all card-carrying members of the UFT and unashamedly proud of it!

Jeez - card carrying Unityites. I'm a bit embarrassed for them.

Then they added the text of the leaflet from the DA.  The post has a total of 5 likes from Unity hacks. This tack will not get them votes, for sure. The Trump voters in the UFT, possibly 30-35%, hate Mulgrew and Unity to a great extent as being too attached to the Dem Party and still end up being shat on - see Obama Race to the Top (or Bottom). ABC talks about no longer taking this attachment for granted.

 

Given the option of Unity, a group attached to MORE or non-sectarian ABC, which way do you think they will go?

I will close with this comment from the son of a UFT retiree, an active member of DSA:

“This is fundamentally anti-worker hypocrisy. DSA advocates for powerful unions and a better world, membership to this organization among UFT members should be welcomed. Socialists have been the bedrock of the labor movement since its inception, anticommunism has been used to kneecap American labor with laws like the Taft-Hartley act. It is dishonest and rabidly anti-worker, Michael Mulgrew should be deeply ashamed of this idiotic red baiting.”

Mulgrew has proven time and again he has no shame.