In the horrible 2005 contract, the Board and the UFT added a Rule 11 to Article 17B that says: "Unless a principal denies the placement, an excessed teacher will be placed by the Board into a vacancy within his/her district/superintendency. The Board will place the excessed teacher who is not so placed in an ATR position in the school from which he/she is excessed, or in another school in the same district or superintendency."The UFT has allowed so much to go on. Why stop here?
These are the only changes from Rule 4 that were added by the new Rule 11:
First, to the fullest degree possible is out so excessed people must stay in their district/superintendency.
Second, now principals can deny placements and then the teacher becomes an ATR who has to stay in his/her district.
Where in the contract does it say that an excessed teacher has to call principals, go door to door, check on line for vacancies, apply and give demonstration lessons as if they are a new hire? It doesn't; the responsibility to place teachers belongs to the Board of Education, not the teacher. Case closed. It says it in the contract.
The fact that the Board no longer places excessed employees but instead tells people in excess to go to job fairs or pound the pavement as if these are laid off workers or new people looking for a job is a violation of the contract. The Board is supposed to place excessed employees. The fact that the UFT allows this to go on and gives classes to veteran teachers in polishing up their resumes shows how the UFT is basically in sync with the Board of Ed.
Read James' entire piece and the comments at ICE:
CONTRACT CHECK: BOARD OF ED RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING TEACHERS