Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Ed Deform Partners: Farina (and UFT?) Promote E4E - an Alternative to MORE?

A district PD held in B'klyn for special ed teachers hosted a speaker from E4E and at least one teacher I know reports that her AP was distributing E4E materials and encouraging teachers to join. She reported this to her C/L who in turn passed the info on to the District Rep but neither seemed particularly concerned. I imagine this sort of stuff will mushroom in the event that the ruling in the Friedrichs case goes against public sector unions. Yet Mulgrew and Co continue to sing the praises of their new found 'partnership" with DiBlasio and Farina.---- email to MORE Discussion list
The partnership between E4E and the DOE continues from the Bloomberg years, but this time with UFT support I suspect. Behind the scenes is an alliance between E4E and the UFT/Unity leadership as E4E has modified (and hidden) its anti-union rhetoric. Like taking a position against Friedrichs (see below).

Why does E4E oppose Friedrichs? My guess is the Gates and more liberal funders want to keep Quisling unions like the UFT alive - as long as they
don't go rogue, Chicago style. And MORE poses the bigger long-term threat than E4E - if it makes headway.

Remember - both take money from a common benefactor - Bill Gates - and probably many others.

My guess is that because E4E is not directly challenging Unity in an election, they see the promotion of E4E as a much better alternative to groups like MORE since both groups have shown they can attract a younger generation of teachers, especially those interested in social justice work.

If an E4E ran against a MORE in a chapter leader election, guess who Unity would support?

For me, over the past 4 years or so, the influx of younger teachers into the opposition has been a major change in UFT politics since the 70s. As teachers age out toward the end of their careers, the long-term prospects of engaging in a battle for the ground game in Unity is not attractive. It is the older gen of people who are opposed to Unity who are more impatient than the younger ones who have long careers ahead. E4E offers a policy directed diversion from active opposition to the leadership - in essence, a partnership - which explains "She reported this to her C/L who in turn passed the info on to the District Rep but neither seemed particularly concerned".

Evan Stone to e4e membership: [TFA Evan spent 3 years at most teaching] before getting the E4E gig. I mean, why actually teach children when you don't have to?]

In just a few weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments in a case that has the potential to disrupt the relationship between teachers and their union-which is why I wanted you to know where E4E stands and how you can learn more. 

In the case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (CTA), ten public school teachers are arguing they should not have to pay "fair share" or "agency" fees, even though they benefit from the collective bargaining and rights those fees pay to establish and protect.

This is an attack on our unions and would threaten their ability to protect and serve all teachers. That's why E4E stands with our unions in opposing this case. Here's what you need to know:

First, our teacher members like you drive all E4E positions. In a recent poll of over 1,000 E4E teachers, educators support paying fair share fees by a rate of more than three-to-one and said that all teachers should contribute to the cost of the benefits we receive.

Second, unions are a critical voice for teachers to elevate the profession and improve outcomes and conditions for our students. A ruling against our unions is a ruling against the collective voice of teachers. Even though E4E doesn't always agree with our unions on every policy question, we deeply believe in the right to organize and collectively bargain, and that all teachers benefit from the work of the union. It has long been E4E teachers' and our organization's stance to be both pro-union and pro-change at the same time. By working through our unions, we can elevate teaching and create lasting changes in our public schools that will benefit all students-but only if we show up and participate.

As someone who believes in empowering and informing educators, I'm inviting you to a special opportunity to get the facts about this case, and find out what you can do to ensure your voice is heard.

Join me for a call on Tuesday, January 5 at 7:00 p.m. EST to learn more about this case.

In our poll, many of you said you wanted to learn more about this case, and what it could mean for your union and your profession. By taking just an hour to join this call, you can get the facts you need to be a resource for your colleagues and an advocate for teachers in your district and beyond. RSVP now:

I'm in

I hope you have a restful winter break, and I am looking forward to helping you elevate your voice in the new year.


Evan Stone
Co-Founder and Co-Chief Executive Officer
Educators 4 Excellence

P.S. To help you learn more about the case, we've put together a new webpage that explains how we developed our stance on this case, how this case could affect teaching, and more-I hope you'll check it out.


  1. With the elimination of tenure and the potential end to agency fees supporting unions, few teachers have long careers ahead.

    Abigail Shure

    1. There are so many states without tenure and are right to work states -- yet people do have long careers - as long as they play ball - and the top salaries are not so high as to make them targets.

  2. I'm appalled by the union leadership not taking action against the distribution of the E4E's propaganda of their faux profession. It is so clear that the UFT only wants dues; they don't care where it comes from or who the despicable members are representing that astroturf group. What bothers me is that the UFT has grown to accept several different groups, who are not educators, as union members and because they pay due$ why should those on the 14th floor get into a tissy. Our union has lost the purpose and the goals of why teachers fought to organize and form a union. The shame of the union leader is conspicuous and there's no sign of remorse for their lack of actions. Friedrich's decision might be the necessary evil to force the union leadership to see, feel and understand that the rank and file will want a new leadership and a new direction if dues are to be paid. I love being in the union and I'm pro union for our country. However, I feel that it time to bring extreme changes, through the SCOTUS's decision, to unions that think they're too powerful to be taken down.

    One last note: If chapter leaders are not allowed to bring in private financial consultants to the schools as per the union's newsletters, why the exception with this group?

  3. E$E is like a bad canker sore that will not go away.


Comments are welcome. Irrelevant and abusive comments will be deleted, as will all commercial links. Comment moderation is on, so if your comment does not appear it is because I have not been at my computer (I do not do cell phone moderating). Or because your comment is irrelevant or idiotic.