The DOE claimed the UFT was basically permitting the DOE to ignore the Contract for over 20 years which made the grievance completely untimely now since the UFT never challenged the Department of Education's policy of improperly paying coverage pay rather than the higher sixth-period rate. The DOE reasoned that the they had established a policy that the Union had accepted.
So the uft should be applauded? The teachers should've had this in the first place. Why the big fight? Why the years of not complying? This is the definition of "It's better than nothng."
UFT WINS ARBITRATION AFFIRMING RIGHT OF NON-SHORTAGE AREA TEACHERS TO GET SIXTH PERIOD PAY INSTEAD OF LOWER COVERAGE PAY FOR TEACHING A SIXTH CLASSAviation High School shop teachers standing up for special per session sixth-period pay of $7,278 per semester for teaching an extra class each day instead of settling for cut-rate coverage pay of $45.38 per class multiplied by 85 days for a semester which comes to $3,857.30. The math clearly shows that many teachers have been getting cheated out of over $3,400 per semester because principals refuse to follow the contractual rules and pay teachers what they are entitled to for teaching a sixth class in secondary schools. We believed it was a no-brainer grievance as the right to receive sixth-period teaching pay for agreeing to teach a sixth class in secondary schools has been in the Contract since 1998, whether it was for a shortage area or non-shortage area class.
|Yankee fan Ibeth|
|Mets fan James - enjoy your (temp) wins|
There's a lot of back story on this, some of which I can't talk about. If I did your head would explode. We are giving UFT/Unity HSVP credit for testifying on behalf of the teachers. There's irony in that her testimony helped seal the case because the DOE argued that they should win because the UFT leadership. let this violation go on for so long. OK, let's call it a win for all.
My guess is the arbitrator probably knew the Union was aware of what was up but the DOE was so blatantly wrong in cheating teachers out of their proper pay that she was willing to suspend disbelief a bit.
The arbitrator may have been persuaded the UFT was right because of the testimony of UFT Academic High School Vice President Janella Hinds. Janella's involvement hinted to the arbitrator that this was an important case for the Union. Janella testified to Arbitrator Biren on what the difference is between Article 7N (Coverages) and 7O (teaching a sixth class for a special higher per session rate). She gave details on how coverages are for an emergency absence but the sixth class provision is for the entire semester so the teacher becomes the teacher of record for the class and so he/she plans the lessons, teaches the classes, and assesses the pupils while in a coverage the teacher only teaches a lesson left to them by the regular teacher for an emergency for the day.
Principals, however, have wrongfully used the coverage provision to cheat teachers by paying the coverage rate instead of the higher special per session rate. At Aviation High School, principals were shortchanging teachers in shop for over 20 years.
The situation changed this year because of the election of my former Jamaica High School and Middle College High School colleague Ibeth Mejia as Chapter Leader at Aviation. Ibeth knew we didn't stand for anything like ripping off teachers at Jamaica. She asked me to help with this and we did research that the UFT had been ignoring for years. We also publicized this issue in several of our blog postings to highlight how teachers were being cheated out of money when they took on an extra class in a non-shortage area. Ibeth was persistent in pressuring the UFT Grievance Department on this case and encouraging others similarly situated to file grievances.