Exploring Caucus Fault Lines: ICEUFT Meets Friday, MORE Meets Saturday

Friday, April 27, 8 AM

I came back from a 4 hour MORE contract committee meeting last night where a few of us (a very few of us) have been going over potential contract demands we are putting in a survey.

Jeez, 4 days of meetings in a row -- PEP on Wed (after the funeral of a neighbor's 40 year old daughter), contract committee Thurs, ICE today, MORE tomorrow. And a shiver call on Sunday. And I'm leaving soon to go out to Long Island to help the Botanic Garden plant sale people pick out plants. And I transplanted two trees over the past few days. And I still  need to process the video from the PEP. Oy -- is this retirement?

There are a whole bunch of people in MORE who are very excited about engaging in a militant fight for a "good" contract but when it comes to actually figuring out what a "good" contract might look like, the ICE people in MORE show up to do the work. MORE will probably vote to be militant for a good contract on Saturday - it doesn't really matter what constitutes a good contract, as long as they are militant and mention strike every 10 words. (For the old-timers out there who remember our old sister caucus, Teachers for a Just Contract -- or as we called them Teachers for Just a Contract, some ICE people have labeled this TJC 2.0.)

There's a lot going on in MORE on a lot of fronts. I intend to cover it all but can't keep up at times. James posted a proposal for ICE to permanently or temporarily withdraw support for MORE after the unfair suspensions of two ICE people from steering when they weren't present.

ICE doesn't bind people so no matter what the outcome of today's resolution, some will stay in MORE unless things get even more weird. Some are considering self-suspension in sympathy. You can read the comment of one of the suspendees here. Over time details will emerge.

I want to hear all the arguments from James and others but I am not planning to leave MORE but to stay there and do the work I feel is worthwhile like fighting closing schools and lower class size and abusive principals -- I mean if some of us don't raise these issues many of the MORE ideologues will just ignore them, as they have ignored the PEP where Black Lives Really Matter.

One of the very frustrating things about MORE is the seeming inability to engage in deep dives into issues, something ICEUFT has always done very well - to the exclusion of doing some other things. But MORE has young people who have a life and don't like to meet for too long a time. ICE people will meet and talk forever because they have a lot of things to talk about. And are mostly retired.

MORE has a lot of very political and sensitive people with limited powers of analysis, or willingness to see below the surface of things -- much younger than ICE people - and it shows at times. One of the heavy issues in MORE is people being rude on the listserve. That seems to tie people into knots with lots of angst and gnashing of teeth. Even I, a known caveman, have to tone it down.

But I try to imagine a group of people claiming to want to challenge the Unity machine, ed deformers, abusive principals, etc. but can't deal with a few (and it is very few) people supposedly making some crude comments - and I have at times have made some comments in the heat of the moment but have learned that listserves are not the best place to shoot off an angry email. So now I let things vegetate a bit and it works better.

The next two days should be fun. MORE on Saturday and ICEUFT Friday afternoon, starting at 4PM and ending till they toss us out of the diner. And all day Friday I'm driving out to Huntington with the crew from Brooklyn Botanic Gardens to pick out plants for the May 10 plant sale, for which I've been volunteering at for the past 35 years.

MORE will meet Saturday from 11-2:30, actually a longer meeting than usual. After that we will race over to the MORE family leave event which goes from 3-5. I would have gone home but my wife is coming into the city for world tai-chi day and trying to get half price tickets to a show. One of the great things about tai-chi, which I have never done, is that you can't tell if it's real people or statues.

Hey, if you are a regular reader of the blogs stop by for a while and have a dose of rice pudding. And hang with the Eternos, Gloria, Schirtzer, Lisa, Vera, Ellen, South Bronx, Giambalvo, maybe Arthur, and who knows who else might drop in? Email me offlist for details. normsco@gmail.com

You can also stop by the MORE meeting - if you haven't been flagellated recently.

My announcement of the ICEUFT  Meeting:

Meeting Friday: Independent Community of Educators

The Independent Community of Educators (ICE), one of the two founding caucuses in MORE, will be meeting Friday at 4PM to discuss a range of issues related to red state teacher revolts and recent actions in MORE. The meeting is expected to last three of four hours - or until everyone has had time to express their thoughts. Maybe midnight.

As usual ICE meetings are openly announced. As a consensus group with a wide range of opinions, all actions suggested are not binding on individuals.

Contact me offlist if interested in attending as there is limited space and meeting location might have to be changed.

Tentative agenda:

Undemocratic actions by MORE steering to suspend 2 members of steering, both associated with ICE, without due process and with ex post facto rules. The background behind a prominent member of MORE threatening to leave MORE unless one of them was purged from MORE and the so-called compromise reached to suspend them for a month, thus removing two potential votes on steering that might be in opposition to the initiatives being pushed.

Other undemocratic acts within MORE, including the moderator of the debate, unilaterally called for the MORE meeting to be closed to members only, the first time this has been done in the history of MORE. Plus the extremely constrictive rules promulgated by the moderator, one of the 30 people who signed the proposal.

An official response from ICE, including calls for ICE to formally suspend or withdraw its support of MORE? Discussion on options, including total withdrawal.

Objectively analyze red state teacher revolts vis a vis current and future conditions in the UFT.
The viability of the current proposal being floated in MORE, which is a reminder of the program put forth by the other caucus that formed MORE, TJC (See Ed Notes on the relationship between ICE and TJC over the years.)

James posted this on the ICE blog:

ICEUFT MEETING FRIDAY AFTERNOON IN MANHATTAN WILL DISCUSS PROPOSAL TO SUSPEND ICE SUPPORT FOR MORE

The Independent Community of Educators (ICEUFT) will be holding a meeting tomorrow (Friday) in Manhattan at 4:00 P.M.

It is no big secret that the relationship between ICEUFT and the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) has been frayed at times and lately it has kind of exploded. I have written the following resolution that I will bring up tomorrow. It kind of speaks for itself.

Whereas, a group within the Steering Committee in the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) has suspended two Steering Committee members who are associated with the Independent Community of Educators (ICEUFT) without any due process or authority to suspend people;

Whereas, due process is a fundamental human right and a basic principle of democracy that cannot be compromised; and

Whereas, the Independent Community of Educators (ICEUFT) on principle will not have anything to do with an organization that denies its members basic democratic rights; be it therefore

Resolved, that the Independent Community of Educators (ICEUFT) suspends all support for the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) until further notice; and be it further

Resolved, that the Independent Community of Educators (ICEUFT) will continue its work to advocate for the members of the United Federation of Teachers and for public education.

This is Norm Scott's agenda for the ICEUFT meeting:
Members of the Independent Community of Educators (ICE), founded in 2003, original organizers of the Grassroots Education Movement (GEM) and one of the founding caucuses of MORE, will be meeting to discuss a range of issues, including a discussion of the red state teacher revolts and the status of its ongoing relationship with MORE, on Friday, April 27 at 4PM

The MORE Meeting announcement - note how little information is given about what has been going on to the MORE membership.

REMINDER: Please try to attend this important meeting that will discuss the future direction of the caucus.

MORE General Meeting 

Sat. April 28

11am-2:30pm

CUNY Graduate Center

Room 5414

365 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 365 5th Ave, New York, NY 10016

Proposed Agenda:

• Contract Strategy Proposal
  
• Committee Reports
  
• New Items/ Sharing of concerns

Join us afterwards at the Parental Leave Forum - From 3-5 PM at the Ya Ya Center  - RSVP Here on FB - 224 West 29 Street, 14th floor, New York, NY 10001

You may RSVP on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/2036581303221106/

If you'd like to help out in some way contact john.antush@gmail.com or peter.lamphere@gmail.com 

History of the UFT Opposition Since Late 80s Plus My Prequel

This Saturday, January 14, is a MORE retreat from 12-4. Kit Wainer has prepared a history for people so they have a basis for going forward. This is one of the most concise histories I've seen -- it would take me 4 hours and 20 pages to cover the same ground.

I only have gotten to know Kit since we began working together in MORE 5 years ago. He came out of Teachers for a Just Contract and I came from ICE. Both groups didn't always mesh very well together and I was somewhat wary of working with Kit in MORE. But happily, it has been an absolute pleasure to work with such a smart, perceptive and most importantly nice guy - despite the fact he introduced me to Mike Schirtzer who I seem to be saddled with for life.

Before reading Kit's history, I wanted to provide a prequel so there is some pre-late 80s context for the various caucus genealogies.

There is no actual beginning and end of the many caucuses in the UFT over decades.

There are links going back to the 1920s.

There is a timeline -  caucuses split, combine, evolve. This is not necessarily 100% accurate as I'm too lazy to go find the relevant info  --

UFT Caucus History/Math Lesson: Long Division - Part I

In a multi part series I will review the history of caucuses in the UFT from my perspective over the past 45 years. I will point to a history of divisions and fragmentation - I certainly played a role - I believe has served to undermine the growth of an effective counter to Unity and how MORE emerged as an alternative so-called "big umbrella" caucus in an effort too merge a variety of groups and interests.

Since my first involvement in UFT internal issues in 1970, my 4th year of teaching, I can remember very few elections - if any - where one opposition caucus went straight up against Unity Caucus. Most of the time there were either 3 caucuses running or caucuses that united for the elections only.

Over most of this time I never felt it particularly crucial to try to unite all opposition voices under one banner because it seemed so difficult to blend a wide variety of voices and politics and it just didn't seem worth the pain and trouble and angst. I had the philosophy of "let each caucus do its thing and organize the people it was capable of organizing."

I felt that way until soon after the 2010 UFT election - with the outcome for the ICT/TJC slate which is what led many of us to MORE which is just such an "umbrella" attempt - with all the ensuing pain and trouble and angst. So how did I get from there to here? Because all other models over the 40 years I was active seemed to end up going nowhere.

I became active in 1970 in a local group of activist teachers in District 14 (Williamsburg/Greenpoint and a slice of northern Bed-Stuy) called Another View. We weren't a caucus - we had no intention of running in a UFT election - we were advocates and provided analysis of a wide range of issues on education and beyond in addition to the local District 14. Our monthly newsletters were aimed at reaching into as many schools in the district as we could get it into -- while facing enormous hostility from a district UFT political machine allied with the people running the district on the local school board - almost all white in a 95% school population of kids of color. Our people often faced threats and harassment for daring to support us.

Then we met a similar group in District 16 and individuals from other districts and high schools around the city and a sort of nascent coalition was born that began to act as a caucus of sorts.

The major caucus that challenged Unity at the time was Teachers Action Caucus - TAC. They had a wide range of people in the schools united by their opposition to the UFT's 1968 strike. Many of them crossed the picket lines and TAC was branded by Unity as the "scabs". In addition, there was a strong influence in TAC of the by then pretty moribund Communist Party - Unity also branded them as such. Many of their leaders were older - the old Left. They were very damaged by the Red Scares and some of their former leaders had been fired in the purges of teachers in the 50s when they were part of the old TU - Teachers Union - which had existed since the 1920s before going defunct in 1964 not long after losing the collective bargaining election to what became Unity Caucus.

At some point - around 1973 - we joined TAC en masse, hoping to move them in more progressive "new left" position, with attention to issues we were concerned with that they did not seem to want to deal with. We met a stone wall and after a year we left en masse to form the Coalition of School Workers - not a caucus in the sense of running in UFT elections but continuing to work at the UFT delegate assembly and other venues of the union - central and local.

Then after the 1975 strike* [see below for elaboration] when we began to gain supporters for our strong stand against what we saw as a Unity sell-out, we began to suffer our own internal problems and a group split off from us to form a new caucus called New Directions  - led by an often effective but also a very controversial leader named Marc Pessin who eventually dominated the caucus, especially after purging the leftists - who formed yet another group called Chalk Dust. (He used tactics such as changing the location of a meeting without telling people who resisted him.)* [See a profile of Marc in Part II].

Oy!

So that was the scene as we hit the latter part of the 70s. Our group - CSW - eventually reached out to TAC to form an alliance for the 1977 UFT elections and even tried to get New Direction to join in -- but their megalomaniac leader would have not of that - wanting to assure he would get to run against Shanker. Our slate and ND pretty much split the opposition vote - about 25-30% of the total.

And thus was born multiple oppositions - a CSW/TAC and a New Directions slate - a bad message to even anti-Unity people who would ask "Why can't you guys all get together in one caucus and if you can't even do that why should we vote to put you in power, no matter how bad Unity is?" While our group still did not find it easy to work with TAC we bit the bullet.

By 1981 - one thing was clear - at the very least, the 3 groups should get together for UFT elections - and thus was born NAC - New Action Coalition -  not a merger of groups but a temporary cooperative for UFT elections  - TAC, ND and CSW - and then they would go their own way.

Of course there was a wrinkle even then - the controversial leader of New Directions declared he had to be the presidential candidate and even though just about everyone outside of New Directions had some disdain, if not outright dislike for that individual, his holding everyone hostage - threatening that he would run ND separately if we did not make him the candidate - people held their noses - knowing we would not win - and formed a united slate - and still won nothing.

It was not until 1985 - by that time my own group - CSW - had morphed into a tight friendship group that was not as much involved - that NAC won anything - the high school Vice Presidency - which Unity promptly challenged and tied up in court for almost half the term of office. The NAC coalition continued to run - in the late 80s New Directions had dumped the controversial leader - and let me say here - one of the truly great organizers I have met - (He had a 2nd act a decade later -which will come in Part II).

With some people from Chalk Dust joining the election coalition in 1991 -  NAC had its biggest success ever - winning 13 seats on the Exec Bd - the high school and junior high schools. But imagine this -- they all came from the different groups -- TAC, ND, Chalk Dust (the CSW didn't partake) and working together was not something they did easily. In fact, some people tell me the very issue of running in the elections created divisions in Chalk Dust and they ceased to exist soon after.

NAC won nothing in the 1993 elections but almost did win the middle school and high school vice presidential positions, which would have given NAC 2 out of 11 positions on the AdCom. Unity, in a state of panic after dodging that bullet immediately moved to change the constitution in 1994 to make this impossible in the future by removing the elem, ms, and hs divisional VP positions from being voted on in the divisions and making them at-large. Thus for the 1995 elections, middle, high and elementary school teachers no longer were the sole voters for their VP - everyone in the union got to vote, including retirees.

In 1995, NAC still existed with 2 main groups - the still somewhat leftish TAC - even though they did not raise many left wing positions - and New Directions - more center with some rightist elements. My memory is fading but I believe NAC may have won the 6 high school Exec Board seats in that election.

By that time it began to make sense for both TAC and ND to end the farce and merge into one group. And so they did in 1995/6 just in time to help lead the massive turn down of the first version of the 1995 contract negotiated by a relative newbie in the UFT named Randi Weingarten.*[see below for elaboration].

For the first time in over a generation, there was one caucus only in the UFT going head to head with Unity -- but that didn't last very long.

End Part I

Part II (1995-2001/2) will include the founding of Education Notes with support of the old CSW people, the rise of a new caucus, Progressive Action Caucus, the role of yet another caucus - Teachers for a Just Contract (founded in 1993 by remnants of Chalk Dust).

Part III 2002-2012): ( the New Action sellout to Randi in 2002/4, the consequent  rise of ICE (Ed Notes, CSW, New Action defectors and others) along with the move of TJC to run in the 2004  elections for the first time, GEM, NYCORE, Teachers Unite, formation of MORE.

Part 1V (2012-present): The trials and tribulations of MORE.

Supplemental
Response to comments on original publication:

Oh thank you for this history.. after part 2, would you do a piece on what happened in the 60s in bed stuy and browmsville amd what role did the uft play?

Replies

ed notes onlineFriday, September 4, 2015 at 11:25:00 PM EDT
I will try - but you can find out by reading Gerald Podair on the 68 strike. In short the UFT closed down the entire school system - along with their hidden partners - the principals and APs who were threatened by community control - for months. It is a long and complicated story - I was teaching at the time and went on strike - and only later when I became active with people who had crossed the lines did I learn a lot more. Still - I maintain that people looking to organize inside the UFT to challenge Unity could not cross the line and should have worked inside the union to try to end the strike. The lesson of TAC was an example - and until memories began to fade after a decade, they had to dodge the scab charge.

nonymousFriday, September 4, 2015 at 1:48:00 AM EDT

This is good stuff. I have been dying to know how all these parts of our local's puzzle came to be. 2 Questions: 1). There was a strike in '75? What was that about? 2). Randi negotiated a contract in '95. When it got turned back, why? And, how come membership had a spine then? Was it turned down at DA, or was it out to membership?

Man, this is important. We need to understand how we did this before. I've been waiting for someone to break it down. Keep it up.
-Nate

Replies

ed notes onlineFriday, September 4, 2015 at 11:30:00 PM EDT
Nate
The 75 strike was the last one and we all were docked 2 for one. They laid off 15,000 people and the rank and file rose up and forced the leadership to strike - Randi used to damper enthusiasm for strikes by saying Shanker told her that going on strike in 75 was the biggest mistake of his life. In fact his biggest mistake was 68.
As for the 95 contract - Randi would leave her school after a few hours and go to negotiate - having no feel for where the membership was at - and with Shanker nearing his end and Sandy Feldman distracted that she would be the new AFT president -- Randi botched it - they didn't bother pushing the contract much and New Action and independents like Bruce Markens who as the only non-Unity District rep led the charge to defeat the contract - and they did. Not being in a caucus I played no role other than in my own school where I debated the District Rep at a UFT meeting where I was the chapter leader.  It was not turned down at the DA - Unity controlled that - this was the membership -which was big - the first time ever and since.
But Unity regrouped - they came in with a slightly better deal and spent months selling it this time - and Randi learned a lesson - she was much smarter about how to control the membership after this debacle. They gave themselves enough time to go to the schools and sell it. The "militant" membership that turned it down 6 months earlier was no longer so militant by the time the union leadership finished beating them up. New Action and contract opponents did not have the resources to put up much of a battle.

Randi learned her lesson - every contract vote since was handled in ways that made turn down almost impossible - with every union official inundating the schools and spreading fear of negative consequences. We had our best chance in 2005 when we did get almost 40% of a NO Vote and the 2014 NO vote was about 25%.

On ICE and Why MORE: History of 40 Years of Failures of Multiple Caucuses in the UFT

Unity wants as many opposition caucuses around as possible to divide people.

Today ICE, the group founded out of Ed Notes in late 2003 is meeting. (Tomorrow I'm meeting with a group of MORE people to plan the summer

retreat.) ICE is comfortable. MORE is not always. But we bite the bullet and keep trying to build a unified opposition caucus.

ICE is an uncaucus - we have withdrawn from taking part in UFT election battles and became a founding member of MORE because we did our own caucus thing  a dozen years ago and saw ultimately how it worked out  - not great - which was why most of us decided to join with people from other groups to form MORE - and that ain't been easy after having our own little group that could function the way it wanted.

I have learned from 45 years in this business that having multiple caucuses, even if they come together every 3 years to run a unified slate but then go their separate ways leads to failure.

Unity wants as many opposition caucuses around as possible to divide people. In the old says we used to assume that if a caucus didn't get the petition signatures to get on the ballot Unity, which runs the election, would put them on anyway. And so they will again.

Randi bought out New Action. Does anyone think she and Mulgrew are unhappy to see yet another caucus out there? They knew that the merger of various groups into MORE in an attempt to forge one identity for the opposition is the real threat to them. Thus they attack only MORE in their leaflets (64 Teachers at PS8X Sign Open Letter to Mulgrew).

Thus Randi would be glad to lend moral support to anyone who wants to start yet another opposition caucus, even taking them out for coffee.

ICE and MORE

MORE is a combo of many different groups and people - a synthesis because many of us have tried it the other way - our own little caucus where we can be the big fish in the small pond - oh how heady at times when you are new to this to have the president of the UFT emailing you at midnight to get your opinion. Almost everyone in ICE has come to see that no matter how difficult it can be working with people you might disagree with at times, the only way is to forge one caucus. Bite the damn bullet.

Many of us have come down a bit from our egos and have a little more humility about things. Or maybe it's the lowering of testosterone with age.

New Action
I have even been tempering my views regarding New Action - Julie and I told them at our meeting in Nov. 2013 that we welcomed them once they publicly announce they will no longer be taking their deal with Unity -- they don't have to end New Action - keep doing what ICE is doing - but move to becoming one caucus. After all, New Action learned its lesson in 1995 when 2 caucuses, TAC (begun in 1968) and New Directions (1976) became one after 20 years of relative futility running in the NAC coalition (though they did win some victories). But they say they were marking time. Then shortly after they merged, along came the old divider, Marc Pessin (who did the same thing with New Directions in 1976) to create yet another caucus (PAC) to divide people. And of course, Marc's ego required that he run for president in the 1999 elections - he did the same thing in the 1977 and 81 elections.

When ICE became a caucus in late 2003 it was with the intention of running in the 2004 election and then disbanding. But we won the HS exec bd seats with TJC and stuck around. But it became clear by 2007 that ICE did not have a long shelf life. By 2010 it was more than obvious. TJC was around for 20 years before disbanding into MORE. ICE kept meeting but in essence did the same. And I must say that after all those years of a tenuous relationship, working with Kit Wainer is a joy - and having Kit and James Eterno, both of whom who ran for UFT president, on the same team is like putting together an all-star rock band.

Yes, multiple caucuses have been tried for ages - there are always calls for them to unite for the elections and then go back to doing their big fish in a small pond. It finally dawned on many of us that ultimately this is helping do Unity's dirty work of divide and conquer - playing one group off against another - even offering people from one group enticements.

Though mostly MORE, we still feel that ICE identity even if we will never divide the opposition - ICE stands for the Independent Community of Educators -- a true social justice group of people who also fought for teacher rights with roots going back to the community struggles of the late 60s and 70s.

Some of the newer MORE members have come to the ICE view of things - we were the only ones to go after mayoral control, ed deform, high stakes testing - all the hot button issues from today - back in 2003 when we began - and Ed Notes was touching on these before then.

How did we see that these issues were important? Through open, non-ideologically driven discussions at loooong meetings. No one at an ICE meeting has been cut off or denied the chance to speak due to time - no one every leaves an ICE meeting feeling they were shut down. Time is not a factor -- the meeting ends when one person is left talking to himself.
I have never left an ICE meeting not feeling good and not having learned something.

Not a formula for efficiency or even building an opposition - but certainly a much needed space for people to talk to each other -- and I would say the single most important thing missing in MORE. I rarely leave a MORE meeting feeling that way. The MORE - Summer Series Workshops is a way to fill this gap.

People have asked me numerous times how come Mulgrew and Unity can get away with what they do for 60 years - how come there is so little effective opposition in the UFT.

The leadership focuses a lot of energy on potential trouble spots - this is where they are truly competent and effective - controlling, defusing, obfuscating, dividing, etc. I posted an example on Ed Notes recently about PS 8x which is a school in revolt against the leadership, led by a former Unity Caucus chapter leader -- see

• 64 Teachers at PS8X Sign Open Letter to Mulgrew Pr...
• Can Mulgrew Put Out the Fire at PS 8x?

The district rep - the key people in how they control the membership - told the CL that Mulgrew is coming to the school to talk to them -- I've been invited to come that day too.

They track every place where there are opposing voices -- making deals with their friendly principals to keep people under control is not off the table either.

But beyond all that, there are the internal divisions in the opposition - I have seen the same issues come up since I first got involved in 1970 - and in the 70s and then again in the 90s we had another version of him doing the same thing - to me this is so deja vu.

Egos, sectarian politics, and who knows what else can lead to so much frustration and angst.

A number of people who were union critics and used to distribute Ed Notes in the 90s and early 2000's ended up joining Unity - they might as well take the free trips and other perks because there was no other place to really go.

They go to Unity because they see a divided opposition. It may not be easy, but one voice, one name is the only answer. That will not happen as long as people refuse to check their egos at the door.

Retro UFT History Lesson: How Unity Killed Divisional Vice President Elections

Most teachers don't know that Unity changed the UFT constitution to preclude high school teachers from selecting their own academic VP. This is because Mike Shulman committed the unpardonable sin of winning with New Action one year. That was back when New Action was a real opposition, before Randi bought Mike and the rest of them off with patronage jobs....

NYC Educator, Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Dues Deduction Without Representation is Tyranny

Prepping for today's meeting with Bruce Markens, Ira Goldfine and Vera Pavone for some insights into the past and how that affects the present and future, Mike Schirtzer found this old Ed Notes post from Dec. 2006. It looked to be well-written so I assumed it was from NYC Educator. But no, it was actually me. What a pleasant surprise. We'll get into more details on the history of New Action and the impact of its sellout to Unity in 2003/4 in future posts.

By the way, Mike Shulman collected $12,500 for his UFT patronage job as reported in the most recent LM-2 (2013) report. There is some fiction going around that New Action people only make around $1200 a year and that is too little to make them sell out. Most do but not at the top.

One note -- the 1995 contract battle where the membership voted it down the first time was led by NAC (or New Action -- not clear it the merger of TAC and New Directions had taken place yet) and also by Bruce from his position as District Rep.

Here is the Ed Notes post from Dec. 28, 2006:

Unity Spins and Grins: A History Lesson

NYC Educator has posted a proposal for a petition calling for divisions to elect their own VP's instead of at-large. Here is an explanation of the history of the change.

There is a debate going on at the NYC Educator blog in UFT democracy, or lack thereof. Since 1994 Unity caucus amended the constitution to eliminate the direct election of divisional vice-presidents -- e.g. Academic HS, Vocational H.S., Middle Schools, Elementary Schools--by constituents of each division and instead had these Vice Presidents elected on an at-large basis by the entire membership, including retirees.

A Unity spinner on the blogs actually claimed this is a good thing, ("The notion that the executive branch should be elected together, in order to provide a minimal unity for governing, is hardly an anti-democratic one.") even trying to compare this to having the US President and VP come from the same party. Naturally he distorted the facts of what really happened to make his case, which NYC Educator trashed in his response.

I asked former Manhattan HS district rep Bruce Markens what occurred while his memory is still intact. (Bruce's long tenure as the lone non-Unity Dist. Rep. despite constant attempts by Unity to defeat him was one of Weingarten's motivations in ending the election of DR's.)

In the mid-80's the opposition was still a coalition called NAC (New Action Coalition, a combo of 3 caucuses with a piece of the name from each one -- some of the founders of ICE were with the Coalition of NYC School Workers).

Mike Shulman won the 1985 election for HS VP by 94 votes over the Unity incumbent George Altomare, one of the founders of the UFT. This sent shock waves throughout Unity and they got Alomare to challenge the election claiming improprieties, a joke since the Unity machine ran the elections.

Naturally, the election committee upheld the protest and they refused to seat Shulman. They finally agreed on an arbitrator and his report called for a new election. This time, without a slate headed by Shanker at the top, Shulman got 62% of the vote. He was not allowed to take his place on the AdCom until Jan/Feb 2006.

With the next election coming in 1987, Unity dumped Altomare and recruited John Soldini from SI (where they could get the large HS vote out for him) to run against Shulman and Unity geared up all forces for the ‘87 election. Schulman almost won again, losing to Soldini by only 21 votes.

He lost again in '89 and by 110 votes in '91 election. But in that election, NAC also won the junior high ex bd seats, giving them 13, the most they ever had. Their JHS VP candidate also lost by about 150 votes. With the opposition seemingly getting stronger, Unity clearly had to do something to keep the wolves at bay.

Their opportunity came after the '93 election when inexplicably, New Action lost the high schools and junior high schools, giving the opposition no voice on the ex bd.

Unity formed a task force to "improve" the election process. It had no specific mandate to deal with the issue of changing the divisional vps to be elected on an at large basis.

At an ex bd meeting in early Jan. '94 they sprung the " improvement" - taking all divisional elections of VP's out of the divisional and making them at-large. A few days after, they sprung it at the Jan. DA, (historically one of the least attended of the year). There also just happened to be a snowstorm that day (Did Unity rig the weather?) guaranteeing an even lower attendance of non-Unity people.

But Unity assured a quorum would be there to make the act legal by threatening Unity Caucus members with the loss of their part-time union jobs and banishment from the slate, which assured a free trip to the AFT and NYSUT conventions. Thus, Unity was able to steamroller through the "improvement" in the election process.

In our so-called democratic union the Unity way, you can change the constitution without having to get membership approval.

But even if they had gone that route, the Unity machine would have spun this “improvement” to the members in some fashion. Without an effective opposition to oppose it (the inability of New Action even at that time to put up a semblance of a fight is indicative of some level of ineffectiveness) the members are helpless against the machinations of Unity. One more argument for the building of an effective opposition to Unity as opposed to the phony bogus opposition New Action has become with all their leaders on the UFT/Unity payroll.

From 25 Years Ago: The UFT After Shanker by Lois Weiner and Bruce Markens

A lot to interesting insights about the UFT and the opposition from Lois and Bruce in this document published in 1990. Some good lessons for the new generation of teacher activists looking to challenge the half century of Unity Caucus control - well, maybe the lesson is the more things change the more they remain the same.

Lois Weiner and Bruce Markens were 2 of the most respected independent voices in the UFT. Bruce is truly the only independently elected district rep in history - he served for a decade as Manhattan HS DR despite repeated attempts by Unity to defeat him. He was so despised by Unity that when he retired I asked Randi to say something at the DA about his years of service and she refused. He was the reason she ended Dist Rep elections 2 years after he retired. Bruce and I are getting together with Mike Schirtzer and some others after the New Year to pass the historical torch so Mike can tell the story in 25 years -

and Mike met with Lois, Julie and some other MOREistas last week to get her current point of view.

I only met Lois after she had left the system and went into academia. She was the one who recruited Vera Pavone and I to write the review of the Kahlenberg Shanker bio which was published in New Politics. http://newpol.org/content/albert-shanker-ruthless-neo-con

Lois and Bruce have written an important historical document about Unity Caucus and the opposition from the point of view of a generation ago.

One of the things we see being sold by some today is the umbrella group idea where each caucus operates on its own and then comes together for elections or certain issues. Coalition caucus politics has been a failure throughout the history of the UFT opposition. ICE and TJC learned that lesson after a years of wrestling with each other and finally came together in MORE. Though there is still some internal wrestling, there is the sense that even a shotgun marriage is better than what was there before.

Here Bruce talks about how that worked out between 1981 (really since my group the CSW worked with TAC in the 1977 elections) through the writing of this article in 1990. NAC was the coalition of 3 caucuses initially and then 2. New Action was the result of the merger in 1996.

Imagine - in those years the opposition could pull high vote totals in middle and high schools but could never make a dent in the elementary and functional and of course the retiree divisions. In fact, in the elections following this 1990 article, the opposition won 13 Ex Bd seats  - its highest totals ever.

After New Action formed from the merger of TAC and New Directions in 1996 it had some success in the high schools by winning those seats through the 2001 elections. But seeing their advantage slipping away they jumped at the deal offered by Randi - don't run against her in exchange for Unity not running against NA for the HS seats. In 2003 I and others, unhappy with the state of the opposition - New Action, a fairly nascent TJC at that point and a 3rd caucus - Progressive Action - focused on one major item - teacher licensing - formed ICE as yet another alternative. (Hey - do you believe in choice?) While there was initial excitement that faded by the 2007 elections and ICE drifited into inactivity and into GEM and MORE. A real lesson for me - and others - which ultimately has led back to an attempt to create one unified opposition voice in MORE.

Attempts to brand Solidarity as a bridge group between New Action and MORE and a mostly dormant ICE will come to naught and maybe in 25 years someone will write this version of history.

If you have trouble reading the document below, go to this link where it will be larger.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/247106770/The-UFT-After-Shanker-Lois-Weiner-and-Bruce-Markens

The UFT After Shanker, Lois Weiner and Bruce Markens

ICE Meeting Friday - ICE and MORE - A Lesson for New Action

At the MORE meeting with New Action last October, we offered the ICE model to New Action as a way for their people to work within MORE for our common aims while keeping their caucus alive. They rejected that offer.

ICE will be holding a rare meeting tomorrow. These meetings take place when people feel a need to talk to each other in a relaxed atmosphere where few decisions have to take place.

ICE (Independent Community of Educators) was founded in late 2003 as a reaction to the deal between New Action, then the leading opposition caucus in the UFT, and Randi Weingarten, by supporters of Ed Notes and others - ie, people invited to leave New Action for opposing their deal, which led to seats for New Action on the UFT Ex Bd and job opportunities in the union.

ICE ran candidates in the 2004, 07 and 10 elections, jointly with Teachers for a Just Contract. But both caucuses had very different ideological backgrounds and methods of operation and there was very little interaction or cooperation.

In 2009, members of an ICE committee dealing with ATRs, testing and closing schools (soon amended to include fighting charter invasions) attracted people from outside ICE, including some from NYCORE and eventually people from other charter battles, like Julie Cavanagh and the crew from PS 15. By that time the committee had been spun off into a new organization that became the Grassroots Education Movement to defend the public education system. Not being a caucus in the UFT, many segments within and without the UFT were comfortable and ultimately the UFT oriented groups began to talk to each other about a big all inclusive tent for a new caucus - which became MORE.

Merging the ideologies and interests has not been an easy process, as the lessons of the march on Staten Island proved. See my piece lambasting the undemocratic ultraleft holier than thou ideologues - The Left and Right Attacks MORE on Garner March Position: I'm Shocked, There Are Social Democrats in MORE. And I do a number on the right wing racists too.

So, anyway - here is an announcement I sent out to the listserves. I'd love to invite every Ed Notes reader - because the rice pudding is so good. But there are only a few seats left - but shoot me an email if you are interested and I'll check.

ICE is meeting  Friday Aug 29 at 4:00 pm. Please RSVP if you haven't yet dome so if you are coming as there is limited space.

ICE meetings are usually the best place to go for real open discussions on issues impacting UFT members. People actually learn. Everyone gets to speak, as often as they like. Meetings don't end until everyone is satisfied that they had a chance to share their views, think about what others are saying and followup. That learning process leads people to an ability to modify their views and compromise during the course of the meeting (except for the rigid ideologues, who often don't stay very long because after all, they know it all and have nothing to learn and are only there to proselytize their views on others.) 

Of course size matters so this is not a criticism of MORE which has more people at meetings, though some ICE people do get frustrated at the more restricted environment of MORE meetings.

James Eterno has suggested we don't just chat n chew but work from a real agenda while chewing and chatting. Darn. Here are his suggestions, supplemented by some of mine, which means we will probably still be chatting and chewing at midnight.

Eterno:

1. ICE stayed together and did not disband in 2012 as TJC did after MORE was formed. I did not want ICE to stick around so we could merely get together and eat once or twice a year. We continued as an organization with a role to play in the union and education debates independent of MORE.
Note from Norm: At the MORE meeting with New Action last October, we offered the ICE model to New Action as a way for their people to work within MORE for our common aims while keeping their caucus alive. They rejected that offer.

2. We need to pay our respects to Gene and Loretta Prisco. We lost both of these wonderful people since we last met as a group. (Those who want their comments published will be videotaped).

3. Is ICE still needed?

If ICE still exists as an organization it should say something and take 

some positions, not just be a space for Jeff and I to share our personal views.  Our purpose as an organization should be on this agenda. Perhaps we are no longer necessary and should disband as TJC did in 2012. We can still get together and eat when we want to.

4. State of MORE and ICE's part in it.  Amazing young people have bred new life into opposition to Unity in the UFT. What, if anything, does ICE want to achieve as part of this opposition? Where do we see it heading?

(Combine items 3 and 4).

5. An ICE endorsement for Zephyr Teachout in the Democratic primary. Locals around the state are endorsing her. MORE probably won't do it so why not ICE? See support statement from James Eterno on ICE blog.

Norm amendment: ICE also endorses Green Party in general election.

6. NYSUT's Stronger Together. 

A legitimate statewide opposition to Unity is forming. The entire year at NYSUT should be reviewed. I propose ICE formally support Stronger Together. Some of us are already involved so why not formalize it if ICE still wants to play an active role in the union and education worlds? 

7. Midnight special - Discussing the controversy inside and outside MORE over the march, the UFT support of the march, what could have/should have MORE done? Not for voting, but for comment: did MORE do the right thing?

Ed Notes Redux: UFT Election Results, 1999 - New Action Vote Drops 75% Over Years But They Gain More Ex Bd Seats

New Action Off the cliff

New Action  received 31% in ‘91. New Action received 24% in ‘99. PAC received 2%.... Ed Notes, May, 1999 election analysis

New Action with this tremendous drop in vote totals between '99 (11,500) and '13 (3600 - half from retirees) goes from 'winning" 6  Ex Bd seats in '99 to ten EB seats in '13. Ahhhh, democracy at work! 

I've been going through the archives for a project geared to making print copies of ed notes available online. Until that is done I am publishing items of interest that might provide perspective.

Note the trend from '91, soon after NA was formed from a merger of Teachers Action Caucus and New Directions in 1990 when they got 31% of the vote. By '99 the opposition totals dropped to 26% -- call it the Randi effect -- she was initially selling reform of the union. That had disappeared by 2001 but NA was not capable of organizing and when totals dropped again in the 2001 election Randi jumped in to buy herself an opposition caucus.

For the record, as an independent Ed Notes, after the 2001 election I tried to broker a united front between all opposition forces but it fell apart, which led me to start thinking of the need for an alt caucus and the concept of a citywide edition of Ed Notes (beginning in Fall, 2002 after I retired) which became the basis of ICE. It took another 10 years to forge the highest degree of a united front with MORE (except for the now outlier, New Action). So much irony all over the place.

There were 2 opposition caucuses running in 1999: New Action and Progressive Action, a group focused on the licensing issue. Note return totals- so much higher than today. Did the NA sellout have an impact on lowering vote totals? NA in the high schools with Paul Milstein running for HS veep received 2880 to John Soldini's 2517 yet Soldini was elected because the entire union voted for that position. Union dues without representation. Throw that tea in the bay.

In the 2013 election New Action got 452 slate votes to MORE's 1430 and Unity's 1592. Even better. NA's total votes has dropped in 14 years from 11,500 to 1900 working people plus 1800 retirees, many of whom still think NA is a real opposition. In other words almost half the NA vote came from retirees in '13. So how is that collaboration deal with Unity working out?

Yet, even better, New Action with this tremendous drop in vote totals goes from 'winning" 6 (or 7) Ex Bd seats in '99 to ten EB seats in '13. Ahhhh, democracy at work!

Think of these numbers given that 30,000 more ballots were mailed out in 2013 and about 4000 more in HS. Also note that over 17,000 votes were returned by retirees in '99 and about 22,000 14 years later with a much larger membership pool. Even though 52% of the total vote in a weak turnout, even retirees (with 25,000 more ballots mailed) are losing interest.

Here is my commentary from the May 1999 edition of Ed Notes:

UFT Elections: Looking at the numbers (non-slate votes not included). PAC votes basically irrelevant,except in Academic HS, so not included. 

Interesting Points 

Retirees are the happiest people in our union. They returned the highest percentage (51%) of the ballots, because they clearly had the time to wade through all the names. (The other 49% were too busy getting ready for The Earlybird Special.) Retirees are happy with the way things are going and voted for Unity by 85%. The 33,000 retirees are the 3rd biggest block in the union. After the massive retirement expected in 2 years, they will clearly be the largest voting block. At some point we have to deal with the issue of the impact retirees have on the working conditions of active teachers. If retirees didn’t vote, Unity would have received 67% of the total vote in- stead of 74%, still a significant victory.

Election Facts
Ballots mailed: 136,565
Ballots returned: 49,108 (36%)
Ballots not returned: 103,023 (64%)
Ballots mailed to active members: 103, 023 Ballots returned by active members: 31,908 (31%) Ballots mailed to retirees: 33,542
Ballots returned by retirees: 17,200 

There has been little change in voting patterns for last 5 elections. Unity’s share of the vote has grown from 69% in 1991. NAC received 31% in ‘91. New Action received 24% in ‘99. PAC received 2%. Their impact was minimal, other than perhaps causing some people who would have voted with the opposition, to not vote at all and could explain, to some extent, the higher than usual (69%) of ballots not returned by active teachers. That’s over 70,000 ballots not returned
by ctive teachers. Is it apathy or a silent vote against all caucuses?

Academic High Schools
The only division where New Action had some success. They won half the Academic high school Executive Board seats (the rest were at large) and received about 52% of the vote. With PAC’s vote added in, the opposition polled 55% of the vote in this division. They did not win the Academic HS VP position because these positions are voted on at large, a change instituted by Unity Caucus after the last time an opposition candidate won this position.This is a bad policy for the union as it disenfranchises the divisional voters. 

ICE Meeting Today: Better Not Shout, Better Not Pout, George Schmidt is Coming To Town

At ICE's scheduled meeting today we will have the bonus of special guest Substance,  telling us all about what's happening in Chicago with the school closing protests and the CORE re-election campaign. As one of CORE's founding members, George will also talk about the evolution of CORE from an 8 person group of people in 2008 reading Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" to running the Chicago Teachers Union by July 2010. The theme of George's talk will be from dissidents to the realities of power.
George Schmidt, the founder, publisher and editor of

And that is an interesting theme given many Unity Caucus comments over the years that it is easy for a group like ICE or MORE to be critical when it doesn't have to deal with running a union. And those are not points to slough off and it will be interesting to hear George tell us about that tightrope walk. But I am interested in how the structures of CORE work in terms of organization building. How have they managed to gather so many more committed activists in Chicago than we have done so far here in NYC given they have about 650 schools (soon to drop to 600 if Rahmbo gets his way) while we have 1700 here and 5 boroughs. George often tells me that organizing Chicago is the equivalent of Brooklyn.

Some who are not aware may be wondering what role ICE still plays given that the other caucus, TJC, is no longer functioning.
We all made a decision that once the organizing groups got MORE up and going their official role as decision makers would disappear and MORE would be a membership org of individuals rather than a coalition of orgs which I for one felt would clog up the process.

ICE as one of the constituent groups that helped organize MORE felt we had strong enough bonds between us to continue in some form, mostly as a discussion group to explore issues of interest. And there are some ICEers who are either not interested in MORE, so keeping ICE alive gives them a voice. Plus the  ICEUFT Blog that James and Jeff continue to maintain and gives ICE its own voice in the union debates.

We don't meet often, especially with the work needed in MORE, but think that as a group of older teachers and retirees we have some things to offer which MORE may not have the time or inclination to address. In fact one of my own disatisfacttions with MORE meetings is the lack of time to just talk. MORE people are more action oriented and that just doesn't always suit old fogies like me who love the give and take we always have in ICE.

And we have invited some of the newer people we have met in MORE to join our meetings who we think fit that mold. We meet in a diner and just talk -- and eat. And I never emerge from an ICE meeting without feeling I've learned something or had some issues that were muddled illuminated. The floating agenda and lack of time constraints plus the fact that with MORE doing the work we don't really have to do anything -- but talk and eat.

Ahhh, life is good.

Part 1: Education Notes - My Path from Ed Notes to MORE Through ICE and GEM

MORE held two back to back meetings on Monday over a 4 hour period and I got to thinking, always a dangerous thing. It's been an interesting 15 years, 10 of them as a retiree. Where to begin before I forget it all? This could be a book, but I'll spare you the pain and just do as short a synopsis as I can in 4 separate posts.

Lawyers Randi and Joel work on a school. Cartoon special for ed notes, spring '03.

Part 1: Education Notes
I began ednotesonline in late August 2006 and Education Notes print edition in 1997, so this 6th anniversary is as good a time as any to do a retrospective.

Chapter leadership re-engages me - 1994
I became chapter leader in 1994 with a hostile, high stakes testing principal who took over the school in 1979. So the battle was joined from the moment I took over the chapter (we had been on opposite sides of a number of issues since she arrived). I spent the next 3 years through 1997 working to organize a democratic union at the school level. My major tool was a newsletter, "PS 147 Notes." I learned a lot based on the reactions of the staff and the active parents. And I saw my principal, who rarely was afraid of anything, showed more than some concern about what I would write. Being in the non-power position, the Notes gave me a lot of leverage and a means of gathering support. I made sure to share the paper at District Chapter Leader meetings so the entire district was getting the word about what my principal was doing. That drove her crazy.

Education Notes as a 16-page tabloid, spring 2003

When I became CL I also began to go back to the UFT Delegate Assembly after an absence of at least 10 years (I had been a delegate from 1972 around 1984.) I also attended District 14 chapter leader and school board meetings. So I was able to provide a load of information to the staff. Those that read my newsletter (I put out 49 editions in my 3rd year) were as informed on a variety of issues as they could be.

I went to all the chapter leader trainings and that is where I met Randi Weingarten who was clearly the heir and we established a cordial relationship. I learned first hand about the Randi one on one charm.

I wasn't all that active at the DA, being more focused on my own school, even during the fight to defeat the seminal 1995 contract that we turned down the first time -- New Action deserves credit along with people like Bruce Markens who was the Manhattan HS district rep - the only non-Unity DR because the chapter leaders kept electing him for a decade - he officially worked for the union and stood up strong against the contract, which just flipped the leadership off.

Becoming active at the Delegate Assembly
In my 4th year as CL (97-98) I was on sabbatical and turned the chapter over to a pair of teachers. My sabbatical was one designed by me -- I offered the district tech boss my services and he accepted. In the middle of the year, 2 jobs opened up doing exactly what I had offered to do and he offered me one of them if I would give up my sabbatical. I laughed. Before the year ended he got another position for Sept. 1998 and offered it to me. I accepted. So I was out of the classroom for the first time in 30 years. I spent the next 4 years in that job working as part of a team of 4 covering 27 elementary and middle schools and offering after school tech courses (like explaining what email and the world wide web were).

In my year on sabbatical I continued to attend the DA and began to think more deeply about the bigger union issues. At some point I began to migrate my chapter newsletter into  "Delegate Assembly Notes" and then changed the name to Education Notes. I entered that project with the idea that the major opposition, New Action, was not very effective. Teachers for a Just Contract was out there in a fairly minimal way, so I did not formally ally myself with the opposition and naively thought I could reach out to reasonable Unity people, Randi included, to lobby for change within the UFT. And Randi and her people certainly helped lead me on for years, even offering me an opportunity to join Unity.

Not anti-Unity

Ed Notes was a monthly directed at union leaders and school-based leaders. It grew from one sheet to 14 pages. It was a big undertaking but my job at the District media center gave me some some room to roam. Many Unity people, and indeed, many of the people at the DA, especially the leaders of the union were reading it. Unity people were fairly friendly and said they agreed with lots of stuff I was saying. I tweaked but didn't attack Randi and we were communicating regularly. I was seduced by the idea that I was getting my ideas heard at the top level. I was also critical of New Action and Unity loved it. NA started spreading rumors I was being funded by Unity.

Whatever independent delegates there were began stopping by and said they were sharing Ed Notes with their staff. But I had a limited amount of copies.

Old political cronies are supportive
I should point out here that I wasn't totally alone in this endeavor. My political cronies from the 70s on the verge of retirement -- the late Paul Baizerman, Vera Pavone, Ira Goldfine, Loretta and Gene Prisco, provided advice and the political analysis I was sorely missing. They even wrote some  great pieces for Ed Notes. Paul and Gene were also delegates and we worked as a team at the DA.

[Social note: Loretta and Gene's daughter got married last Saturday and we were all together again and we still see each other on a regular basis. More on this amazing group of socially and politically committed people when I get to ICE in part 2.]

When I left my school, I was no longer a delegate but continued to go to every DA to hand out Ed Notes. Having something in writing was especially important as I could no longer speak (from 98-2000).

I looked for a way to get back into the DA as a delegate. As a teacher assigned I could run as a delegate from that functional chapter but that was totally controlled by Unity. But Randi must have given the word and they gave me a slot as a delegate for 2001-2002. I felt even at that point that lobbying Unity was still possible.

Breaking with Randi
It took me over 3 years to see through the Randi bullshit, (I way behind many others). Merit pay and mayoral control were the key issues.

The break with Randi came in the spring of 2001 when I began to see through the bullshit and realized that only by building a strong opposition could we make changes in the union. This was just at the point Bloomberg was running for mayor.

Ed Notes turned extremely critical of Randi and Unity during the 2001-2 school year. Unity people began shunning it and hostility grew. My last year and a half at the DA before I retired in July 2002 was really contentious. I felt the rest of the opposition were not functioning in a critical manner. More independents were giving me their contact information and some even said they were making copies for their schools.

Trying to unify the opposition
There was another opposition group that ran in elections in the late 90s: Progressive Action Caucus, focused on teachers who were losing their licenses because of difficulty with the teaching exam. At some point after the 2001 elections -- maybe late spring or early fall I called a meeting to try to get New Action, TJC and PAC into the same room -- I also asked independents I had met to join us. The idea was to try to unify the opposition. But New Action was the king of the hill at the time, having beaten Unity in the high schools in most elections. The had disdain for the others it seemed. And since Ed Notes had been critical they didn't trust me either.

Influence of Schmidt
I had picked up a copy of George Schmidt's Substance at an ed tech convention to Chicago in June 2000 and continued to stay in touch with George. His model of a full-fledged tabloid with thousands of copies that could reach into the schools began to intrigue me. As I entered the spring 2002 with my office having a new boss who was a joke, thoughts of retirement along with the idea of having the time to expand Ed Notes into a tabloid with a bigger outreach into the schools began to intrigue me.

Retired, July 2002 and a visit from George Schmidt
I started planning a tabloid edition of Ed Notes with the idea of 4 pages -- think one pull-out page in the Daily News - 4 sides, but it kept growing as the summer went on and turned into a 16-pager.

In mid-July George was coming through NY with his family and I invited a bunch of people to my house to meet George and he regaled us with stories of Substance (which he began in the late 70s) and the takeover of the Chicago union by the Debbie Lynch insurgency in 2001. Debbie was no radical -- she had worked in DC for Shanker -- and in fact when I crowed about Debbie, both Randi and Leo were saying "she is one of us." But that she had beaten a Unity style machine was impressive and an indication of things to come in Chicago 8 years later. [Debbie lost in a very close election 2004, got slammed in 2007 and in 2010 was one of 5 caucuses to run and in round 2 threw her 15% of the vote to CORE which helped them gain power.]

Remember, my goal was to use Ed Notes to organize unity in the opposition, at that point by trying to bring all the groups together. All the groups agreed to help distribute Ed Notes -- I offered them space in the initial edition to push their platform. Thus, I had 10,000 printed for September.

Ed Notes as a full tabloid had an affect just by its looks. It was meaty, full of news and analytical, with cartoons specially commissioned and all  kinds of graphics. Boy, did I learn desktop publishing. In between the 4 editions during that year, I put out a one sheet edition on alternate months, at the DA only. I was one busy guy in my first year of retirement during the 2002-3 school year. I wasn't thinking all that far ahead. Just plodding along.

Meeting Lawhead, Ahern and Fiorillo
During that year I put out four issues of 16 pages each --wait, one was even 20 pages ––  even I am stunned at that output and don't see how I did it. I ran around the city dropping off bundles, often with the help of retiree Merry Tucker -- we made sure to treat ourselves to a nice lunch. People began to contact me from various schools. I met John Lawhead and Sean Ahern during that year, two people who would a big influence on me. We began to hang out. And Michael Fiorillo, who I knew from the DA, joined us at times. I would say these guys were the genesis of ICE, a year away. I began to think of introducing them to the 70s crew, (which I did at a party at my house in July 2003.)

Danger signs from New Action
Sometime in my last months at the DA- spring 2002 -  there seemed to be something going on between New Action and Unity. NA leader Michael Shulman and Randi were getting their heads together. I remember a Unity/NA joint resolution that was  toothless and full of holes. I was the only one at the DA to oppose it and heaped scorn on them both. Shortly after Micheal Mendel told me I was insulting to Randi in this speech and she wasn't happy --- hmm, is scorn insulting? Maybe. But I heaped scorn on Shulman too. After I spoke, one of the leaders of TJC came over and said she was glad I had done it but she wanted to -- but was still being careful about being openly critical of the major opposition.

In the spring of 2003, Paul Baizerman wrote a critical analysis of New Action for Ed Notes and New Action started refusing to hand it out. I offered James Eterno space to write a rebuttal. (Bruce Markens had to adjudicate the number of words.)

When the relationship between Randi and Shulman began to blossom into a dirty election deal in the summer of 2003 where NA wouldn't run against Randi and she would hand them the 6 high school seats they had been winning anyway by not running any Unity people -- this was for the 2004 elections -- New Action stalwarts James Eterno and Ellen Fox were very disturbed and started touching base with me and people in TJC.

At a rally in early October, 2003, I ran into Fiorillo at a UFT rally and lo and behold, there was Shulman on the podium with Randi. Fiorillo said, "you think NA is right about putting up a united front with Unity given the BloomKlein assault?"

I disagreed. Given that Randi had floated on so much of the same shit coming from the people doing the attacks, there needed to be more resistance, not less. That the New Action position of putting up a united front would free Randi from being held accountable.

But why don't we get some people together and talk about it. Which we did on the Friday before Halloween, 2003, in essence the first meeting of ICE.

End part 1.

Coming soon
Part 2: Independent Community of Educators (c. Nov 2003)
Part 3: Grassroots Education Movement (c. 2009)
Part 3: Movement of Rank and File Educators (c. 2012)

=============
The opinions expressed on EdNotesOnline are solely those of Norm Scott and are not to be taken as official positions (though Unity Caucus/New Action slugs will try to paint them that way) of any of the groups or organizations Norm works with: ICE, GEM, MORE, Change the Stakes, NYCORE, FIRST Lego League NYC, Rockaway Theatre Co., Active Aging, The Wave, Aliens on Earth, etc.