UFT's Leo Casey Fights School Closings

If you like to sing and dance, and would be interested in some flash mob actions around the closing schools, let me know

Thanks to David Bellel for photoshopping.

Afterburn
The UFT paid Randi Weingarten nearly $200,000 for unused sick days after she left. (WSJ)
I have no problem with Randi getting paid for sick days she didn't take. I had 140 days divided by 2 over 35 years. Interesting question: did Randi get half her days like teachers do?

Leo Casey: If you like to sing and dance, and would be interested in some flash mob actions around the closing schools, let me know

Last Update: Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2011, 9am

How much fun is this email from Leo Casey - the UFT is so devoid of ideas they are stealing from GEM, which has been flashmobbing and singing at PEP meetings and at the Waiting for Superman premiere. Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic. I'm greasing my voice and practicing my dance steps.

The UFT is worried (for good reason) that if they try to get teachers out to PEPs, they will discover that "real reformers" are doing THEIR job! I think it is a good bet to say they have been embarrassed to act!

See below the fold for more. Note how Leo urges the high school committee meeting to go to the PEP - but the UFT is in not organiizng the kind of massive response they did at last January's historic 8 hour PEP meeting.

Leo Casey to NYC Public School Teachers: My Word Is Not Worth Much Either

Not a day goes by that the actions of the UFT/AFT/Unity Caucus leadership doesn't remind me of the joke about the guy who murders his parents and pleads mercy on the grounds he was an orphan.

I rarely read Edwize, the UFT useless propaganda forum for Leo Casey, who almost never fails to reveal his intellectual dishonesty. I certainly don't read Casey with a full stomach. But I was tipped to this priceless piece titled "Joel Klein To NYC Public School Teachers: My Word Is Worthless"where Casey castigates Joel Klein for lying about the publication of teacher data scores. Casey opens with his first misdirection, taking out the crying towel.

 As part of an agreement between the NYC DoE and the UFT on the then new Teacher Data Initiative [TDI], a “Dear Colleague” letter was sent by Chancellor Klein to all New York City public school teachers in October 2008.

Who co-signed the letter with Klein? Someone named Randi Weingarten.

I'll let Casey go on so I can get this over with and eat. Try not to injure yourself as you roll on the floor with laughter.

 According to the letter, the TDI was to be:

…a new tool to help teachers learn about their own strengths and opportunities for development …The teacher Data Reports are not to be used for evaluation purposes. That is, they won’t be used in tenure determinations or the annual rating process.

Now we all knew that the TDI was a crock and that the assurances Casey and the gang gave the members meant nothing. And they knew it. Klein had so often lied and manipulated every agreement with the UFT people were left thinking: How stupid could people like Casey and Weingarten be? But you know I don't think they are stupid. I think they are Vichyite collaborators. Leo continues to whine:

Klein chose the venues of an letter and an op-ed [to defend his position on releasing the names] because it meant he would not have to answer reporters’ embarrassing questions about his broken promise to NYC public school teachers.

Oh, those broken promises. Is that why Casey is writing on Edwize - so he won't have to answer to his own broken promises? Now comes the best part:

It doesn’t matter that the NYC DoE Teacher Data Reports have been discredited as meaningful measures of student learning: based entirely on state exams found to be invalid by national testing expert and Harvard University Professor Dan Koretz, using an underdeveloped methodology that has as many as 1 in 4 teachers fluctuating from the highest to lowest percentiles year to year, and filled with dirty data that misidentifies the students a teacher has taught, the TDRs are just the latest example of deliberate misinformation from Tweed promulgated solely for political purposes.

&^%%$%##

OK. I just finished smacking my head against the wall. Leo - we always knew this stuff was invalid. BUT YOU SIGNED ON TO TDI ANYWAY. Watch Casey wiggle away by saying the studies came out after they gave the teachers away on a platter.

Try telling me the UFT leadership is not Vichy.

AFTER BURN
Read the Klein/Weingarten letter:

Run, don't walk, to reread my Aug. 24, 2010 post:

Education Notes Online: UFT/AFT: Think Like Vichy

My favorite Vichy moment happened at last October's Delegates Assembly when Mulgrew opposed a resolution in favor of endorsing Bill Thompson for mayor. In a shocking surrender of conscience, he winked that the delegates could vote for ....

AFTER BURN 2
This just came in on the NYCED News Listserve

Is the UFT "A Union of Professionals?"

UFT leaders like to play make believe by trying to give the impression that we are a union of professionals. A profession is controlled by the members. But in NYC the UFT has assisted Joel Klein in the process of de-professionalizing and de-skilling teachers, who have less control than ever over what goes on in their classrooms.

I never looked at teaching as a profession. Though we used to be able to make a lot more basic decisions in our classes, most of us had little or not say in the curriculum or the materials we could use. Until 1979 I still had a lot of freedom. But that year we got a new principal who was a testing freak (she figured that if the raised our scores drastically she could become a Superintendent). There went the remnants of our freedom. I fought the testing wars with her for the rest of my career but gave up the ghost by leaving the self-contained classroom to become a computer teacher for my last 10 years in the school. But ever there we had friction as she wanted me to use the lab for test prep instead of teaching word processing (who measures that?)

There is a direct correlation between the standards and accountability movement that the UFT has so supported since the early 80's and the disappearance of whatever element of professionalism we used to have.

Witness the initial imposition by Joel Klein of the Diana Lam so-called progressive education system modeled on Teachers College, a program that was the core of District 2 (most of lower Manhattan) and then District 15 (Park Slope and Sunset Park in Brooklyn.) I was in District 14 (Greenpoint/Williamsburg) where we had the opposite program, a more rigid method of teaching, which we also didn't have a say in either, but at least they left us alone - mostly. The methods used were brutal and many teachers who could not adapt quickly were attacked by administrators. Some teachers "adapted" by faking it.

If we were a union of professionals, we would have played a role in these basic decisions.

The other point of attack has been the use of instant teachers in the Teaching Fellow and Teach for America program, many of whom leave after their two year commitment. The attacks on career teachers, a basic tenet of a profession, were inherent in the acceptance of this approach.

Now, I'm not taking a position vis a vis these people entering teaching (it was the way I came in in 1967.) I think it takes at least 3 years to become a proficient teacher no matter how you come in, though people with some background in student teaching have less ground to cover. Instead of calling for a paid apprentice program which would professionalize teaching, the UFT has gone along with the instant teacher schemes. (The Teaching Fellows idea came from Harold Levy, Klein's predecessor.)

The UFT supported the elimination of 1000 teachers who did not pass the teaching test but who had taught for years and were rated Satisfactory for their teaching while supporting people who had no experience and 6 weeks of training, but who did pass the test. What does that tell you about how they view professionalism?

The UFT view of professionalism is as narrow as you could get:

More money for teachers (not a bad thing but in our case, tied to longer days and school years, which is easy - and given the tremendous amount of increased responsibilities heaped on teachers - money for blood.)

The other plank of professionalism is a seat at the table for union leaders.

As to fighting for the right of classroom teachers to control what they do on the job, nada.

The idea as to whether to put money into massive accountability schemes and ignore class size is made by politicians, not educators. the UFT has gone along all along, paying lip service to class size for three decades (you'll notice the million dollar campaigns with petitions, etc has disappeared from the UFT's lexicon.)

That the UFT tries to call this a Union of Professionals is a joke.

Their idea is to give the union leaders a seat at the table while the rank and file gain little. The UFT can only gain this seat at the table by agreeing to be partners in the so-called reform movement based on standards and accountability. We know that the latter means "blame the teacher."

The UFT/AFT has been part of the public relations mantra used by Klein and Rhee that teacher quality is the most important element.

The first time I heard Randi talk about teacher quality, I immediately emailed her that she was walking into a trap. (At that time I actually thought she might be well-intentioned - silly me.)

That is why unless power within the union is shifted from the top, teachers will be given the illusion they are professionals but treated as drones.

The union has played this role: not as a strong advocate for teachers but as an intermediary between the so-called political reformers and the rank and file teachers, selling them mayoral control, merit pay, getting them to sign on to one way accountability (we don't want to make excuses, do we?)

Thus, teachers should not view themselves as professionals but as much a part of the working class as construction workers and teamsters.

In these times, that is exactly the type of union leadership teachers need. The type that will say, "Take yur stinkin' accountability and yur phony test driven curriculum and bury them in yur black robes."

My point is proved by these droppings from the Little Red Book of UFT high school VP and blogger in residence, Leo Casey from a post on a listserve.

We have had rather substantive critiques of the school progress reports and on their over reliance on test scores, but we are also political realists who take stock of developments in the real political world, and not just our ideal positions

While some think that there should be no differentiation for pay among teachers other than seniority and educational credentials, we do not believe that there is some special merit in such an industrial, proletarian view of teaching, and are quite willing to support the development of a teaching profession that allows for the development of different roles with special expertise, and provide additional financial remuneration for them.

Leo loves to use words like "proletarian." Sorry Leo. Your policies have made teachers more part of the proletarian proletariat than ever. I have a lot more droppings from Leo to report on. You can read the entire raw thread from the arn listserve on Norms Notes. But watch where you step.

Hill in '12 - Leo and Randi Attack Me

I've been writing on the issue of whether the Clinton/AFT/UFT machine really wants McCain to win so they can run Hill for Pres in '12 for quite a while. That the fall back position for the Clinton machine [of which the UFT/AFT machine is part and parcel] was to set up the campaign against McCain - in 2012. The NYT Maureen Dowd column on Aug. 13 nails them.

Now I know that many people feel Dowd has a thing about the Clintons, but she does deal with the facts of the protest and addresses the issue that the Clintons could stop the movement with a simple word. But they won't. Closure, ya know.

What we do know is that the actions by the Clinton gang will severely damage Obama to the point of no repair.

From the day the Clintons started to go downhill, we pointed to the quandary for UFT/AFT president Randi Weingarten. Insiders at 52 Broadway had been telling us for years that the major focus by Weingarten was to get Hillary elected and that the joint UFT/AFT presidency was to be used for that purpose. Thus the manipulation of the Hillary endorsement where it was done ass backwards - first the AFT, then NYSUT (NY State) and never the UFT where the members, who constitute the largest local in the nation and are the backbone of NYSUT and the AFT, were presented with a fait accompli. Thus, UFT Obama supporters were never given the opportunity to even discuss an endorsement. We wondered how Obama could be pulling 90% of the black vote nationwide while the Black members of Unity Caucus were silenced into supporting Hillary.

At the April Delegate Assembly, with Obama clearly about to clinch the nomination, ICE's Lisa North asked Randi the million dollar question, which I reported this way on May 9th:

At the April Delegate Assembly Weingarten was asked by ICE's Lisa North - will you be giving Obama the same level of support you are giving to Hillary, she smiled (sort of) and said, "We don't want McCain to win, do we?" The tone with which she answered gave something away. Then this was followed by a slap at Obama. We've also heard about chapter leader training has been used to slam Obama - a great way to get the word out to members without being on the public record.

After the election, the Clintons - and Weingarten - will spend the next few years mending fences.

And they will be aided by the entire AFT/UFT apparatus. Behind the scenes of course. That will be Weingarten's focus as AFT president.

Important to UFT members is how this plays out in the amount of real support Obama will get considering the UFT/AFT has such a big stake in Hillary.


Fred Klonsky ran the piece above at his Chicago-based blog, Prea Prez.

Then the plot thickens as UFT high school VP Leo Casey attacked both Klonsky and me, calling me sleazy and attacking me for not knowing what Randi said at a Unity Caucus meeting [Norman Scott knows this, and he also knows, because he makes it his business to know such things, that she reinforced her statement at the Unity Caucus meeting later that night] - Huh? Make sure to invite me next time.

Remarkably, Casey's attack was followed up with one by Randi Weingarten herself.

Before I get into those and Klonsky's response, a UFT member who was at the April Delegate Assembly meeting sent Klonsky this report backing up some of what I sensed but not all . I think that person got some of it right tbut missed the context of the deep roots that are committed to making Hillary president, by hook or crook.

Anonymous report sent to Klonsky:
At the Delegate Assembly an Obama supporter (and, by the rules of their game, not a member of our leadership’s caucus, they all support Clinton or remain silent) asked the “will we support the candidate even if it is someone other than Hillary” question, and Randi did answer clearly “yes.” And then she hedged. Not nearly as badly as Norm indicates, but it was a hedge. From memory, after her yes, she went on to mention how there hasn’t been outreach from the Obama campaign, that they’ve been hard to talk to. Didn’t make much sense. And, yeah, it sowed some doubt. But not much. It sounded much more like one last negative comment, one last unnecessary shot at Obama. But she was careful. The shot was at “the Obama campaign” rather than at him personally.

I have no doubt that the entire UFT phone-banking and canvassing machine will get to work behind Obama, but they might push a bit more on the local races, and not push quite as hard overall as they would have if Hillary had won.

Here is Klonsky's comment on the Casey/Weingarten's posts (which follow his comment.)

UFT’s Casey berates me. “Proud of support for Clinton.”
preaprez on May 11th, 2008

A few words in response to Casey and Weingarten. A couple of words about the two previous posts [by Casey and Weingarten].

First, I couldn’t be more pleased if the teacher union leadership will enthusiastically support Barack Obama in the upcoming historic battle with John McCain. As a member of the NEA, I wish my own union had done it already.

Frankly, I received the e-mail from UFT President Randi Weingarten with mixed reactions.

Mostly I’m happy about her assurance that her union will energetically support Obama when he is finally formally nominated or when Hillary drops out.

But, Weingarten’s claim that she never said anything negative about Obama seems to be parsing words.

Clinton’s campaign against Obama, particularly in recent weeks, has been repugnant, war-mongering and racist. What of Clinton’s threats to “obliterate” Iran? What of Clinton’s making use of racism in her warnings that Obama would be rejected by white working voters because he is black? Other Clinton supporters rejected this kind of talk.

What was my crime? I reprinted a post from a NY school’s activist (”slimy” according to the wordsmith, Casey) who has a blog that I read and sometimes agree with and sometimes don’t. I reprint a lot of postings and I will continue to do it, even if Leo Casey doesn’t like it. Interesting that he didn’t get so outraged when my anti-war essay was censored on the very site that printed his essay the day before mine was scheduled to run. In fact, not a peep from Casey.

No, Casey’s outrage is limited and targeted. Gerald Bracey writes an article on the Huffington Post about NCLB, and Casey says Bracey’s right-wing critics are justified in their outrage.

Someone from the union opposition speculates about what the AFT’s position might be in the aftermath of the Clinton collapse, given their leadership’s close ties to the Clinton operation, and Casey is outraged. In Leo Casey’s world you are not allowed to speculate about the political dealings of the union leadership, because as we all know, they are always open and above board. I reprint a portion of a post, and in Leo Casey’s world, civil debate is calling me “sleazy” and “shameful.”

But the candidate that they support runs a cheap-shot, Karl Rove-like campaign, and Casey’s outrage disappears.

Casey’s hysterical rant suggests that maybe there’s something to the speculation. A reasonable response would have been, “There’s nothing to it. The UFT will enthusiastically support the Democratic nominee in the race against McCain.” Because all the name-calling aside, that’s what I’m going to do.

By the way, I don’t know Norm Scott. Never met him. He’s never written to me. Never called me a name. Casey’s finger-pointing about how I joined Norm Scott in some exercise is not true. The only one who I join in exercising is Ulysses, my sweet Wheaten Terrier. And Ulysses is neither slimy, sleazy, divisive or blindly critical. On the contrary, he is blindly accepting of everyone. We need more like him.


[Note: The last time Casey attacked me [Konsky] it was because I said the UFT had supported Clinton. He said that the UFT didn’t support Clinton. Now he says he is proud of their support. You pick.]

Casey’s e-mail follows:

Leo Casey comment:
I am personally proud of the principled way in which the UFT and AFT has supported Clinton, sticking entirely to our view of the issues and Obama’s and Clinton’s positions on them.


This is one of the sleaziest and most outrageous seen in quite a while, and you do yourself absolutely no credit by reproducing it on your blog and giving it credence.
Every time the question of what we would do if Obama [or earlier, Edwards] won the Democratic nomination over Clinton has been posed, been completely clear and unequivocal: the differences among the Democratic candidates on the issues that are paramount for us — education, labor, human rights — pale next to their differences with the McCain, and we would actively support whomever won the nomination. When the question was posed at the April Delegate Assembly, at a time when Clinton’s candidacy looked like it was gaining momentum after Ohio, Texan and Pennsylvania, and Randi’s answer there was as clear as it could possibly be:
The person who asked the question, an Obama supporter, thanked her for her answer. Norman Scott knows this, and he also knows, because he makes it his business to know such things, that she reinforced her statement at the Unity Caucus meeting later that night, explicitly refuting misrepresentations of Obama’s positions on Israel — an issue of great concern to many of our members — and telling members that we would call upon them for November.
Since her words are so clear on this question, he is reduced to a slimy attempt at suggesting that she means something other than what she has actually said, again and again.
I am personally proud of the principled way in which the UFT and AFT has supported Clinton, sticking entirely to our view of the issues and Obama’s and Clinton’s positions on them. Regardless of what others have done, we have refused to go down any road other than that of the issues. Our endorsement, our focus on the issues and our ability to put people into the field in key battleground states has been one of the few important and consistent strengths of the Clinton campaign — a point which, I am sure, is not lost on an Obama campaign looking to November.
If you share with us the view that is potentially a realigning election that could put a progressive majority in command, than clearly the task is one of building the most powerful coalition possible for November, so that we can win the Presidency with strong majorities in Congress. A major component of that coalition will necessarily be teacher unions, as we are probably the most significant electoral force in the union movement. Norman Scott could care less about that goal of winning in November — as always, his purpose is to sow division. How shameful that you would join in him that exercise, and give credence to his outrageous misrepresentations.

Leo

And Randi follows with:

I agree with Leo. I have never said a negative word about Senator Obama. When asked at the April DA about this I was very emphatic about how we must unite the Democratic Party. Only someone who wants to be devisive or blindly critical, or simply lie, could have possibly misprepresented the content or tone of my remarks.

Randi

Anyone who was listening carefully caught the hesitation but there was also a quick recovery. But I always say, watch what Randi does, not what she says. Her actions in Denver will give us a clue as to whether my analysis has been correct.

OK Randi. Now is the time to put up or shut up. Roundly condemn the attempt to derail the Obama camppaign in Denver. As a super delegate, make a stand and just VOTE NO on roll call vote. And don't give us the democracy crap which we see very little of in the UFT.

And leave it to Leo

to hand his lede on the Chicago AFT convention at Edwize over to Hillary. The AFT may have finally endorsed Obama, but to Leo what’s most important is that Hillary spoke to them.

Comments on UFT VP Leo Casey, Obama and the AFT.
Fred Klonsky at PREA Prez.

LeoGate

The gang over at NYC Educator have been doing a bang-up job of exposing Leo Casey's ruminations and paranoia - it will destroya, Leo! They're calling it LeoGate. Mike Antonucci's Educational Intelligence Agency has been part of the mix. (When Mike cited some of my stuff once, Leo attacked ME for being cited by EIA, which is definitively anti-teacher union. But when you look at the outcomes of the policies Leo's Unity Caucus have supported, their actions have been much more harmful to teachers than Mike's.)

I'll say no more but it has something to do with Leo getting dissed by a mouse. I'll let you read the delicious details at NYC Educator.

Woodlass at Under Assault has chipped in with a strong post on censorship at Edwize, the UFT blog where Leo spews forth miles of words justifying every wrong turn of UFT policy. At least I think he does since I don't waste my time over there.

Unity Caucus Bait and Switch
It is worth mentioning the Unity "bait and switch" policy when it came to electing Casey the high school vice-president.

With it being clear that former high school VP Frank Volpicella was going to retire in the fall and Casey was going to replace him, Unity still ran Frank in the March 2007 election.

Why? So the not as popular Casey could be voted in by a special election of the Executive Board upon Volpicella's election in October, where Unity and their New Action cohorts control all 89 seats. (New Action ran a token candidate against him for show.)

Now don't get me wrong. Casey would have won anyway since Unity doesn't allow the high school teachers to elect their own VP. The entire membership including retirees, nurses, elementary school teachers (and soon to be voting home care workers) have the honor of voting for all the divisional VPs.

High school teachers used to be able to vote for their own VP - until the opposition won in 1985. Unity went to court to protest that there were irregularities - in an election they themselves had run. There was another election and they lost - again.

They bided their time until 1994 when there was no opposition at all on the Executive Board and they changed the rules to assure there would never again be a victory by the opposition at the VP level by having the entire union vote (at-large voting.)

But Unity continued to lose the vote in the high schools and that allowed the opposition to win the 6 high school Ex. Bd seats, a drop in the bucket when compared to the 83 Unity seats. Then they got real cute in the 2004 elections, making a deal with New Action to hand them the 6 seats (they had been behaving real nice) for them not running against Weingarten for president (she was afraid she might not get 90% of the vote.) To both New Action's and Unity's surprise, TJC and the new kids on the block, ICE, won the seats - if Unity HAD run they would have won.

In the 2007 elections they learned their lesson and ran a cross endorsement strategy. ICE/TJC 36%, Unity got 52%, and New Action 12%, thus leaving no opposition on the Ex Bd. The raw totals were so low that even a few hundred more votes for ICE could have turned the election. Check these results at the high schools:

Unity: 2,183 votes - 51.6%
New Action: 521 votes - 12.3%
ICE/TJC: 1,524 votes - 36%

New Action and Unity shared the 6 seats. ICE/TJC got none.

Democracy, UFT style.

There were 19,799 ballots mailed to high school teachers and 4,568 returned, 23.1%. Just shows you how relevant the union is to rank and file teachers. When people tell me democracy in the UFT is a crucial issue, I say – Yes, to us activists. To the rank and file it means beans - until they face the Unity machine head on at some point.

Back to Leo. If Unity had run Casey their percentage would have been lower. How much lower? Hard to tell - a swing of 300 votes would have given the seats to ICE/TJC. Or maybe more teachers seeing Casey on the ballot would have decided to vote for the ICE/TJC slate. It is still unlikely ICE/TJC would have won the 6 Ex bd seats if Casey headed the Unity HS ticket but the election would have been closer. But Unity wasn't taking any chances.

We expect there will be a hell of a lot more Leo Gates to come.

UFT's Leo Casey Wants Open, Lively Debate

Guess what? He won't find it at UFT Delegate Assemblies or Executive Board meetings or just about anywhere in the UFT. Here's what he wrote on Edwize about Kathryn Wylde's assault on Diane Ravitch:

"Education policy thrives in a vigorous, dynamic public sphere where ideas and initiatives — new and old, good and bad, half-baked and well-formulated — are subjected to open, lively debate and contestation. What is essential in this sphere is that it is the policies, not the persons advocating them, which are the center of debate."

Nice to know the red-baiting attack on Kit Wainer by Unity Caucus in the elections was not personal. Or Casey's attempt to brand an entire opposition Caucus as Nazi sympathizers because of the colors used on their web site.

Casey goes on to say, "It seems that for some, markets should rule all education — except for the free marketplace of ideas. There, their monopoly must go unquestioned and uncriticized."

If you've read this blog you see how the UFT leadership attempts to suppress debate on a consistent basis. Don't believe me? Check anyone who is not in Unity Caucus to tell you how much open, lively debate and contestation there was at the October Delegate Assembly over the merit pay deal as Unity Caucus faithful hooted and hollered to close debate as soon as they could. How they rejected attempts by delegates to go back to their schools to discuss the issue before voting. You see, in the UFT open lively debate consists of springing something on the delegates without any advance notice on the agenda even after months of discussion with the DOE, taking an hour to have the president present it, "allowing" less than a half hour to talk about it before voting.

Or how when Jeff Kaufman rose to amend an ATR resolution there were immediate calls from Unity that he did not have the right, followed by about a hundred violations of Robert's Rules by Randi Weingarten as she constantly interjected herself while Jeff attempted to talk.

Wylde unfairly called Ravitch hypocritical. Call Casey and the rest of the UFT hierarchy hyper-hypocritical.

Free marketplace of ideas indeed!

Unity Gives Itself a Raise – With New Action Support

Updated Tues, Oct. 16, 9pm

New Action joined in with Unity at Monday's UFT Exec. Bd. meeting in voting the same raise for UFT staff as teachers receive. The vote was unanimous with the 8 New Action Ex Bd members going along for the ride. The entire process took about 15 seconds. Now all Unity hacks can make mid 6 figure salaries to go along with their double pensions.

Last time Jeff and James put up a fierce fight. No more fights, with the rubber stamp New Action joining in on the Unity follies. Giving people employed by the union these raises gives them a vested interest in pushing for contracts that will feather their nests as opposed to fighting for better working conditions like reducing class size or eliminating potty patrol.

The desperation with which they fought for the 2005 contract certainly reinforces this view. Especially since they make so much higher salaries than rank and file teachers, so their percentage increase makes the gap between the UFT hierarchy and the members grow. Add the fact that they make up almost the entire Exec. Bd and dominate the Delegate Assembly, and you have a prescription for the disaster that has hit the NYC teaching corps.

Read NYC Educator's report on the election of Leo Casey as High School VP, defeating the token New Action candidate Jonathan Halabi, who actually puts out some good ideas for union reform on his blog, but is silent when it comes to open advocacy at Delegate Assemblies and Executive Board meetings. Reminds me of how the UFT puts out a report on high stakes testing and does nothing about it.

By joining with the non-critical New Action instead of trying to build a real opposition, reformers like Halabi make a choice to accept crumbs from the union leadership rather then help build a true movement for change.

Leo Casey Redux
Speaking of Casey's election as HS VP (which he coveted in 2002 when he was passed over)

Ed Notes reported in the Fall 2002 edition (the first 16 page tabloid we printed):

(NOTE: How New Action leader Mike Shulman was screwed back then but seems to have figured out how to worm his way into UFT officialdom - the ole "If you can't beat 'em" ploy.)

Fall 2002
New HS VP leads to sighs of relief in UFT High Schools
Frank Volpicella’s promotion from Brooklyn HS district rep to the Academic HS VP, despite the sham election at the Sept. 9 Exec Bd. meeting (he won 75-5 over New Action James Eterno despite the fact that the NA/PAC slate won the majority of votes of high school teachers in the last election) has led a number of union observers to breathe a sigh of relief that the ever popular Leo Casey was passed over for the job. Casey, who had been Randi Weingarten’s chapter leader during her 10 minutes of teaching at Clara Barton HS, is currently a UFT full time field rep. doing research into the extent of mouse droppings at union headquarters. Rumor is he won’t get the HS VP position until he has finished counting all the turds at 260 Park Ave. South.


High School VP Election Exposes Lack of Democracy in UFT

fall 2002

When John Soldini retired as Vice President of the Academic High Schools, the UFT Executive Board held an election on Sept. 9 to choose his replacement. Brooklyn HS District Rep. Frank Volpicella was the Unity nominated candidate (which means he was hand chosen by Randi Weingarten.) James Eterno was supported by New Action and PAC. When the votes were counted, Volpicella won by a count of 75-5. With such an overwhelming victory you’d get the impression that the sentiment of high school teachers would be overwhelmingly for Volpicella. You’d be wrong. If a popular election was held in the high schools, Eterno would win by a significant margin.

In the last UFT election in the spring of 2001 HS teachers voted for the NA/PAC slate by a 54% margin. (The opposition also won the Academic HS vote in the ‘95, ‘97, ‘99, ‘01 election.) Yet NA/PAC only has 6 Executive Board seats. Unity owns the rest. Unity also controls the HS vice presidency even though their candidate loses the vote among HS teachers. How can this discrepancy be explained? Sit down boys and girls and let us regale you with:

THE BALLAD OF AT- LARGE VOTING

Prior to 1995, divisional vice presidents were elected only by their constituents. Elementary teachers voted for their veep. Junior High Schools voted for their veep. Ditto High Schools.

Thousands of academic HS teachers are disenfranchised
The opposition began to win HS Exec. Bd. seats back in the 80’s which culminated in Mike Shulman actually winning the HS Veep election in 1985 and becoming the first (and only) non-Unity member of the ruling Administrative committee (the Adcom). This so shocked Unity, they forced one of the UFT’s founding fathers George Altomare to retire for daring to lose. Unity’s new candidate John Soldini recaptured the Veep position in the next election. In 1991, Shulman narrowly lost to Soldini (by about 100 votes) while NA won all HS Exec. Bd. seats. The Unity braintrust cast about for a way to prevent this from happening again. The had their chance when they narrowly recaptured all the Exec. Bd. seats in the ‘93 election. They rammed through a constitutional amendment where the divisional vice presidents were elected by the entire membership rather than the members of their own division. This is known as at-large voting. Thus, retired teachers and paras and elementary teachers and Junior High Schools teachers and guidance counselors, etc., etc., get to vote for the academic HS Veep and Unity gets to keep a monopoly on the Adcom. (Follow all this? don’t worry, we’ll repeat it in future editions of Ed. Notes.)

That is how Eterno’s 5 votes (1 NA member has left teaching) out of 80 cast at the Exec. Bd. meeting on Sept. 9 is so misleading and so unfair to high school teachers. And this is one way Unity Caucus controls the entire machinery of the UFT.

If Gore really won, then Eterno really won
It’s pretty funny to hear Randi Weingarten often joke that Al Gore really won the presidential election. Well the next time she does, tell her that James Eterno also really won the election for HS Veep.

Running a union and maintaining control is simple:
When the opposition gets close to winning or actually wins, just change the rules.


Report from the AFT 2002 Convention: Anti-War Resolution Defeated

Leo Casey of the United Federation of Teachers countered: "If ever there was a just war, this war is just."

Reported by EIA's Mike Antonucci

A group of delegates led by the contingent from the Professional Staff Congress of the City University of New York attempted to substitute its anti-war Resolution 46 for the moderately pro-war Resolution 49 submitted by the AFT Executive Council. Though the AFT leadership was outmaneuvered at the microphones by the anti-war group, the substitute motion was rejected and Resolution 49 was approved by about a three-fourths vote.
The adopted Resolution 49 offers support for the war on terrorism, with appropriate caveats about civil liberties and the use of force. The biggest complaint of the anti-war crowd was this sentence: "We support the use of the wide range of powers at the country's disposal to eradicate this threat to our people, our liberty and our children's future." Tania Kappner of Oakland argued that this was a "blank check for Bush" to conduct all future wars.

But Leo Casey of the United Federation of Teachers countered: "If ever there was a just war, this war is just."

(Ed. Note: Leo Casey is the UFT’s foreign policy director.)