ABC - Able, Buttkicking, Creative Running To Win Against Unity - Attend Feb. 11 Meet the Candidates - Arthur on How ABC Will Run the UFT

 There were people who did not believe ABC could organize a slate for the election. Come to the Feb. 11 meet the candidates to find out.

ABC is following up on its successful zoom organizing events with a meet the candidates event this Tuesday at 7PM. Last Tuesday over 100 people attended the elementary school zoom focused on issues specifically related to that oft neglected division.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today's piece by Arthur delves into some detail on how ABC would run the union. It is an important piece and here are a few excerpts.

 

• ABC knows union power comes from members. It’s imperative we work toward member empowerment. We’re in this together. We stand together, we fight together, and we win together. Our first message is for Michael Mulgrew:

• We don’t work for union leaders—union leaders work for us.

• When ABC wins, we will no longer use our citywide union power as a vehicle to demean health insurance. Moving backward will no longer be a priority for the United Federation of Teachers (let alone something we seek to drag our brother and sister unionists into). As far as we’re concerned, organizing to make things worse is anti-union.
• When members call UFT, they don’t want to press buttons and hope to get connected to someone. Nor do they want to be on hold for 20 minutes. ABC believes it’s our job to be responsive to member needs. Like you, we hate hearing, “Your call is important to us,” particularly when a non-response indicates otherwise. When you call UFT, you will speak to a living, breathing person, not a pre-recorded, computer-driven robot.  
• ABC will actively support legislation that retains the health care members have been promised in retirement. There are currently bills to protect retirees in both city and state legislatures. We will not only lobby for their passage, but we will also support the organizations that brought them. We will do the same for legislation that protects in service members.
• When ABC wins, UFT boots on the ground will mean members actually showing up to work for and demand what we want and need. These days, it amounts to a dozen paid staffers showing up here or there. Years of Unity indifference to members have resulted in years of member indifference to union. That won’t happen immediately, but needs to change.
• For really important issues, like money and health care, we will show up en masse and let people know who we are and what we demand. We will grow our union into the activist organization we need to be. Again, when papers talk of the “powerful teachers union,” it needs to mean something.
• We will use union resources, including COPE, union lawyers, and UFT boots on the ground to support our causes.

• The caucus model has failed us, and continues to fail us.

• Unity has misled and betrayed us for years. They do this as though it’s their birthright, and barely bother to hide it anymore. They think they own our union hall, and if anyone else finds their way in, they build literal walls around them.
• We’ve had 60 years of minority rule and outlandish palace intrigue. ABC has a better vision.
• We are not a caucus, and will not demand loyalty to caucus. We represent UFT members, not some pre-determined philosophy that may or may not be representative. Member voice will guide us as we move forward.
• We are not indulging in some last-gasp attempt to rationalize our existence. We are not a stalking horse for some mysterious, arcane philosophy. We don’t require an elite and self-indulgent steering committee controlling everything and everyone. We formed our platform by surveying members, and we’ll continue doing that as we move forward.
• As UFT members, we’re looking to wake up the sleeping giant that is our great union, the United Federation of Teachers. That means empowerment and inclusion, not lip service and ignoring those who elected and worked with us.

Read the entire piece

Easy as ABC

Let's amplify member voice.

Arthur Goldstein

Feb 07, 2025

UFT Resistance Caucuses: We Need Them, But Why Not One Big tent?

We really need to just merge the opposition caucuses into one United for Change caucus.... comment on a chat

 

That was original intent of MORE from the ice perspective in 2010 when talks began.  As time went on others in MORE did not want a big tent, more of a boutique caucus which alone cannot win power in the UFT. So I gave up now on one big caucus and went back to forming election coalitions of caucuses and independents ... Norm

Reply: As great as that sounds, I don’t think it’s realistic. There are some issues that I don’t see people agreeing on. The union is just way too big for that. Ideally there would be a few healthy caucuses, like most democracies have a few relatively strong parities

Even with healthy caucuses there is competition for those few activists and a focus on caucus building. Another model would be one big caucus with sub caucuses internally that allowed for internal debates. DSA has that. I actually made a similar proposal at the first big More meeting. Recognize we start out with internal factions....Norm

 

Reply: It seems like one opposition caucus and one caucus that maintains power would pose the same problems as any two party system.

I began this series on UFT caucuses with:

• The Caucus Role in UFT in Elections: The ICE Experience: The Caucus model works very well for Unity over 62 years. Not so well for the other caucuses.

Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2024

• Recent (past 30 years) caucuses in the UFT: New Action, ICE, TJC, RA, MORE, PAC, New Direction, TAC - When caucuses begin to fail they often look to merge or form new caucuses.

• How open is a caucus to new people? Does it have guard rails for membership? Do people have to agree to caucus fundamentals before becoming a member? Caucus discipline? Unity is known for its guardrails and discipline.
  

So why don't all the groups form one big caucus?  There are major differences in how each caucus operates.

 

I've been a critic of caucuses even when I was in one, some of which I helped found. I tried to see beyond the often narrow confines of a caucus, with their rules and structures, which often (and still does) drive colleagues crazy. That is why I was most comfortable in the more free-flowing ICE, which I and James Eterno sort of ran (I drove him crazy too). But let's face it, there can be no organized resistance to Unity Caucus without caucuses, so love 'em or leave 'em, we need 'em. In fact in today's UFT world, the more the merrier.

 

I'm constantly criticized for looking back to the past. But as an historian of sorts I don't believe you can move forward without learning lessons of the past. In UFT caucus history, there are loads of lessons to be learned. 

 

Currently, there seem to be 3 major caucuses beside Unity: New Action, MORE, and Retiree Advocate, with Solidarity and ICE considered minor compared to where they stood in the election 3 years ago. Daniel Alicea as EONYC last time was a sort of one man caucus but with tremendous outreach. Now he's joined New Action. But ICE and Solidarity still exist in some form.

 

ICE, which ran with TJC in the 2007 and 2010 elections fundamentally gave up official election caucus status to merge into the new MORE in 2011 with the idea to form a big tent. TJC went defunct while ICE continued with a blog, listserve and meetings. ICE was the biggest contingent in MORE at the beginning, with the International Socialists (ISO) being the second. But there were others: NYCORE, Progressive Labor Party, Teachers Unite,  TJC remnants, and non-affiliated.

MORE began with many internal factions and I proposed formal recognition of the factions which would allow differences but keep everyone together for the purpose of building a force to ultimately defeat Unity. That didn't happen.

Some of us in ICE noticed a certain segment of MORE that did not seem to believe in the vision of winning elections; having Unity in power as a foil seemed to fit their needs. Elections were not important, other than as a means to build the caucus and promote an ideology. I could see that point, though if you declare yourself a caucus how to explain not running? While mostly people were on the left, some see union work as a building block to socialism. Others  saw union work in more simpler terms - use power to improve conditions for teachers and students.

After a few years, it became clear there was a division: big tent vs. a narrow ideologically driven one. That faction didn't seem to want to win, arguing that winning was corrupting. Underneath it all was a belief that you must build a caucus with "the right kind of people" that can take power with a "unified vision". Reject people who don't agree with the dominant ideology and only make alliances with those you disagree with when absolutely necessary, but with the goal of jettisoning those alliances when the caucus is strong enough to go it alone.

Ultimately this faction did just that: It jettisoned the ICE members, actually branding the mostly leftists in ICE as right wing, and purified the MORE caucus.

But even that doesn't always work out and divisions over the 2025 UFT election have arisen, but in a new context of the possibility of winning this time, which has created new pressures throughout the Unity resistance movement.

The retiree and para massive victories created the possibility that a unified opposition can actually win. 

For most of the Unity resistance, that was a no-brainer. But the purists, a minority faction in MORE, do not want to win in a united front because that would dilute their political stances and violate their principles. And I respect that. In a recent internal vote, around 125 voted for a united front (but with specific conditions) and 35 voted against.

There is some irony in that minority position, given how often these very same people bow down to their "allies" in Chicago and LA as caucuses that actually took over their unions -- they obviously ran to win - and not initially with a very heavy social justice agenda. Win baby, just win, first and THEN change the union. As a fan of those movements who was involved with them from the early days of 2009, I have never gotten an answer to the contradiction between them and the so-called NYC version of them. I know a guy doing his PhD exploring this issue between Chi/LA and NYC. I hope he illuminates the differences - I see him heading in the direction I lean - Unity Caucus.

And here's the reality: At no point can one caucus actually win a UFT election without making alliances, so that subset of MORE will go on spitting into the wind endlessly. In my early years in MORE I urged the new caucus not to waste resources in running but to use the election to build outreach but the newbies were so excited to run. After the 2013 election, there was a year or two of stagnation - actually a slow decline over the next few years. That always seems to happen between election years.

One of the Retiree Advocate elected delegates, Lois Weiner, recently wrote an article appealing to these dissidents, an article I have some issues with but don't have the time to address them at this point. It seems the philosophy that has been driving MORE also explains the ICE expulsion:

...building the caucus then contending for power (a chronology I’ve advocated in my work about teacher union reform). To some, joining the coalition without having the caucus we want in place seems a violation of principle.

That's a standard position of the election purists in MORE - running in coalition with people not on the same page as you is a violation of principle. The theory of caucus building by reduction or purges, is very standard on the left but a philosophy that has been a proven failure in NYC and leads to a narrow ideologically driven "club" more than a caucus. Put out dog whistles to both keep people away and attract the ones you want. 

The winner is always Unity.

But here is where Lois Weiner makes her appeal to the "don't run" dissidents by differentiating NYC from the other cities:

The vulnerability of the retiree victory in its chapter election makes joining the coalition and building a progressive politics within it all the more urgent.

Proponents of union democracy and social justice teacher unionism should not wait out this election in anticipation of becoming stronger, more unified in shared principles, more democratic in functioning in time for the next election. The RA’s victory forces those who want a more militant, democratic union, in particular activists in the Movement for Rank and File Educators (MORE), a caucus inspired by CORE, to re-think the trajectory exemplified in CORE’s victory and its subsequent transformation of the CTU. CORE had and used the advantage of time we in the UFT do not have, time to build a unified caucus based on shared principles that fuse social justice with protection of economic protections for members, time to organize on its program to contend for leadership in a union election. Context counts. The comparative size of the school systems and their unions, along with decades of Unity’s rule, which has isolated reformers from possible allies in NYSUT, combined with the machine’s almost untrammeled exercise of power, its punishment of opposition and reward of those who take its orders, converge to make reformers’ task qualitatively different in New York than elsewhere, certainly in this country and possibly the world.

Credit to Lois, who I can't wait to see at the DA tomorrow, for seeing a new landscape. But let me point out a flaw that is a myth on the left - that CORE, founded in midst-2008 as a book club and won power in 2010, managed to build a unified caucus in a year and a half when they ran a campaign based on fighting closing schools and high stakes testing and defending teachers against attack and even attracting right wing supporters. MORE is now 14 years old since people first started meeting. If they haven't emulated CORE by now, then when?

MORE had to make an alliance in 2022 after their disastrous decision in 2019 to run alone (my opposition and reporting on that is what got me kicked out) and finish 3rd behind Solidarity and losing an enormous percentage of their 2016 vote. 

A few months later a key voice in that faction approached me at a DA and said, "you were right, Norm, we never should have run. As you warned it took a lot out of us even running a minimalist campaign." The 2019 lesson was learned and MORE joined UFC. And the majority still think that is correct. 

This time, as Lois points out, building a coalition to defeat Unity is even more imperative.

Next: A Way to Win: Offering a Different Paradigm for UFT elections: Less control by caucuses (not their elimination) and more from the rank and file. Plus the remarkable resurgence of the 30-year old New Action Caucus.

 

Can Unity Be Beaten in 2025 UFT Election? What was right and wrong with the UFC Coalition

Can Humpty Dumpty be put back together again? I say NO and let's start all over. We can't be hamstrung by having to wait for every caucus to approve every move. Let's move beyond caucuses and have key people from every interested party get together outside the caucus structure and move ahead. I am in the minority on this point within the oppo movement in NYC.

Wednesday, June 26

Already speculation has begun about next year's general UFT election where for the first time in it's over 60-year hegemony, Unity Caucus control of the UFT may be threatened.There is speculation that many Unity people, especially those with jobs, wouldn't mind seeing Mulgrew, who has become a millstone for them, decide to retire. (hose speculating he might replace Randi as AFT pres one day are barking up the wrong tree - he never had a shot. NYSUT president Melinda Person is Randi's replacement. Mulgrew is in the same position as Biden, where many Dems wish he didn't run. If Mulgrew does run and Unity loses, can the tar and feather be far behind?  

Who might Unity slide into Mulgrew's place and would it make a big difference? Randi, who seems to be popping up around her lately, may see her own control of the AFT threatened by a Unity loss, is probably involved in some ways. I hear names like Mary Vocarro and Elem VP Karen Alford. Losing Mulgrew might just distract enough people to give Unity the win.

But to me no matter what they do, Unity does not seem to inspire the loyalty it once did. Expect the Tier 6 issue, with 55% of current teachers, to resonate no matter how Unity tries to say they woke up after 10 years and allowing Tier 6 to pass without opposition. Endorsing the architect of Tier 6, Micah Lasher, won't help - but only if the oppo makes this an effective campaign item. It is not just Mulgrew but Unity Caucus that helped give us Tier 6. 

 

Jonathan applied the recent RA win numbers to the 2022 general election and we would have gotten 51% with those numbers. Retired Teacher election… What if? But as Jonathan has pointed out the retiree voting pattern in a general and chapter election is not the same, so for next year's election I wouldn't necessarily assume 63% of retirees would vote against Unity.

So the buzz is on about next year. RA people will be busy running the 70k chapter and there's a lot to do - like improving the food at RTC meetings and organizing our 300 delegates, which considering we recruited every former activist from the past, some of us who often disagreed, will be like herding cats. But oh so much fun.

Organizing a campaign against Unity will be like herding herds of cats. The excitement of the United for Change Coalition where 7 or 8 groups came together in Sept. of 2021, faded pretty quickly after the election. The big win was the 7 high school candidates which echoed the same win in 2016 with about 300 more votes, but still weak considering in the old days opposition in hs often topped 3k. But that was the only area of improvement. Every other division was stagnant from 2016 - except retirees hit 30%. While some celebrated the closing of the gap due to erosion of Unity votes, there was little sign of making a dent in getting active UFT members to vote for UFC. I of course was the Debbie Downer because so many of the newer recruits wanted to see the positive side.

Soon after the election, calls for UFC to meet fell on some deaf ears, especially MORE. Since UFC was founded on the sense of consensus of all groups even one major missing element threw a monkey wrench. But the HS group did meet regularly and worked together - for the first year. This past year things sort of fell apart with differences, some of which I can't make heads or tails about.

The problem with UFC was that each segment had veto power and for every decision, people said they had to go back to their caucus. Not much fun watching paint dry. 

Can Humpty Dumpty be put back together again? 

I say NO and let's start all over. We can't be hamstrung by having to wait for every caucus to approve every move. Let's move beyond caucuses and have key people from every interested party get together outside the caucus structure and move ahead. I echo the statement published today on the ICE blog: 

• ICE Calls For a Unified Effort to Replace Unity Caucus and Bring our Union into the Modern Age

Here's my problem with the process of creation of UFC. It was done in darkness with select reps from invited caucuses and some individuals who met for 6 months in dark corners of zoom to put the platform and slate together. UFTers beyond this inner circle were left out of the process and there was a lot of caution. Frankly, I feel many of the leading oppo voices who often go through analytical angst over the state of the membership actually tail the underlying militancy that exists in many schools.

Caucuses tend to move through their own process in whatever democratic manner, with a steering committee and or executive board that must meet to decide important issues and then possibly go through a general meeting or membership vote before moving ahead.

This time the process must be more open and inclusive and less caucus controlled. 

There have been some big changes in the original UFC. 

James Eterno's death has hampered ICE and made the key communication agent, the blog, severely restricted. ICE is not a caucus and hasn't been one since it merged to form MORE in 2011. ICE has and continues to be open to all from any caucus and individuals connected to ICE are some of the major players in the opposition. ICE makes decisions by floating items on the listserve and seeking comments and modifications.

ICE members have and will support any moves toward a unified opposition but if there is fragmentation, ICE will meet and rethink its support.

With all this I am extremely proud of the work ICE has done over 20 years, whether as a caucus or not. We held 4 meetings in person this past year and all were invigorating. ICE must continue to function at any level it can and I expect many of its associates to be involved andl have input in next year's election.

Solidarity with Lydia gone has lost its great advocate and has not been very active, though there are some individuals who are in touch and we hope they will be part of a campaign.

That leaves New Action and MORE as the fairly active groups, along with of course Retiree Advocate, where I am part of the organizing committee that has proven to be so successful.

So fundamentally, there are major changes in what was UFC.

If the leading voices in the traditional opposition were to start, where exactly do they start working on organizing for the election? I have no easy answers - other than some people need to take the bull by the horn and JUST DO IT!

I am advocating for the key voices from the various groups to start talking outside their own caucus structure to reduce a formal caucus role but hopefully with the support of their caucus in the interest of winning.

While I was part of the process in creating UFC, I was uncomfortable with the slow pace. And the fact that there are loads of people out there who want change in the union but are not included in the process. We found out in the RA election that in recruiting 300 people to run and getting them involved we were a much bigger force. 

Of course RA is a caucus and the organizing committee did a great job. So am I talking out of two sides of my mouth?  Well, we had one major issue facing us - healthcare -  and we had to move fast and build alliances and most importantly, we were the only oppo game in retiree town and didn't have to build coalitions with internal competing groups but only with individuals and we certainly did with our 300 candidates.

Let's use that model as an example. We can run 750-800 people in the election next year. Let's reach out and get some more voices involved in organizing for the election and not stay behind closed doors until January petition craziness when it is already getting too late.

Peter Lamphere has some thoughts on next year on the MORE blog:

By Peter Allen-Lamphere

The electoral sweep by opposition forces in the paraprofessional and retiree chapters are nothing less than an electoral earthquake in UFT politics. By winning close to 2/3rds of the votes in these former bastions of Mulgrew’s UNITY caucus, the union activists in Fix Para Pay and Retiree Advocate slates have proven that it’s possible to electorally defeat UNITY’s 60 year control of the UFT. 

If the 2022 United for Change slate had received the same margin amongst retirees as in this years chapter election, we would have won by 51%

The retiree activists also have provided some new innovative and inspirational tactics and strategies we need to apply to our general union elections next year.

 Read if at What could a grassroots UFT election campaign look like?

----
Afterburn

This post will piss off some of my oppo colleagues but I will be in the hospital early tomorrow morning for a hopeful operation on my pancreas so I'm posting and running. You might not be hearing from me for a while so enjoy the best day of the year - the last day of school.

 

Update on Chicago Teachers Union, LA's UTLA Authorize Strike

Past contract negotiations have been about wages and benefits, but the union under Lewis and Sharkey also has emphasized broader issues. Their caucus, called CORE, believes the teachers union should lead in the battle against the privatization of public education.... WBEZ News, Chicago 

I am going to be doing a batch of blogs on the various social justice teacher groups around the nation, not as a fan boy as so many on the left seem to be, but with an eye towards analysis. The three biggest cities - NYC, Chicago and LA all have versions of social justice groups, with the latter in control of the union while MORE in NYC has made little progress and in fact I would say it has gone backwards since its founding in 2012 as an outcome of the victory of CORE in Chicago in 2010. I found this comment interesting:

Lewis and her leadership team became a force by taking on broader social justice issues affecting students, schools, and their members. Since their election in 2010, they have fought for strong, equitable public schools, peaceful neighborhoods, and affordable housing. The CTU’s current leadership says these battles are still of the utmost importance, but they also plan to focus squarely on bread and butter union issues. 

One of the charges in Chicago has been that the leadership was too focused on SJ and not enough on bread and butter, leading to the formation of a caucus called Members First, which will challenge CORE in the upcoming elections. We have had the same discussion in MORE here in NYC which caused so much rancor, it led to people leaving or being pushed out. (More on the MORE divides in upcoming posts.)

I will post updates on Chicago and LA teacher unions. They are of particular interest in that the leaderships of both are social justice oriented. The CTU has been run by the CORE caucus since the 2010 election, an event that inspired teacher groups around the nation to organize local caucuses. MORE in NYC is one such example. With Karen Lewis, a black woman, about to retire, VP Jesse Sharkey, a white male, is expected to take over. In the world of identity politics so dominant on the left/SJ world, this can get sticky. Thus there is some battling going on over who will be the VP and identity politics is playing a role from what I hear. The 2012 strike by the CTU was a sort of shot heard around the world in education activist circles.

In LA, I'm not clear whether there is one controlling caucus or a coalition of progressives. But Alex Caputo-Pearl, also a white male, is a strong and progressive leader and will almost definitely lead them into a strike -- as I write this Diane Ravitch just reported the strike vote was in:

Diane Ravitch's blog: Los Angeles: Teachers Authorize Strike - This just in: ** MEDIA ADVISORY ** FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
First up today is a story about the CTU from WBEZ News with what seems like a fairly honest assessment of where things are with the CTU where there will be an election taking place this spring at the same time there will be one here in NYC. Note this:

Emphasizing wages and benefits, as well as firing up members around contract negotiations, could be a strategic move for a union coming under pressure from all sides. 

Internal and external struggles 

At the moment, there’s an internal struggle in the union about how and when to replace Lewis. Also, Lewis and Sharkey’s leadership team, which faced so little opposition three years ago they didn’t hold an election, looks like it will face a challenge this spring when their term expires. 

The story delves into the finances of the CTU - from one of the CORE founders George Schmidt, who has been on the outs with the CORE and CTU leaders over his reporting, we have heard some questions over expenditures but I don't have the full story at this point.

WBEZ News

 

Uncertain Future For Chicago Teachers Union
https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/uncertain-future-for-chicago-teachers-union/1f4ec7b6-69af-43b1-a2b7-694a8b408105

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 

Another View in The UFT - Our New DA Newsletter

• If APPR Is So Great, Why Do People Want Out? By Arthur Goldstein, CL Francis Lewis HS,
• What We Do at the UFT Executive Board By Mike Schirtzer, Delegate Leon Goldstein HS, UFT Ex Bd, MORE/UFT
• High School Teacher Emily James Makes The Case For Paid Maternity Leave
•   Unity Caucus/UFT Leaders vote down resolution to reduce the 4 observations the UFT agreed to down to the 2 in the rest of NY State
•   Mulgrew To Delegate Assembly: These Are Best Of Times For NYC Public Schools By James Eterno, Delegate, MORE/UFT, ICE
• Chalkbeat: Lack of Knowledge, Lack of Experience By Jonathan Halabi, CL School of American Studies, UFT Ex Bd, New Action/UFT
• Tottenville HS Teachers Castigate Principal Scarmato; 

Email me for pdf if you want to share with your colleagues.

I like standing at the DA handing out something I consider relevant and something that over time people may want to read even if they disagree. I enjoy the interaction with people, some of whom I've known for decades. But I also like to hand out content I am comfortable with and also that I think is relevant. At times I go back to my own production of Ed Notes. But I've been looking to partner with people who can continue the project when I decide to hang up my spikes. Thus----

Arthur Goldstein, Mike Schirtzer, UFT Ex Bd members, James Eterno and I, all members of MORE, have begun a newsletter, "Another View in the UFT", aimed at attendees at the Delegate Assembly. The 5-700 people who attend DAs regularly are not the average UFT members. They have committed their time and energy to taking a more activist role in the union, whether they are in the ruling Unity Caucus, opposition groups or independents. Thus we all have something in common even when we disagree.

Most of the content will be abridged versions of the issues covered on our blogs but also some additional content. Newsletters will be timely and often last minute based on breaking news. Content will be aimed at  informing chapter leaders and delegates of issues that have come up at DAs and UFT Exec Bd meetings.

Over the past 20 years I have been at most DAs handing something out - Education Notes, ICE lit, GEM lit and less often MORE lit, which has been very spotty over the years despite the fact I have urged people in MORE to establish a regular publication at the DA. I have pretty much given up preaching that message. Unity puts out a piece of worthless trash each month and most months New Action has something to give out, which over the past two years has been getting better and better. The DA, no matter how lame it may be, is still the 10 times a year where people from the schools get to gather and even though probably 60-70% are Unity and a handful are opposition there are still a 100-150 independents. The Oct and Nov DA has no new motions, which was very frustrating to see. Many of use even when we were in ICE used the time to push into issues being neglected. The spotty presence of MORE as an organization and the MORE CLs and Del who don't bother attending DAs over the years has been a serious concern to the older ICE members and some of the newer activists.

In Ed Notes publications, I focused very often on the foibles of the union leadership. When MORE has lit to hand out I often do it but find it devoid of the analysis of the action of the leadership, which I believe an opposition party must take on if it is to be taken seriously. MORE wants to put forth more of a positive alternative. Some MORE's feel there is a need for a more critical piece of lit about the Unity Caucus control of the union. Thus this new limited edition newsletter --- if any readers want it for their school email me and I will send a pdf.

The problem with MORE Lit is often an unwillingness to take on the union leadership or even mention Unity Caucus. MORE often has bigger ideas it wants to emphasize and wants to avoid coming off as negative. Like take its "Save Our Union" campaign which a minority in MORE feel is better left to the leadership because it puts MORE in the ticklish position of trying to be an opposition and critic - in theory - while in essence urging people to back the Unity party in power. (Some MORE people did show up to hand out a Save Our Union leaflet yesterday.)

I have no qualms about going after the union leadership and am withholding a blanket "Stay in the Union" pending some signs from the leadership of democratization. I am in my 51st year of UFT membership (and will remain a member) and over decades have seen too much on how the ruling party operates. Some of the younger MOREs may need a few more decades of seeing how they operate before they get riled up like me.

Howie Schoor's response to my speech (see Arthur's report) at the EB meeting the other day where I called on the UFT leadership to be held accountable for he failures to challenge awful principals more aggressively and for the climate of fear in so many schools was that they are held accountable every three years in the UFT elections.

I was already off the mic  -- I wondered how many teachers at Port Richmond and Flushing and Tottenville HS feel that way --- just wait until post Janus.