Showing posts with label MORE Caucus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MORE Caucus. Show all posts

Saturday, April 19, 2025

ARISE Pro-Unity Positions Proves ARISE never AROSE: Don't Waste A Vote That Helps Unity Win - VOTE ABC

Saturday, April 19, 2025 - ARISE SINKS!

Proof is in the pudding. ARISE is not running against Unity but against ABC. 

Holy Cow - ARISE's Bacon increasingly takes the same line as Unity - this time on the Intro 1096 City Council law that so many retirees want to see passed to protect their Medicare. And engages in an attack on Marianne Pizzitola and her enormously successful organizing of retirees to battle for their medicare. 

Of course the motivation is that Marianne is supporting ABC and only wishes she would back ARISE and if she did you would never see him writing these comments. Even more interesting to me is that 2 of the 3 legs of ARISE - Retiree Advocate, and his own caucus New Action, are loaded with retirees - in fact 25% (140) of their candidates are retirees, many of them elected to the DA in the massive retiree win in last year's retiree chapter election, which they won with what Nick Bacon would call a "myopic" focus on the healthcare issue - and they won due to the massive support Marianne and her troops gave them. That election and the 75% win by Fix Para Pay are amongst the main forces driving the possibility of defeating Mulgrew -- note there are 70k retirees and 27k paras -- about half the total voting UFT membership. 

That FPP is aligned with ABC -- with 120 paras running with ABC - over 20% of the 560 candidates - unprecedented in the history of the UFT - irks ARISE which had reached out to FPP to ask them to run with ARISE, especially since ARISE does not seem to have many - or any - paras on their slate.  

Yet, ARISE continues to join in the Unity attacks on ABC for focusing on the issues of most concern to UFT members and attempting to create a broad-based non-sectatarian inclusive movement. Shame, shame, shame.

How does the position of ARISE on intro 1096 - which many of the 300 elected RTC delegates and Exec Bd members support - play out with them or even with the 140 retiree candidates?

This was posted by Dan Alicea on FB:

Whether fueled by political/personal vendettas, unabated paranoia or Mulgrew’s Unity talking points, Nick Bacon, the caucus boss of New Action, now believes full support for Intro 1096 is short-sighted and could adversely hurt active members. 
 
❌This despite an overwhelming majority of UFT retirees voting in favor of a reso in full support of Intro 1096 and their calls for our union to lobby and commit its resources to it.
 
🥸 This is strange since many of those who support the bill and the RTC resolution are RA, and even New Action (NAC) UFT retirees.
 
❌ Bacon thinks that we need a task force of UFT labor lawyers to decide our futures. Despite, MLC/UFT lawyer, Alan Klinger, on an audio recording not willing to call 1096 illegal but rather that he worries it would impact future options of the MLC to negotiate retiree benefits for active service benefits and wages.
 
UFT retirees, a vote for ARISE is a wasted vote. 
 
ARISE never AROSE. 
 
Nick has shown his MORE-led, caucus-first coalition is willing to ignore the will of UFT retirees. They are willing to bow to Mulgrew for political gain and election season posturing by pitting actives against retirees.
 
If you think it’s time to replace Mulgrew because our healthcare, pensions and benefits are too important to risk, only ABC offers a steady hand of seasoned union leaders and the unwavering commitment to support the issues that matter to retirees. 
 
On May 1st ballots will be mailed to our homes. In May, we take back our union and make MEMBERS FIRST, again! 
 
Vote for A Better Contract (ABC)
 



 

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

Teacher Mike Schirtzer Celebrates Paraprofessional Day

For Unity, MORE, and New Action, this is an election gimmick...Mike S.
April 2, 2025

Mike, a candidate for HS Ex bd on the ABC slate, didn't mention that over 100 paras are running with A Better Contract through the Fix Para Pay group. This is the first time in UFT general election history that paras have joined groups running against Unity and Mike points out the failures of the past and even some current caucuses in their failures to work with paras - certainly United for Change in the 2022 election, of which I was involved, failed in this regard. I always wonder about all those teachers in the caucuses  and whether they talk to paras at all in their schools. Retiree Advocate has few if any paras associated with it and I'm trying to come up with paras who ran for the 300 delegates to the RTC. Note: This is also a failure on my part and had been for decades so I don't take myself off the blame list.


 
 
There is no bill yet and the 10K bonus is non-pensionable and looks like an election bribe but we still support them getting that money and despite Unity attacks, ABC has supported the 10K and signed the petitions while also being critical of the tactic of using bonuses that are not pensionable.
 
Some schools are holding celebrations:



Holy Paraprofessional Day! by Mike Schirtzer

As an ICT teacher for almost 20 years, I can’t even begin to tell you how incredible it has been to work with so many amazing paras. Every single one I’ve worked with has made my students’ days brighter and better. They’ve helped me become a better teacher. They are the backbone of our schools.


And let’s be clear—the foundation of any union is negotiating strong contracts. That’s why we pay dues. It’s so our union leadership can sit across from the DOE and fight for real raises, benefits, and protections. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

But what are we being told now? That we have to beg City Council for a raise because our union leadership can’t get it done at the bargaining table? That’s an admission of failure. You’re telling me that every other union in this city negotiates raises for its members, but for paraprofessionals, the best we can do is hope and pray politicians throw them some crumbs?

Crumbs in our weekly paycheck—and we’re supposed to be thankful? We’re supposed to rally and wear blue, but whatever you do, don’t bring up the shady backroom political deal. Don’t bring up that it’s not pensionable. Don’t mention that we’re not doing this for school aides and parent coordinators in DC 37. Just smile, say thank you, and keep paying your damn dues.

And even if this raise, bonus, City Council gift, or whatever we’re supposed to call it actually happens—it’s not pensionable. So when paras retire, they’re left high and dry. This is the same scam they pulled on teachers with those garbage bonuses that don’t count toward pensions. Who in God’s name gave Michael Mulgrew the power to hand out non-pensionable “bonuses” like some Wall Street CEO, while refusing to fight for real raises?

And one more thing—because my brothers and sisters in A Better Contract (ABC) have been too kind about this: Let’s talk about New Action and MORE, running under their front group Arise.

New Action has been around for 40 years. MORE for over a dozen years. And now they’re running around pretending to care about para pay? Have they ever made fixing para pay a priority? Hell no. For Unity, MORE, and New Action, this is an election gimmick. For us, it’s about a union doing what it’s supposed to do—fighting for real raises and making our paras’ lives better.

We have worked alongside the leaders of Fix Para Pay—not only including them, but taking our lead from them. Isn’t that how a real union works? A real union listens to its members and fights for their needs. Unlike Unity, MORE, and New Action, who treat para pay as a political prop, we believe in doing the real work to make our paras’ lives better.

This isn’t about political maneuvering—it’s about securing fair, pensionable wages through proper collective bargaining, not backroom deals or non-pensionable bonuses. Our paras deserve respect and real compensation, not empty promises.

Meanwhile, ABC has been fighting to fix para pay from day one. We’re running actual paras for the Executive Board because we believe they should have a real voice in this union.

Unity, MORE, and New Action haven’t cared about para pay—yesterday, today, or tomorrow. Don’t be fooled.

 

Tuesday, April 1, 2025

Beware of Unity & MORE, UFT! They ALL claim to be 'member-driven'. Part 1 - UFT Proud

An ABC supporter opines on this anonymous blog. (It's not me writing this stuff - too much research work for lazy me to do.)

Tuesday April 1 - and this post is not an April Fool Joke

I am tired of the caucus control of our union. This is our union. We need a better contract.

They ALL claim to be 'member-driven'. But can you truly be member-driven while forcing your own personal politics and personal agendas on union members? - Part 1

Do Mulgrew, Weingarten, and their Unity caucus really think they speak for us all? Who do they represent and speak for? Doesn't member-driven mean we have a say?



Beware Stock Illustrations – 65,361 Beware Stock Illustrations, Vectors &  Clipart - Dreamstime

Can Michael Mulgrew, Randi Weingarten and their Unity caucus separate personal politics and personal agendas with leading our union?

Do they even bother to ask us what we think when they act on our behalf?

Umm. No.

Here are just some recent examples that they don’t give a darn about our diverse views, nor do they bother to get our input before they act on our behalf.


  1. Congestion Pricing - Mulgrew decided he’s against congestion pricing, therefore, the UFT is against it. He never polled us. We never spoke about or debated this issue at a UFT delegate assembly or UFT executive board. Like the dictator he is, he used our dues to file a lawsuit without our consent.

    Maybe he has a point about how it affects working class folks? Maybe he’s ignoring the body of environmental studies that prove him wrong? Maybe some of us agreed with him regarding congestion pricing. Yet, we also know just as many of us didn’t. Either way, he didn’t care to ask because he doesn’t think he has to.


  1. Israel/Gaza - This is an issue that has many strong, passionate, polarizing and personal positions among Americans and our union members, alike. Despite the inherent dissension this issue inevitably brings, Unity decided they would pass several geopolitical resolutions locally and nationally without speaking to members, first. Why bother, right?

    Even when some in Unity pushed back behind closed doors about the need to make sure that any stated position included our union’s diversity of voices, or that perhaps a press statement might be better, they didn’t care to ask or include members in the discussion before writing and forcing through geo-political resolutions with limited debate.

    As some know, Unity doesn’t just control our local union but Randi Weingarten leads Unity’s equivalent in our national union, the American Federation of Teachers.

    Did Randi or Unity poll teachers on a national level if the union should have a “Ceasefire Resolution”, condemn Netanyahu, or that the union must support a “two-state solution”? Nope.

    Ask most on the various sides of the Israel-Gaza issue and sufficed to say that the majority these days may likely not support a “two-state” solution. Some of us are not even sure our unions need to have a union position on geopolitical issues.

    One AFT delegate, Amy Lesser, from Los Angeles, holds a view many others in our union have expressed. She stated in a recent interview:

    “We are not international politicians,” she said. “And there is no foreign government that has any interest in what the teachers union or any labor union has to say about how they should function. . . . So the entire purpose behind these motions and these resolutions is that they generate a hostile teaching environment and learning environment for students.”

    Nonetheless, Unity didn’t bother to ask you or me, once again. They voted as a bloc in Houston, Texas, in the summer of 2024, for a “two-state solution” because of their oath that binds Unity delegates to vote for whatever the caucus leadership decides.


  2. Divesting our pensions and union assets from Musk’s Tesla? - We all know that Randi and Unity are tied to the hip of the establishment Democrat machine. They may try to appear to be neutral but those of us who attend delegate assemblies heard when Mulgrew included us as part of the DNC’s operations. He blurred the lines with the DNC when he spoke about ‘WE’ will be door knocking and campaigning for the Harris for President campaign in Pennsylvania.

     
    Who can forget Randi and the UFT making public endorsements of Kamala Harris the minute front page news shared that Biden would no longer be running and Kamala had declared her candidacy before rank and file AFT delegates voted on the matter? They boasted about being the first union to endorse Kamala while unions like the Teamsters deliberated and polled all of their members. Teamsters did the unimaginable in Unity circles these days — they made no endorsement.

    Now that Harris lost the presidential election handily and Trump has included Elon Musk in his administration, Randi is really mad and obsessed about losing to the will of the American people, Trump and Musk. She dedicates a lot of her time and effort these days in a Twitter/X war with Elon and has gone as far as asking that pension and asset managers divest from Musk’s Tesla company.

    It seems that her personal politics and petty partisan online bickering now affect our financial bottom lines, too? Randi, have you reflected about why so much of the working class isn’t voting for your side these days?

  3. The New York Health Act - Here’s a little secret Unity doesn’t want you to know. Retirees, take heed. Our union’s official position according to our highest-deliberative body is that the UFT SUPPORTS of the New York Health Act.


    Did you know that Unity is actually behind writing, motivating and passing the two UFT resolutions that affirm the union’s official support for the New York Health Act? They have a really crazy way of gaslighting us to deflect from their own deeds.

    In 2015, most of the left and even centrist Democrats were staunchly behind Bernie’s Medicare for All. For a season, it was politically cool and fashionable to support single-payer universal healthcare. Following the political headwinds of the day, Unity wrote and passed a resolution in support of NYHA that seeks to a create a single payer healthcare system for all in New York.

    In May of 2015, the former Unity-UFT Secretary, Emil Pietromonaco, can be found here motivating the Unity crafted UFT resolution in support of the New York Health Act. It passed overwhelmingly by the Unity dominated executive board. Shortly after, it passed overwhelmingly in their rubber stamp, Unity dominated delegate assembly.

Another Unity inspired reso in 2017 that affirmed our union stance on the New York Health Act was motivated by current UFT secretary, LeRoy Barr. It too passed overwhelmingly in the Unity-dominated exec board and delegate assembly.

So what changed? Why did Unity waffle on its own stance on the New York Health Act? Did they see the light? Did they finally realize it may affect retiree Medicare? Or did they have a “come to Jesus'“ moment as to how to fund it? No, the Biden-Harris campaign for President in 2020 changed the DNC’s views on single-payer universal healthcare, at least for now.

The 2020 Biden campaign may have still supported a path to universal healthcare but it also believed it could become a reality through privatization — rejecting a single payer option exclusively. We see this in his stated campaign positions.

We also see the AFT and Randi abandon its hardline single payer stance from the Bernie days and fall in line with the Biden-Harris privatized insurance plus public option view.

The Uniry-led AFT passed a resolution during the pandemic changing labor’s long held position regarding univeral healthcare with a single payer option to supporting the possibility of achieving it with “private insurance with a public option.”

Circa 2020, the current union leadership pulled back on its own single-payer healthcare position, despite their own resolutions in support of NYHA, and they began to publish contradictory anti-NYHA messaging on our union web pages. Mulgrew openly attacked the will of the union’s deliberative bodies and blamed union activists, except it strangely was their own Unity caucus machinations.

In this insider, establishment political see-saw game, they didn’t ask you or me. Their flip-flop regarding the New York Health Act wasn’t because they sought input from the membership. It had more to do with the Big Healthcare lobbyists having the ear of the Biden Administration while it fiercely lobbied in states that were considering a single-payer option or a public option.

So maybe they just changed their minds? So why not use the executive board and delegate assembly to change the union stance on NYHA?

These days they have no guarantees in ramming things through the DA because of their shrinking majority and why should they if Mulgrew can do whatever he wants without consent, even if the consent is performative.

Did they realize how it would impact their control of the Welfare Fund? Maybe. We also can’t discount Mulgrew’s dance with the City to achieve health care cost savings in exchange for retro raises and the bill that came due in 2018 . Or that he created a Medicare Advantage plan that sought to force Medicare eligible retirees into it to pay for his givebacks.

To Cuomo or Not to Cuomo?

A test of Unity’s disdain and mistrust of members will be on display during this pivotal upcoming mayoral election. Will Unity actually poll us for our desired endorsement picks as to who should be the next mayor of NYC? Would they bother to share the poll results with us? Already Unity apologists are making a case for disgraced, former Governor Andrew Cuomo who has a marred history steeped in anti public education and anti-union policies, creating Tier 6, and multiple allegations of sexual harassment of 13 women. Mulgrew already has shown his cards and thinks Cuomo is worthy of our consideration.

And still our voices and input don’t matter to Unity in our union’s political decisions. Member-driven? Not in 60 years. Not ever.

Member-divisive. Yes.


Up next: If a MORE-dominated ARISE coalition is elected, can it genuinely be MEMBER-DRIVEN?

Can MORE caucus and its political front groups, like Educators for Palestine, separate their own personal politics and personal agendas from leading our union?


We need new leadership that’s committed to being member-led, member-centered and MEMBERS FIRST. That’s why I’m voting for the A Better Contract slate. Caucuses like Unity and MORE only pursue their own self-preservation. While ABC believes in genuine member voice and referenda — no more decisions on big issues like political endorsements without bringing it to the membership, first.


  • A Casino in Queens or Time Square? - Most of us still don’t understand why he used the weight of the union or had union officers at public hearings fighting in this casino bidding war among the city’s billionaires as to whose project should be approved by the City. Mulgrew decided that he was firmly with Team Billionaire Steve Cohen and that Queens residents deserve a new casino in their backyard— not in a business district like Time Square. Mulgrew’s close ties to chief lobbyist, Louis Cholden-Brown, for Cohen’s casino empire bidding operation raises a lot of eyebrows. Should our union be involved in this? Were we consulted or briefed? Ha!


  • Saturday, January 25, 2025

    UFT Election Winning Strategy - As Simple as ABC - Go Where the Votes Are and Meet the Candidates on Feb. 11

    When bank robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robs banks he answered: Because that's where the money is.

    I apply the same logic in response regarding UFT elections. I don't put down getting votes from anywhere -- The aim is to win and for those who don't realize --
    If you really want to win go where the votes are. 
     
    Otherwise you are running not to win, but to make a point. 
    Now I do see people turning their noses up at some voters -- like Unity defectors or the non-lock step ideologues or heaven forbid, the potential 30-35% UFT Trump voters.  If you turn up your nose at potential voters, you don't want to win.

    Saturday, Jan. 26, 2025
     
    Many critics who attack me for daring to think outside the box, assume that if two slates run in the UFT election, it is impossible to beat Unity. 
     
    “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Sherlock Holmes
     
    So let's look at how to to turn the impossible into the improbable into the possible: A win for ABC.
     
    It may seem "improbable" for ABC to win, but I believe a win is impossible for ARISE in a 3-slate race. Thus, only a vote for ABC can turn the improbable into the possible and Sherlock says that must be the truth. 

    Elementary, my dear Watson.

    And on Feb. 11 you can meet the ABC candidates. http://rsvp.uftmembers.org
      
    Unity Must Go in order to win
    I've been accused of changing positions in mid-stream. I have always been in favor of one slate to challenge Unity. I also believed that we can't win unless we weaken Unity at its core -- in the schools where they have an army of chapter leaders and influencers, especially in the elementary schools where there are 36 thousand potential voters and Unity always wins big. (66% in 2022).

    Going back to the late 90s and looking at a weak and ineffectual opposition back then, I decided that winning over people in Unity would be essential to winning an election and I initially aimed Ed Notes at appealing to Unity people who wanted change in the union. And I did get an audience. But the minute I made even the mildest criticism of the new leadership under Randi, I lost them. So I switched into full-blown oppo mode.  Now I see the first real opportunity for a permanent break in Unity at the in-service level to go along with the break in the retiree and para chapters.
     
    In the past elections, winning a sliver, the high schools and maybe the middle schools was the realistic goal. But conditions have changed and I'm not interested in slivers. The idea of winning the entire enchilada is what has gotten people so excited. They seem to take winning for granted. I don't take anything for granted.
     
    And conditions have certainly changed since the 2022 elections when every voice of the opposition was involved in United for Change.
     
    I change due to changing conditions. And the numbers for UFC were not great. Somehow people think that the current version of UFC, a weakened ARISE - with 3 caucuses involved - two of which are no stronger than they were in 2022 - would win if they were the only ones running because the third caucus, RA, seems so much stronger based on its big win last June. My claim is that RA as an organizing group of 11, is not really stronger than it was in 2022 and in terms of a general UFT election it has the same limited direct outreach. RA won 63% due to the influx of voters, many from Unity, and many coming from Marianne's supporters. Many Unity voters may just drift back in a general election.
     
    As a member of the RA org committee of 11, I was the lone dissenter from joining this coalition and urged RA to stay neutral, and could play a mediator role. MORE and New Action needed RA to be part of the coalition as a way to sell a winning strategy because both of them, which aim at the in-service people, understand they have failed to attract a wide enough following with in-service people to win without the retirees. My position has been that the oppo have opposed the impact of retirees on elections for decades but now are switching course in mid-stream and that to win an election loaded with retirees would be destabilizing and further alienate the in-service where a majority are on Tier 6. How do they feel about being led by people who are on Tier 1, as ARISE is offering?

    I try not to stick with a pattern of a losing strategy. In 2022 I believed in all caucuses and non-caucuses should get together in United for Change. And the outcomes of that effort was disappointing, to the point I have been willing to look at alternate ideas. I am still for one slate, but not the same kind of election management under caucus guidance, like UFC was. Instead I believe in one slate under a broad based and group of individuals capable of growth from the ground up, whether people are in a caucus or not --- but not to allow a small group of people to make the basic decisions -- call it a steering committee -- instead to open up the process to the broader based UFT membership. In other words, we don't just want your vote in May, we want you involved from the ground up in the entire process.
     
    So let's go back to the opening question: where are the votes? 
    Certainly retirees where 39% return ballots and the recent flip from Unity in the RTC election is major. Clearly, many former Unity voters flipped over the Medicare issue and voted for RA. Will that flip hold for a general election? While those former Unity voters may have been pissed off enough at Mulgrew and Tom Murphy's role to vote them out, are they willing to turn over the entire union to a group consisting of RA, New Action and MORE, with MORE being the dominant player in this group? Frankly, I don't think so.

    But given another alternative that includes a number of people who have left Unity, these voters may feel they have another place to go rather than go back to Unity. It's as simple as ABC.

    Where else can we find votes? Remember the Para election where Fix Para Pay won 75% in an admittedly low turnout vote in a para chapter that has 27k potential voters? Unity has noticed and is suddenly showing interest in making paras welcome, though fixing their pay is not on their agenda. But there is a group that is very committed to fighting for para pay and to fight for other things issues they want - like ILOD - Injury in Line of Duty protection and other issues beyond pay like some prep time. Can the para unit be energized to vote in this election and where are those votes likely to go? It's as simple as ABC.

    Now how about the disaffected anti-Mulgrew Unity Caucus people? I don't mean the full-time staff who are clinging to their jobs, but the rank and file Unity people who are often chapter leaders, some with after school jobs? How many potential votes do they offer? The important issue in this case is can they bring their staffs and other Unity friends along with them, which could add up to thousands of votes? While there's no way to tell since most Unity are silent (though sending private encouragement), there are underground indications of a growing revolt, that if it catches on, will make a major dent in the Unity votes. And we have been seeing an erosion of Unity votes over the past elections. But Unity voters will not go to a MORE tinged group. It's as simple as ABC.

    How about retirees? The assumption since June was that the same massive vote would go to Retiree Advocate. But they've aligned with MORE, leading to these comments on my last blog post:
    John Q Teacher: I thought that RA was Mariannes's baby? Why would she abandon it and secretly endorse ABC? I'm confused. I really wish she would speak publicly about where she stands on who she is supporting.  
     
    Anon: This shit is just too complicated to follow. I was a retiree. I will vote for whoever Marianne recommends. Stick that up your ass, Mr. Mulgrew.
    Marianne has clearly leaned toward ABC, and made reference to ABC in public comments, sparking the Unity attacks on her. So where will her followers go? It's as simple as ABC.

    Now, let's look at the vast unknown -- the 80% of working UFT members who don't vote. This is the territory that both Unity and the caucuses, following the same formula in every election, have not been able to mine. Why would they be more successful this time? 
     
    Can a new campaign paradigm make a dent in the 80% non-voters? Here I won't claim It's as simple as ABC because it hasn't been successful before, so let's call this an interesting premise, that if proven correct, will make it as simple as ABC.
     
    What are these new tactics? I ain't saying just yet as many ideas are still in process, but turnouts for ABC events have been very promising. And email lists are growing. I will get deeper into the unique experience I've had working with ABC in future posts.
     
    ABC has a chance to win in a 3 way race by draining Unity votes and winning new voters in the schools and old voters from the retirees. Whether it works or not, we will learn a lot.

    For my money, a vote for any group other then ABC is a wasted vote.

    Everyone is invited to run with ABC. Sign up here.

     
     

     

    Tuesday, January 14, 2025

    ABC, To me, Seems Like One Two Three, Join ABC Member Assembly, Tue, 1/14 at 7 PM; Join the ABC election slate

    Amongst all the furor over the two slate situation and the angst it seems to engender, I keep wondering why I find the endeavor with ABC so energizing. Here's one reason:

    You're invited: Join our UFT Member Assembly via Zoom on Tue, 1/14 at 7 PM; Join the ABC election slate

    We will speak about the erosion of our healthcare benefits and what we need to do to stop it. http://rsvp.uftmembers.org

    300 registered so far. Join the crowd.


     
    The turnouts for ABC have been excellent due to networking ability to extend its reach, an original intent of coming together in the first place: To attempt to reach deep into the schools to break the 80% non-voting active members (39% of retirees vote). 
    I'm not opposed to caucuses but for this election especially I feel their model of organizing will not win. I've said it time and again - the ability of the current caucuses to reach deeper than the surface into schools has not been successful as reflected in the most recent UFT election two years ago and the fact that over decades they have shown little growth, massive turnover and some shrinkage. New Action is 30 years old with roots back to the 60s and MORE, the hot new thing when it went public 13 years ago after over a year and a half of behind closed doors negotiations, are stagnant.
     
    When people ask how is ABC different from other groups running --- look at the outcomes so far in terms of attracting attention and supporters because ABC was free of restraints to act and did not get bogged down in caucus negotiations fed through a narrow group of steering committee members who are a gate though which decisions are made.

    Look, since my diagnosis, I no longer am looking at living to 125. So I don't have time to watch the slow drip of caucus negotiations. When ABC began to meet in earnest in August with members of all caucuses in the room, I wanted the campaign to start in September but caucus issues kept delaying us until early November when the caucuses exited ABC and what was left of ABC said: Enough - and came out of the box publicly in mid-November, declaring it was running, while the caucuses spent the next 6 weeks deliberating in secret and made their first public announcement as the XMAS vacation was about to start.
     
    This is the basis of my analysis as to why a caucus dominated election will not win. What has been accomplished since New Action left their 10 year alliance with Unity in 2016 when they joined with MORE to win the 7 hs exec bd seats, and again with UFC in 2022 -- the holy grail of oppo election politics -- winning 7 out of 100 exec bd seats? That is no longer good enough.

    Don't get me wrong. I was an avid participator over decades as a member of MORE and before that ICE in elections from 2004-2022. I just don't want to do that again.

    Now, with the big retiree and para wins in the chapter elections, everyone's hopes for a big win have been raised. I think a win would only be possible by building new alliances and not just count on those results to carry the day.

    A key to this election would be to reach out to the 80% of in service teachers who rarely vote and the current caucuses with actives in previous elections did not have enough outreach into enough schools to beat Unity. Of course everyone was thinking of the ace in the hole -- the retiree vote. But with Tier 6 being such a catastrophe for over half the working UFT members, there are issues beyond health care, though for both retirees and actives, healthcare is still a top level concern. 

    Which reminds me: ABC is doing a healthcare zoom tonight.



    You're invited: Join our UFT Member Assembly via Zoom on Tue, 1/14 at 7 PM; Join the ABC election slate

    We will speak about the erosion of our healthcare benefits and what we need to do to stop it. http://rsvp.uftmembers.org

    Hey folks! Last month, we covered the ABCs of PAY. This month, our focus is on HEALTHCARE.

    Whether you're a UFT Retiree or an In-Service member, our premium-free healthcare is at risk, while our existing coverage continues to erode and we pay more and more out-of-pocket.

    Let’s come together to discuss the current threats and challenges facing our union, and talk about what we need to do to protect and expand our premium-free healthcare for the future.

    Tuesday, January 14th at 7 PM.

    Register here: http://rsvp.uftmembers.org

    Join us! Let’s work towards A BETTER CONTRACT that protects and improves our healthcare. Everyone is welcome.

    Register for Member Assembly


    Run With ABC in the 2025 UFT Geneal Election – Slate Signups Still Open!


    We want you (yes, YOU!) to join us in the upcoming UFT General Election.

    We're inviting all UFT members, no matter your political views or caucus affiliation, to be part of ABC’s non-partisan grassroots movement. We’re all about demanding A Better Contract — both with the City of New York and our union leadership.

    We're looking for candidates for UFT officer positions, Executive Board, NYSUT Representatives, and AFT Delegates. Read the UFT 2025 election notice to learn more about these positions and qualifications.

    Do you want to read our platform, first? Click here.

    Our officer and executive board spots are 90% filled with some of these positions still available. Still, we most definitely want to run a full slate, so sign up today.

    Head over to slate.uftmembers.org to sign up, and we'll be in touch soon with more details.

    Sign up for the ABC Slate


    Thanks so much. We’re looking forward to connecting with you soon and getting back to work on transforming our UFT.

    If you have any questions, suggestions, or want to get more involved, don’t hesitate to reach out. Together, we can create a stronger, more equitable future.

    Stay updated with us at: http://abettercontract.org

    To run on the ABC slate for the 2025 election, go to: http://slate.uftmembers.org

    To join our organizing work groups, go to: http://join.uftmembers.org

    Download, share and print a flyer to post at your school/work site: flyer.uftmembers.org

    And follow us at:


    Thanks for reading A BETTER CONTRACT - UFT MEMBERS! This post is public so feel free to share it.

    Share

     
     

    Tuesday, December 10, 2024

    UFT Caucuses: When to Hold and When to Fold, UFT Members Assembly - The ABCs of Better Pay

    I agree (Union Activists - Are We Weird?. )  Prioritizing building an all-inclusive coalition is a losing game. We've seen where that goes and the fact that UFC evaporated shortly after the last election is all the evidence that anyone needs to know that these types of marriage of convenience strategies aren't built for long term organizing. How many UFC officer candidates left the DOE post election? This pattern of squabbling between elections and trying to come together last min is a real bummer.... Anon. comment on Ed Notes
    A very incisive comment from someone who seems to be on the inside. And after the public service announcement below I will delve into the 50 year failures of election coalitions in the UFT - believe me I know. I helped put them together multiple times, only to see the coalitions come apart for years before they awaken like a bear out of hibernation to redo the same old thing once again when the election bell rings, the so-called Einstein def of insanity. Or the Pavlov dogs of the UFT. 
     
    The current caucus structure even with one slate can't win - and if they did imagine each caucus doing what they always do - retreating to their corners to use their position to build their caucus so the next time they could ice everyone else out to try to win the whole thing for themselves. MORE is in a much better position than NAC to do that. After the 2022 election all pleas to MORE to keep meeting were ignored. It took most of the year for the break with New Action on the exec bd to come. MORE sits as far away as they could from NAC. (maybe now they will sit together to show a united front while they  gnash their teeth. So imagine this shot gun alliance now. Just like UFC the day after the election, win or lose, infighting and positioning will start. It's in their DNA. Only RA doesn't have to do that because a) it's an oligarchy and b) they have no competition from another caucus so they can act with impunity.

     
    There's still time to register for today's ABC Member Meetup zoom.

    We’re excited to invite you to an important UFT Members Assembly: "The ABCs of Pay: Let's Talk!". In this Zoom meeting, we will dive into one of the most pressing issues for educators - fair compensation.

    Surveys show fair compensation is the leading issue for UFT members. This meet-up will focus on the nuances of pattern bargaining and how to break it, plus other ideas on how to increase compensation. Within two hours of posting this meeting, 100 people signed up. You can't run in an election calling for better compensation without an actual plan on how to win that and developing a strategy that differs from the Unity strategies. Explore the options and compare to how the current leadership approaches the issue - Hands up, surrender to the pattern. What is the Municipal Labor Committee and how do we break its stranglehold on pattern bargaining?

    RSVP, Tuesday 12/10 @7PM: UFT Members Assembly - The ABCs of Better Pay

    Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2024
    Time: 7-8 PM
    Location: Zoom [rsvp.uftmembers.org]

    RSVP: 12/10 Member Assembly

     
    Future meetups will focus on other issues. Tent Date for next one on How to win changes in Tier 6 is Jan. 7.


    Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2024
     
    UFT Caucuses: When to Hold and When to Fold
     
    UFT Caucuses come and go - except for Unity. And there are some signs of lower level desertions.
     
    Here's a little history of UFT oppo groups, over 55 years of observance where in most elections coalitions were built and ended the day after the elections.
     
    My 1970s caucus, Coalition of NYC School Workers, was extremely active for a decade and was a one-third component of the New Action Coalition, a united front of 3 caucuses that came together every two years to run in UFT elections from late 70s through early 90s and then went their own ways between elections, often competing with each other for a scarcity of activists. The other two caucuses were New Directions (founded in 1976) and Teachers Action Caucus (c.1968) and merged c.1995. This pattern, while eventually winning some exec bd seats, which often seemed the sole purpose of running, made no progress in building a serious caucus to challenge Unity, a consistent fatal flaw.
     
    The School Worker Coalition's key organizers began to lose interest in the early 80s - I bought a house in 1979 and began an MA in computer science and taught at Brooklyn College that took up the rest of the 80s into the early 90s. We didn't try to breathe life into a dying caucus corpse. The core stayed together and began to meet and eat socially - which those of us still alive still do. The main organizing we did was menus. But we continued to talk about the major issues and stayed informed. Discussions still ran deep and incisive and when I re-emerged those talks gave me a base with which to organize in my own school.

    I came back to life in the UFT in 1994 when I became chapter leader, but my focus was on my school and district where I had to battle a principal and try to woo a district and local union leadership that had viewed me as an enemy in the 70s - and I was fairly successful in neutralizing them since they knew I could still be a problem for them if I did exposes. I did not have much time to do central UFT work other than go to the DA.

    Not until 1997 when I was no longer teaching and working at the district did I have time and energy to do central union organizing work with the debut of Ed Notes, the newsletter. But I was a lone wolf in a sea of caucuses. I relished the freedom but understood you need a caucus to move the ball. The lone wolf phase lasted through 2003 when NAC sold out to Unity and I helped found ICE, not a caucus loaded with limits or norms (except me) in response. 
     
    New Action was composed of the other two wings of the original election New Action Coalition that functioned from 1979-1995, TAC and ND.

    TAC and ND continued as separate active caucuses through the 80s and early 90s. The original coalition, not the caucus New Action but the coalition of caucuses, began to win the high schools and the biggie came in 1985 with winning the HSVP and then 1991 winning the 13 HS and MS exec bd. But they lost it all in 1993 which opened Unity to taking away the right for divisions to choose their own VPs.

    Then came the 1995 contract battle and the voting it down, led by TAC, ND and independents. (I played little part in that for reasons I can't remember.) Apparently talks for a merger of TAC and ND had been going on and that led to the current edition of New Action - New for ND and Action for TAC. Both groups knew it was time to fold into something new and it worked, attracting people like James and the future Camille Eterno. And Lisa North. So TAC and ND folded for something better - more big tent than either ND or TAC (which was considered the left at the time.)

    There were other caucuses called PAC - Progressive Action Caucus. c. 1997. They were focused on teacher who were having trouble passing the license exams and they existed through the 2004 elections when they ran with ICE. They had a big court case and when that was lost they folded -- but funny thing they recently won on appeal 2 decades later.

    And Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC) which was founded in 1992 but didn't participate in UFT elections until 2004. More on them later.

    Now let's leap ahead to ICE - Independent Community of Educators -  which came out of a meeting I called on Halloween 2003. We attracted those who quit New Action like the Eternos, Ellen Fox and Lisa North plus very newly active UFTers like Jeff Kaufman and Julie Woodward, but also what was left of the core people from the old 70s School Workers Caucus. I was impressed by how many independents there were who were not interested in New Action, PAC or TJC and were looking for something that ICE seemed to offer - an Independent point of view freed from caucus hierarchies. And I will say, ICE has never had hierarchies.
     
    This combination in ICE proved dynamic - for a few years. And then it wasn't after the 2007 election when we clearly began to shrink. Meetings of 50 went down to 12. While others persisted I read the cards. We had no real future as a traditional caucus but could continue in some ways to have influence in the UFT, even today. Despite my reluctance we gave it one more try in the 2010 elections, when we ran with TJC. It was time to fold as a traditional caucus after that, to the consternation of people like the late James Eterno and Ellen Fox.

    Oh, TJC - Teachers for a Just Contract. They were around since the 90s but came to life as a caucus for the 2004 elections when ICE and TJC ran separate slates except for the high schools where we ran the same candidates and won. BTW - a formula for running two slates in the coming up election with enough candidates on both slates to win a majority of exec bd and ad com. A possible solution to settle differences. But leave that for another time. The older ICE socialists were very much opposed to the TJC version of socialism and  I would say ICE formed as much to stop TJC from representing the opposition. ICE was a bullwark to both NAC and TJC. To say TJC was pissed is putting it likely. They viewed ICE like ABC is viewed by the legacy oppo today.

    TJC was the hot, younger thing then while ICE leaned older. So they may have had legs but also faded when the younger International Socialists (ISO) abandoned the older socialist Solidarity segment and by the 2010 election they could only field a relatively small number of candidates. It was clear that both ICE and TJC had no future.

    In 2009, some of us in ICE founded a new non-caucus group called GEM - Grassroots Education Movement - a group that had no intention of running in UFT elections but was an advocacy group for public education. GEM attracted new people not interested in UFT politics and, unencumbered by the burden of trying to build a caucus, GEM took off like a rocket - we accomplished more in a 2-3 year period than any caucus I've seen - totally focused, not on positioning, but united on key issues. Even parents were involved. GEM had legs but we got waylaid.

    Then came the 2010 Chicago victory of CORE, a caucus founded only two years before as a union study group. Suddenly some eyes in GEM lit up - we need a CORE in the UFT - and that folded GEM, sadly, and all groups linked to the UFT were invited to discussions of what became MORE - Movement of Rank and File Educators. I was involved in choosing that name - I always wanted to see the word Educators or workers in group names.

    The day of MORE's first big meeting, TJC folded, but ICE people were a major presence in the founding of MORE. And don't think many ICEers weren't reluctant. Gloria, Lisa and I led the push for ICE to give up our autonomy and veto power as we entered MORE. James Eterno was a skeptic. The recently passed Ellen Fox never failed to remind me she opposed ICE giving up autonomy. She wanted to see MORE as a coalition of groups instead of a caucus. Sadly, I now think she was right.

    But as MORE grew, ICE continued to function -- at times were accused by some in MORE of functioning as a caucus within a caucus which was LOL since we are the most undisciplined group of anarcho-socialists. Rice pudding over politics. One thing I learned in MORE was there were highly disciplined factions in MORE that did operate semi-undercover as a caucus within a caucus and were using MORE to recruit for their own outside groups. 
     
    In 2014 a segment of MORE split off to form Solidarity Caucus, which is still around today. Solidarity was very dependent on the leadership of Francesco Porteles and Lydia Howrilka and when they left Solidarity has floundered. After MORE/NA won the 2016 hs seats (where they functioned fairly well together despite MORE steering attempts to interfere and "steer" the exec bd, to no avail - which led to the future troubles and the purging of ICE. 

    So, I gave you a history of most UFT caucuses (I'm leaving out Retiree Advocate for now) and how they merged or folded or became something other than a caucus. 
     
    The conclusion: I'm clearly not opposed to caucuses. I do push back against caucuses when I consider them fundamentally ineffective. Ed Notes once rated a caucus as A caucus in Need of Improvement. I reserve the right to be critical of caucuses  - some for external policies, but also for those with clunky over burdened internal process that bog them down in minutia and too many rules and norms - I hate norms.

    I can only say my best experience in caucuses and uncaucuses had been when there is dynamic conversations on issues of concern to NYC educators -- while some caucuses spend a lot to time talking about themselves. 

    So far my ABC non-caucus experience has been much more of the dynamic conversations with ideas flowing freely. I care more about that process at this point then imposing a formal structure on the UFT election process.