Elfrank-Dana Slams Mulgrew on DA

Dear President Mulgrew,

I was surprised by your insinuation that I am against people's right to vote when I objected to retirees voting last night. 

Are you going to let me vote for my District Rep instead of appointing her/him?
Are you going require high school VP to be elected only by high school members instead of having their votes disenfranchised?
Are you going to be concerned that you are elected mostly by retirees, as member voter participation is barely 20 percent at election time? 

If the answer to these questions remains NO, you are sadly, smugly self-righteous.

John Elfran-Dana, CL Murry Bergtraum HS

And here are some more comments from John:

Unity Dominated DA Rubber Stamps Surrender

As expected, the recipients of patronage jobs at the UFT in exchange for their vows of silence and obedience (a prerequisite for membership in Unity caucus) voted for this lousy contract proposal.

James Eterno, Chapter Leader from Jamaica High School, makes a monkey out of Mulgrew showing him he was out of order by not allowing for alternating pro/con speakers in debate and that the time limit was for the question period. The parliamentarian even had to approach the dais and correct President Mulgrew. 

Furthermore, Eterno challenges Mulgrew's assertion that there's "no money" out there to get us the raises now. Eterno cites reports in the press of city budget surpluses that now and in the future. Presently over a billion dollars. That the money can be moved around to get the teachers the dignity other unions got with raises immediately. Mulgrew escaped by ruling him out of order. It's the old adage - "Never argue with the guy who controls the microphone." To read on go to www.MoreCaucusNYC.org 

Mulgrew did had a flash of religion when he said my objection to letting retirees vote on the contract (which for the most part does not affect them) was an affront to voting rights. I say religion because this is the same UFT President who won't let Chapter Leaders vote for their own District Reps. This is the same UFT President that allows your vote for High School Vice President as a high school teacher to be disenfranchised by allowing retirees and elementary and middle school members to also vote for VP, and visa versa (guaranteeing via this bogus "at large" VP a Unity caucus/retiree majority in each election). This is the same UFT President who thinks there's no problem with less than 20 percent of the membership voting in union elections. Hence, my surprise about his smug self-righteousness surrounding voting rights.

 

Does internal union democracy help organizing efforts? What to tell charter school Teachers being organized by the UFT/AFT?

Leo Casey, who threw around terms like "Trotsky" and "Rosa Luxemberg" in his usual red-baiting attempts to taint those who disagree with the UFT leadership, is possibly the single most intellectually dishonest person in their entire operation - and even his colleagues know it.

Lack of UFT/AFT democracy will retard charter school organizing

I attended a Left Forum panel headed by Leo Casey last Saturday where he and and an AFT charter school organizer talked about how essential it is to organize charter school teachers. I agree. But left unsaid was the Godzilla in the room: what do you say to charter school teachers about the state of democracy, or lack thereof, in the UFT/AFT?

I won't go into the gory details here. But I will say that Leo's fellow panelists congratulated him for sitting through the assault those of us in the opposition put him through. They loved the debate. But where is that same debate taking place within the halls of the UFT? Not at the highest level, the AdCom. Not at the Executive Board where every single member (including the 8 New Action) were endorsed by Unity. And certainly not at the Delegate Assembly.

And not in most of the schools that are controlled by Unity Caucus chapter leaders (see the signs of how some district reps are attempting to undermine Fight Back Friday because they perceive the organizing efforts of GEM, NYCORE and Teachers Unite as a threat. (Isn't it interesting that the "official" caucuses ICE and TJC have laid back on this even though many of the individual members are involved?)

But then again, Leo Casey, who threw around terms like "Trotsky" and "Rosa Luxemberg" in his usual red-baiting attempts to taint those who disagree with the UFT leadership, is possibly the single most intellectually dishonest person in their entire operation - and even his colleagues know it.

So it was with some interest that I came across this item at Gotham:

The Times’ labor reporter is taking questions about unions and labor law. (City Room)

With this excerpt from Steven Greenhouse:

Does internal union democracy help organizing efforts? 

There are those who, perhaps with a cynical view of life, contend that internal union democracy hurts unionizing efforts because one needs a tough, forceful union leader, perhaps like Jimmy Hoffa, to take charge and push people to organize. But I disagree. I think internal union democracy is needed to show potential union members that unions are democratic, responsive organizations, that they listen to union members and their wants and needs. Besides, internal union democracy is vital to help stamp out union corruption. Repeated eruptions of union corruption have badly embarrassed the labor movement and of course made it harder for unions to recruit new members.

So, yes, I support the idea of organizing charter school teachers. But the UFT/AFT efforts will go nowhere until the leadership democratizes the union. See the ICE 2010 platform for a list of 16 suggested reforms. (It could be 50). Part VI: For a militant, progressive, democratic UFT

Oh, and it would really be nice to see New Action, once the major voice in calling for a more democratic union, come back to their roots. But then again, that might jeapardize their seats on the Executive Board, which is precisely our point as to why the UFT/Unity Caucus is a one party system in control for 50 years.

Now just watch the Unity slugs claim I should just be quiet because the charter school operators and ed deformers will use the undemocratic nature of the UFT/AFT to defeat organizing efforts. I even noted that E4E made these points on TV.

So, the answer is in this Feb. 18 Ed Notes blog:  
Mr. Mulgrew, Tear Down This Wall



AFTER BURN: THE RIGHT SAYS WE HAVE THE HIGHEST CORP TAXES IN THE WORLD. WHAT WORLD ARE THEY LIVING IN?

But Nobody Pays That
G.E.’s Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether
By DAVID
KOCIENIEWSKI<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/david_kocieniewski/index.html?inline=nyt-per>
Published: March 24, 2011

General
Electric<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_electric_company/index.html?inline=nyt-org>,

the nation’s largest corporation, had a very good year in 2010.

The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1
billion of the total came from its operations in the United States.

Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2
billion.

Mr. Mulgrew, Tear Down This Wall

Last update, Friday, Feb. 18, 11:45AM

"Who would ever think you guys could make such a big deal out of one stinkin' dinner? It's beyond belief."- UFT lead lobbyist Paul Egan in NY Daily News

If the union refers to the PEP Bloomies as "puppets" are Unity Caucus Clones any different?

By now, most readers will have heard of the Paul Egan Albany restaurant caper. If you didn't, you can catch up on my post the other day, which I have updated with the latest links: Everyday Math: How Many Quail Does it Take to Fill a Union Leader?

I know I had a little fun at Paul's expense but before I begin, let me say that I like Paul Egan. From what I hear he is one of the more capable Unity Caucus people. When he was Bronx District 11 rep I only heard good things. He put up a great web site with a number of resources that people say was the gold standard for providing information. He has charm and charisma and that Irish brogue doesn't hurt. I'm sure he does good work as the UFT's chief lobbyist. And the unfair attacks on him for a supposed cheating scandal are extremely unfair. For the Daily News and NY Post ((DN, Post) to connect a 10 year old cheating scandal is shameless. Especially when they ignore the official and unofficial rampant cheating going on every day, cheating winked at by Tweed and the State Ed Dept. (The Dirty Secret of Regents Cheating ...).

Egan was the guy who got up to oppose endorsing Bill Thompson for mayor, saying that at most a union effort on Thompson's behalf could move the needle no more than 2 or 3 points.

See below the fold for a  defense of Paul from retired UFT Bronx District rep Lynne Winderbaum.
Now, Lynne is one of the most respected people in the union, even by the opposition. I've never heard one bad thing said about her.

But both she and Paul just don't get it.

Paul may be right about making a bid deal about a stinkin' dinner. But this is not about a stinkin' dinner. It is about 24 people going out and using COPE money contributed by the members to spend $1800. The fact that Egan makes around $150,000 a year must also be noted. As one commenter said:

Teachers who attend the UFT dog and pony show called “Lobby Day” get up at 5 A.M, travel to Albany on a bus, get a box lunch and a bag of pretzels and come back the same night. Unlike the Mul-Dew flunkies, they don’t get to spend two nights in Albany, eat three or four meals a day and put their Egan-sized bar bill on their UFT padded expense sheets

This is about the arrogance and feelings of self-entitlement of power. That is what you get when you have a one party system running the union with no checks and balances with a rubber stamp Executive Board and Delegate Assembly.

For 3 years, from 2004-2007 when ICE/TJC had 6 members of the EB, there as actually a voice of the members even though they were only 6 out of 89. But when New Action and Unity teamed up to push them out, Lynne Winderbaum was one of the Unity people who replaced them. I wasn't there all that often, but did she step up and play a public role to check the excesses of power or challenge one disastrous policy after another that has led us to this abyss? Of course she couldn't because she would have been removed from Unity.

In 2005 there was a major battle over the contract that opened the door to the massive assault on seniority (ATRs were born in that contract). Unity send out hordes of people to steamroller people into voting for that contract and stifle debate within the union, even going so far as to stop us from getting literature into teachers mailboxes so they could hear the other side. Many of us were stopped at the door, not by principals but by Unity chapter leaders. I maintain that the DOE has to end seniority rules before they could start closing schools en masse, a first step before going after LIFO 5 years later. (Remember how when ATRs complained about being forced to be subs while first year teachers had jobs and the UFT told them to be happy they still have a job?) What did Egan and Winderbaum do during that battle?

Democracy is not an abstract concept. The lack of it is why the UFT and the AFT will never be a force opposing the ed deform movement because the membership has so little voice. If the members could vote do you think the UFT would have two charter schools invading public schools? Would they have gone along with UFT policy that led to us sitting by while one school after another was closed? Signing an agreement with the State Ed Dept. on test data being used to evaluate teachers?

Until the UFT begins to function in a democratic manner, some of the most eloquent and passionate voices in the UFT will oppose Unity Caucus no matter what words they say that makes them look militant. So I say:

Mr.  Mulgrew, tear down this wall.

But that will never happen and the UFT power and influence will continue to shrink. But the leadership's prime directive is to maintain power.

If the union refers to the PEP Bloomies as "puppets" are Unity Caucus Clones any different?

Below is Lynne Winderbaum's comments to the Daily News. I just wonder where she and other decent Unity people were when Unity did a vicious red-baiting attack on ICE/TJC presidential candidate Kit Wainer in the 2007 elections.

(See Breaking News: March 29, 2007 "Randi then gave Unity head Jeff Zahler the floor to engage in another round of red-baiting, saying he was proud to have sent that out and reading excerpts in an attack on Kit Wainer. He said accusations of mccarthyism are not true ...")

They all sat on their hands at that DA.

Also see: NYC Educator

What Your COPE Dollars Buy

  Winderbaum response online to the Daily News editorial and the recent articles in the News and the Post:

The UFT is now soliciting opinions on Teacher Eval Agreement....

...and chapter leader John Elfrank responds

1. NEGATIVE: It’s a foot in the door for using Standardized Tests and Merit Pay.


2. NEGATIVE: The new system claims to eliminate what the UFT describes as a totally subjective system. Yet, seven of the eight criteria are the same. The UFT says the addition of an eighth criterion (test scores) changes everything. Can’t we find less subjective criteria other than standardized test scores? It’s gonna count for 40%! The UFT says it “limits the influence of state tests on teacher performance evaluations”, it actually INTRODUCES state tests into teacher performance evaluation. Anything less than 100% is a “limit”.


3. NEGATIVE: Since there’s still much that has to be “negotiated” the agreement will only lose some of what appeal it does have. For example, 40 of the eval will be test scores% for starters.


4. NEGATIVE: There are no specifics about how peer review would work, how test scores will be used.


5. NEGATIVE: The contract is NOT enforced now regarding Art. 8, so why should we assume the UFT will enforce what is in our best interests regarding this agreement? For example, if the UFT doesn’t want a “gotcha” system, why doesn’t it challenge the informal observations put in our files and used to U rate us? Read Teaching for the 21st Century… You’d never know it was meant to apply to our members. It was supposed to eliminate the “gotcha” observation.


6. NEGATIVE: Lead Teacher wannabes will compete with their colleagues, not cooperate. After all, it’s who ranks at the top that will get the lead teacher gig.


7. POSITIVE: is that if negations fail the old system remains in place, as would be expected with a contract.


8. POSITIVE: Growth model assessment seems to be the best model if you have to go with standardized testing.


9. POSITIVE: Teacher improvement plan looks like it will be specific and transparent. Again, depending upon what is negotiated.


These negotiations need to take place in full view of the membership in order to invite member feedback. Secret negotiations are only meant to keep the membership in the dark .

BOTTOM LINE: Teaching to the test will take on a new urgency. Gone will be creative pedagogy. Close the Teacher Centers, they’ll be a waste of money. We will all be in the test prep business.


John Elfrank-Dana
UFT Chapter Leader
Murry Bergtraum High School

ICE Throws it Down for the 2010 UFT Elections

ICE/TJC presidential candidate James Eterno throws it down in his post at the ICE Blog.

An excerpt from Eterno's post:

We are posting this so we can start to emphasize to the readers of this blog how difficult it will be to unseat Mulgrew and Unity Caucus.

The NY Teacher is a house organ and as such it is a very efficient propaganda newspaper, spinning a positive message about the state of our union and its leaders. In addition, Unity has money as people who accept their invitation to join have to pay a fee.

Since being in Unity has guaranteed victory in UFT elections, Unity has a very deep treasury; they will use it to smear us in the general election in 2010. They are extremely adept in one area: keeping themselves in power. They count on member apathy. Sadly, the vast majority of teachers do not vote.

Unity even has a loyal subsidiary group called New Action. The traditional opposition party has not run a candidate for UFT President since 2001 and yet they remain on the ballot in UFT elections. Their purpose appears to be to confuse people who want to vote for something different. Their reward has been union jobs.

If we want to see real change in the UFT, ICE-TJC can lead the movement. We have union passion. Many in our group are experienced chapter leaders, delegates and activists. Some of us have even sat on theUFT Executive Board. We have served on the inside so we can clearly see how to repair the Union.

If elected, we will protect every member and Chapter as fully as possible. No UFT member should ever feel that the UFT doesn’t completely have their back.

More from James Eterno at 2010 Campaign Kickoff: We need YOU to Help Us Form a Real Union

Ed Notes Commentary

I learned a term in Los Angeles a few weeks ago: an organizing union vs. a service (or lack thereof) - the UFT/Unity top down model. In practical terms, this means that instead of sitting back and telling people to call the union when you have a grievance (and most of the time they tell you it is a waste of time) - the quasi service model – an organizing union is proactive and out there organizing the members into an active force that functions effectively at the school level.

The UFT/Unity model can't and won't implement an organizing model because that requires an open democratic, bottom up system. They fear their own members' activism because an active membership would be aware of the kinds of scams the leadership is pulling and threaten their control.

The Independent Community of Educators, ICE, in its almost 6 years of existence, has struggled to build itself in a way that doesn't emulate Unity.

ICE bends over backwards to implement democracy internally and must do so if it expects to implement an organizing union. But as you can imagine, democracy can get messy and we always don't get done what we feel we should get done. But it's worth the mess.

ICE believes that the key to a well functioning union that can serve and protect the members is through the most democracy, not the least. If ICE were to function in a top down, undemocratic manner, I would be the first to criticize.

I'll be writing a lot about Ed Notes views concerning organizing and elections in the UFT. What I say should not be construed as ICE/UFT positions as I don't always agree 100% with where ICE stands but I support the organization 100%.

UFT Exec Bd Nominates Mulgrew As Lone Candidate for Pres as ICE Attempt to Nominate Eterno is Rejected

Putin, Ahmadinejad, Kim Il Jong Jealous of Model of Undemocratic Precedure

Continuing a 25 year tradition, the UFT executive board again rubber stamped a hand-picked successor as the lone nominee to fill out a term of office. Given that Unity Caucus controls all the seats on the Board, Mulgrew is expected to win with 100% of the vote. Saddam Hussein is rolling over in his grave with consternation over how he could never figure out a way to get more than 98% of the vote. Even Ahmadinejad got only 2/3 of the vote. (The Mullahs are having the UFT Constitution translated into Farsi.)

A large group of ICEers, who have no seats on the Board, attended in the hope they would get an opportunity to speak and nominate James Eterno from the floor (read Anna Philips profile of James at Gotham). The vote on July 29 will still result in 100% for Mulgrew and having a 2nd candidate would only be symbolic, but ICE figured, why not try? Worse case scenario, get a few cookies and some fruit (that giant chocolate chip was fab).

James Eterno, a member of ICE, is running for president of the UFT. (Photo via GothamSchools' Flickr)

Figuring to use the EB rule giving any union member speaking time before the meeting as an opportunity to point out the lack of democratic procedure, I called ahead and asked for speaking time and was not told this was not allowed. I was recovering from my Bikram Yoga class, but I dropped my cigar and left the beach in Rockaway and schlepped over, but I was told by Michael Mendel that I would not be allowed to speak, as the speaking rule was suspended for these types of meetings. Former EB member (when she was with New Action) Ellen Fox of ICE also attempted to speak, but was turned away.

We were armed with the UFT Constitution, which has some of the more ambiguous language than credit default swap explanations. ICE's interpretation was that the Mulgew nomination was illegal, as the Constitution says an officer cannot run for another office unless he/she resigned as of July 1. It also says anyone can make a nomination without specifying that only applies to EB members. But if you read the Constitution backwardsor standing on your head, it is all legal.

I had the most fun watching the New Action EB crew, all elected with Unity support, sit there and blandly accept the situation without attempting to nominate anyone. Their fearless leader, Michael Shulman, even got up to ask why there was a need to hold the pro forma election on July 29 if there was one candidate and why not just put on the crown immediately? Mendel said the Constitution calls for two separate meetings. Hey Mike, nice to see the Constitution being followed at times. (Actually, Unity has made the Constitution ironclad undemocratic with few if any loopholes.)

New Action is praying Mulgrew will give them a quarter of the attention Weingarten gave them. ICE expects New Action to run another bogus slate in 2010, with a small group of candidates endorsed by Unity in an attempt to claim there is bipartisanship and to keep any ICE/TJC people off the board.

For the record, in the last election (2007) ICE/TJC received 5500 votes while New Action got 3500, yet NA got 8 seats and ICE/TJC got none. Ahhhh, that fresh air of democracy.

George Schmidt, editor of the widely read Chicago-based resistance newspaper and web site, Substance, joined ICE at the meeting as an observer. "At least you can attend EB meetings even though you are gagged," Schmidt said. "The Chicago TU EB meetings are closed." Ah, more fresh air of UFT democracy, with the reigning theme being, "You can attend, as long as you eat your cookies and fruit and shut up."

Related:
Eterno Comments on Mulgrew Nomination at the ICE blog
MULGREW CORONATION: MEET THE NEW BOSS SAME AS THE OLD BOSS

Ragging on the Gag Order

Some people think there is a hint of legitimacy in the UFT position - theoretically. That it is in a union's interests to keep certain information from leaking to the bosses or press. In 40 years of attending Delegate Assemblies, Executive Board meetings and countless other UFT functions, there is nary a time that much of anything in this category has come up. (Talking about strikes given Taylor Law penalties is certainly something to keep under cover.)

As Jeff Kaufman points out at ICE, the union always can go into Executive session. Randi has said that numerous times with me in the room and has often publicly has asked me to keep info confidential so she won't have to clear the room. I always complied and will continue to do so. And she full-well knows that, which only makes her demagoguery last Monday ("Norman, put down that camera" as a way to rile up the Unity troops, who were the majority of people in the room) so manipulative. She tries to direct the finger of blame in case something does leak out (often from her- and this actually happened after she once hinted I was leaking to the NY Post and it was clear she did it).

We have a union that is interested in keeping info from flowing to the rank and file. The gag is an attempt to maintain Unity's monopoly on access to the members, similar to their attempt to keep critical info out of teacher mailboxes. When you are faced with despotism and demagoguery, the appropriate response is to fight fire with fire.

Randi is trying to paint this as protecting rank and filers from having the words and images up on the web that can come back to haunt them. Like ATRs and rubber room people or chapter leaders being critical of their school leadership. I absolutely concur with that point. Rank and filers who speak up at meetings should be protected. And at no time have I ever violated that.

But we are talking about UFT leadership and the positions they take. Last Monday I caught Randi in an out and out contradiction between what she said at the info meeting at 52 Broadway (this is not the time to make noise, a less than subtle dig at the rally) and what she said an hour later to the demonstrators at Tweed (the noise you made led to the ATR agreement.) Should I suppress the video of District 19 rep Alan Weinstein cursing and threatening me for taping him leaving the meeting? Weinstein probably makes $120,000 or more a year paid from our dues. Any person on the payroll of the UFT is fair game.

Meetings should be taped and made available to the members. I'll tell you what, let Unity Caucus put forth a series of reforms that will establish a democratic union that will allow the free flow of information. That proverbial snowball is already melting.

ICE reports on the UFT attempt to stop the info flow:

Paranoid UFT Leadership Attempts To Silence Opposition By Proposing Inept Gag Order Over Union Meetings

Just like our sweetheart agreements with the DOE, the resolution, unsurprisingly, provides no penalties for violating its provisions.

When a Union becomes nothing more than a self-serving public relations operation, it ceases to care about free speech or other rights of its members. We must protect our precious rights and demonstrate to our misguided, paranoid leadership that they work for us…not the other way around.

Besides, Jeff seems to be saying it violates the Landrum-Griffin Act.

ICE will be discussing the issue at this Friday's meeting. Maybe everyone should come with cameras and create an I am Spartacus moment.

UFT Responds to Ed Notes Taping of ATR Info Session With Gag Order

This resolution is squarely aimed at trying to suppress some of the video I took of the embarrassing spectacle of the UFT leadership undermining the ATR rally on November 24.

Will delegates and chapter leaders no longer be allowed to give reports to their staffs?

Go to a UFT Executive Board meeting or a Delegate Assembly and look for "free and open debate"? Democratic deliberations? They have to be kidding.

And whose permission are they talking about? Will the NY Teacher ask each and every person at a meeting if it is ok to disseminate their information?

This resolution is no different from all the other resolutions at the DA. Just unenforceable words.

My taping parts of the gathering in the UFT ATR info session last Monday created absolute panic on the part of Randi Weingarten. Weingarten has always attempted to paint opposition points of view as a 5th column when in fact the biggest leaker is Weingarten. In all of the years I have been around the UFT incidents of information leaving the union meetings via videotape have been few and far between. She pulled the same stuff at the October meeting by giving the impression that Elizabeth Green had infiltrated the meeting (a lie.)

Make no mistake about it. This resolution has noting to do with the chapter leaders, delegates and members but with the leadership attempt to keep their own "speaking out of 2 sides of their mouths" words from getting out to the members. The Unity mob is ready to pass any restriction on democracy. This is only the beginning. Still to come: Why not add that any union member who puts info out to media or blogs should be tossed from the union? In fact Randi even mentioned the blogs in her attack on me at that meeting and I challenged her by saying, "Next you'll tell us we can't write about what you say." She didn't respond.

In order to enforce this will they have security guards confiscate all cell phones at these meetings?

They know full well the contrast between the images of the wine and cheese guzzling Unity crowd and the people in the cold at Tweed will be very embarrassing. And so it will be.

Here is the resolution Unity Caucus will present to Monday night's UFT Exec. Bd meeting.

Motion: To recommend to the executive board and delegate assembly the following resolution on the Confidentiality of Union Meetings:

WHEREAS, it is essential that UFT chapter leaders, delegates and members have the full confidence that they can speak honestly and frankly in union meetings without fear that their words and their images will be reproduced in the news media or on the Internet without their knowledge or permission; and

WHEREAS, without such meetings and the free and open debate among union members that they allow, the democratic deliberations of the UFT are diminished and the ability of the union to learn and represent the views of its school-based leadership and members is undermined; and

WHEREAS, in recent weeks UFT member meetings have been surreptitiously recorded and transmitted to the news media, reporters have been invited to attend union meetings without identifying themselves, and video cameras have been brought into such meetings for the purpose of recording the proceedings – all without the consent of those present at the meetings; and

WHEREAS, there are ample opportunities for those who wish to speak to the news media and make their views known publicly to do so outside of union meetings; therefore be it

RESOLVED, that this Delegate Assembly affirm the vital principle that our union be able to hold union meetings, without outside news media present and without the proceedings being recorded and disseminated in public forums, in order to encourage the widest possible freedom of communication and deliberation among union members and leaders; and be it further

RESOLVED, that this Delegate Assembly call upon all in its ranks to respect the right of their fellow members to meet and deliberate in union meetings, secure in the knowledge that their words and their images will not be transmitted or reproduced without their permission.

This Can NEVER Happen in the UFT

WTU Board of Trustee Candi Peterson reports on The Washington Teacher blog:

Washington Teachers Union Executive Board members in a statement of disapproval passed a motion to censure the Washington Teachers' Union President George Parker yesterday. The motion passed overwhelmingly 9 to 4. Board members expressed their disapproval of President Parker's failure to adhere to regularly scheduled board and delegate assembly meetings, fails to hold membership meetings, fails to adhere to motions passed by the board, and does not respond to members request for information.

Unity Caucus in the UFT has assured that there will never be dissent on the Executive Board by controlling every position. Even when ICE/TJC controlled 6 out of the 89 seats from 2004-2007, that was too much. So they made sure to endorse the former opposition New Action Caucus to replace them. With a majority of UFT members not being working teachers and manipulating the election process, Unity has assured their control in perpetuity.

Does this mean there is no hope in getting the leadership to respond? The actions of adhoc special interest lobby groups like ATRs and rubber room members has created some force from the rank and file to get some movement. There is such fear in Unity of a revolt from underneath demanding change, they will respond to deflect militancy.

Follow-up:
Read James Eterno's
UFT PSEUDO DEMOCRACY EXPLAINED
http://iceuftblog.blogspot.com/

The Delicious Irony of the UFT Suit on Political Freedom

In the entire world of UFTdom, this lawsuit has to be one of the funniest things to come out of 52 Broadway in a long time.

With only weeks to go before the November 4 elections, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) today [Oct. 10] filed a federal court lawsuit claiming that a New York City Department of Education policy banning educators from wearing campaign pins in schools violates their constitutional rights to free speech and political expression.
- UFT press release, Oct. 10, 2008. [Full release at Norms Notes.]

Ahhh, the hypocrisy of this defense of free speech by the UFT/Unity Caucus, the very organization that has its people pull opposition literature from mail boxes and has taken the astounding stand that groups critical of the leadership only have the right to go into schools to communicate their views once every three years during the 6 week UFT election period.

“The ban on members wearing lapel pins is bad enough,” Weingarten told reporters. “Now the Department of Education wants to restrict the communications between the UFT and its members through the regular channels utilized for such communications such as union bulletin boards and employee mailboxes, both of which are out of students’ view.

Unity Caucus chapter leaders have refused to allow anyone but them to post material on the UFT bulletin boards. UFT district reps have gone into schools and removed ICE and Ed Notes from mailboxes.

Have you been to a UFT Delegate Assembly and seen Unity delegates hoot and boo members of the opposition? You'd think you were at a Sarah Palin rally. Just short of, "Kill Jeff Kaufman. He's a terrorist."

The UFT's filing of a law suit against the DOE for banning teachers from wearing political buttons as an attack on free speech is akin to John McCain's attempt to distract people from the economy by raising straw men. And talk about character assassination.

"Are these the kind of leaders we want running our union" is a question asked by the card mailed directly to thousands of teachers' home? Distorting the ICE/TJC platform and going after Randi Weingarten's opponent in the 2007 election Kit Wainer's personal political views.

Remind you of the scare tactic character assassination of Barack Obama by the McCain campaign? It is a perfect example of the kinds of attacks the UFT/Unity Caucus machine engages in to slime the opposition.

Unity Caucus' Jeff Zahler, now Director of Staff at the American Federation of Teachers, told a Delegate Assembly he was proud of the Unity Caucus campaign literature that attacked Wainer for his socialist views. The only thing they didn't include was connecting Kit to Bill Ayres.

Here is a link to some ed notes commentary on the Unity slime literature.
http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2007/03/unity-propaganda-machine-treads-in.html

Union Dues Mandatory in NY State - Not a Great Thing for UFT Democracy

Gov. Patterson made the agency shop a permanent law in NY State, which means people must pay union dues even if they don't join the union (it had to be renewed regularly for 30 years.) The agency shop makes sense in that the union negotiates for everyone. Union supporters, even those in opposition to the leadership, generally support the concept, which goes along with dues checkoff where dues are automatically deducted from the paycheck.

And I still support it.

Sort of...

....when I see the wonderful use of those dues to fuel the Unity patronage machine. And those all expense paid junkets to AFT and NYSUT conventions for 800 Unity Caucus members. (Check those wonderful salaries posted from the 2006 LM2 on the bottom of the sidebar.)

....and when our union is a monarchy, we wonder if there might be a tad more democracy and accountability if the UFT actually had to compete to get people to pay dues.

Sean Ahern has a few more words over at ICE-mail where he points out that transit worker's TWU Local 100 still hasn't had its dues checkoff rights returned since their strike a few years ago, which has caused tremendous stresses in the union. While the dues checkoff is a major convenience to unions, it also functions as a noose and is a major deterence to the right to strike, which means unions have no real weapon in negotiations. The stacked courts can even use job actions as an excuse to cripple a union. I guess truly "permanent" would mean just that, as Sean points out - meaning, dues checkoff can't be taken away.

I'm sure UFT members can come up with variations of this cartoon.

Sean touches on the accountability issue:

The dues stream, the real estate holdings, the insurance plans, the retirement system of the UFT, the city's largest union local, is a web of interests defining the "bottom line" to be protected by the leadership. Our union assumes a corporate identity, another self serving 'special interest', a collection of trade union bureaucrats and hangers on, instead of a mass organization for the advancement of mutually agreed upon goals. Our union today is an institution that can not simply be changed by voting in new leadership. A change in leadership, a strike and subsequent detachment from the dues stream is not a sufficient guarantee that a union leadership will be accountable to the membership.


The UFT has lost dues checkoff in the past and there is no way we will ever see the leadership go near a strike again with that threat hanging over them. Can you just imagine the chaos in the halls of 52 Broadway when people might actually have to go back and work in a school?

As usual, Sean finishes up by drilling right down to the race issue with his unique single-minded approach.

Read the article and Sean's comments over at Norm's Notes.

Mugabe Hires UFT as Consultant

UPDATED
Ed Notes News reports:
Robert Mugabe, suffering in the wake of bad publicity over his recent election where he was the only candidate, has hired the UFT/Unity Caucus publicty machine to clean up his image.

A Mugabe spokesperson said:

We were very impressed with their operation and how they almost pulled off running Randi Weingarten for President of the UFT in 2004 unopposed by offering New Action, the opposition party at the time, a deal where they would run a slate to give the appearance there was an opposition but leave the presidential spot open so Weingarten could run without opposition, just as Mugabe did, but with lousy PR.

It was a brilliant concept, that was only foiled when TJC decided to run and ICE came into existence to do the same. But did that stop them? In the 2007 election, they went even further by cross-endorsing candidates with New Action and though only 22% of the active teaching staff voted, they proclaimed it a great victory even though only 15% of the working teacher corps voted for Unity Caucus.

Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. We expect the UFT/Unity PR campaign to lead to Robert Mugabe being proclaimed one of the great democrats of our time.

His backup plan in case things go wrong is to become chancellor of the NYC school system.

UFT Resolution Opposes Dictatorship

Finally, I thought at last night's UFT Executive Board meeting when I spotted the words "authoritarian regime... denies its peoples fundamental rights" in a proposed resolution.
And Leo Casey was actually going to be the one to motivate it.
WOW! Unity Caucus is actually going to pass a resolution to democratize the UFT by allowing:

UFT members to have free and unfettered access to the membership so a free exchange of ideas can occur.
To allow free and open discussion at UFT delegate assemblies – maybe even allow Obama supporters to make their case.
To allow people in high schools and middle schools and elementary schools to elect their own Vice Presidents.

Then I read on. It was China they are talking about, not the UFT's Unity Caucus.

Unity Caucus tanks confront protester before recent Delegate Assembly

Reports out of Beijing are that the ruling party recently passed a similar resolution:

Whereas the Unity Caucus regime has suppressed efforts to move the UFT toward democratic rule and respect for the rights of free exchange of ideas,

Whereas the ruling junta in the UFT recently rejected attempts to collect funds for the 17 Puerto Rican teachers who were fired for striking and defying the PR version of the Taylor Law.

Whereas that same ruling junta of the UFT has continued to shunt aside any attempt to raise a resolution at the Delegate Assembly calling for opposition to the GHI/HIP privatization plan.

Whereas the Unity Caucus rejected attempts by members of the opposition caucus ICE to hire independent investigators for teachers assigned to the DOE's gulag rubber rooms.
etc. etc. etc. (the list is too numerous to fit.)

Resolved that the government of the People's Republic of China will support all efforts to force the Unity Caucus ruling junta to establish glimmers of democracy.

Breaking News

James Eterno posts on the ICE blog about how working teachers are now a minority in the UFT and suggests a program for democratic reform of the UFT. There will be zero debate on this issue in all bodies of the UFT, a perfect illustration of James' point.

Under Assualt makes a point about the way schools are staffed today - with a majority of new, lower cost teachers, a recipe for disaster. The BloomKlein attack on union rules and seniority claimed the system was shortchanging school in most need as teachers used union rules to gravitate to the better schools (meaning easier places to teach.) Then their minions place senior, higher salaried people under assault, followed by a school funding formula that puts a penalty on schools that hire teachers with higher salaries. They used the language of the civil rights movement to get the black community on board - see, your kids are being denied the experienced teachers. So, take a look at the schools and tell us what has happened. I bet that under BloomKlein there's less experience in the schools than ever. So they change tune - "see, we now have a young, committed teaching corps. So what if many leave. We'll just train a new crop."

Teaching is all about testing anyway and in the factory model you don't need the same level of skills in classrooms under the complete control of the teachers - the term being used is the de-skilling of teachers.

Is Clinton Strategy Designed to Undermine Obama Chances to Win?

What role will the UFT/AFT play if Obama is the nominee?

On Feb. 12, in part 2 of our post on Randi's Succession, we wrote:

[Randi's] plan being to use a national forum [as AFT President] to help Hillary get elected. Ooops! Actually, if Obama is the candidate and loses to McCain, Hillary becomes very viable in 2012, so think long-term. Who do you think the Weingarten/Clinton forces will really be rooting for?) An Obama loss and AFT HQ becomes Hillary Central.

If Obama gets the nomination and loses to McCain, Hillary gets to say "I told you so" and becomes the instant candidate for 2012. At the time, I read the piece to my wife, upon which she, basically a Hillary supporter at the time, said "WHY? HOW COULD THEY WANT McCAIN?" I responded because for the Clintons and their supporters it is about them, not the party. I told her we would be watching the true level of enthusiasm Randi Weingarten and the AFT/UFT have for Obama – oh, there will be lots of surface stuff, but with Randi's star so hitched to Hillary, an Obama win, leaving Hillary in Siberia, would not be part of the plan.

Today, Maureen Dowd ("Hillary or Nobody") raises this same point (has she been reading my blog?):

Even some Clinton loyalists are wondering aloud if the win-at-all-costs strategy of Hillary and Bill — which continued Tuesday when Hillary tried to drag Rev. Wright back into the spotlight — is designed to rough up Obama so badly and leave the party so riven that Obama will lose in November to John McCain.

If McCain only served one term, Hillary would have one last shot. On Election Day in 2012, she’d be 65.

Why else would Hillary suggest that McCain would be a better commander in chief than Obama, and why else would Bill imply that Obama was less patriotic — and attended by more static — than McCain?

Why else would Phil Singer, a Hillary spokesman, say in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday that Obama was trying to disenfranchise the voters of Florida and Michigan. “When it comes to voting, Senator Obama has turned the audacity of hope into the audacity of nope,” he said, adding, “There’s a basic reality here, which is we could have avoided the entire George W. Bush presidency if we had counted votes in Florida.” So is Singer making the case that Obama is as anti-democratic as W. was when he snatched Florida from Al Gore?

Some top Democrats are increasingly worried that the Clintons’ divide-and-conquer strategy is nihilistic: Hillary or no democrat.

(Or, as one Democrat described it to ABC’s Jake Tapper: Hillary is going for “the Tonya Harding option” — if she can’t get the gold, kneecap her rival.)

A few days ago, David Brooks ("The Long Defeat") estimated Hillary's chances of getting the nomination as at best 5% and he wondered why she would be risking the party's chances by undermining Obama to such an extent he can't win.

When you step back and think about it, she is amazing. She possesses the audacity of hopelessness.

Why does she go on like this? Does Clinton privately believe that Obama is so incompetent that only she can deliver the policies they both support? Is she simply selfish, and willing to put her party through agony for the sake of her slender chance? Are leading Democrats so narcissistic that they would create bitter stagnation even if they were granted one-party rule?

We've speculated (here and here) on the lack of democracy in the way Randi Weingarten went about steamrollering the UFT into supporting Hillary Clinton (Are there NO Obama supporters in the UFT, in particular amongst Black UFT'ers and in particular Unity Caucus?) by not allowing the Delegate Assembly to even discuss the endorsement, denying Obama supporters at least the sense of fairness.

Unity Caucus discipline will take care of their Black members. It is hard to believe that not even one Unity Caucus Black member would not be for Obama, with polling numbers around the nation showing a massive drift of Black voters moving from Hillary to Obama.... But in the "democracy" in Unity Caucus, democratic centralism will suppress any sense of support for Obama.

It's all about how to manage the membership. The UFT payed [Hillary advisor] Howard Wolfson to advise them on how to use massive UFT resources in Hillary's campaign without having to go through an endorsement by the members or even hold a discussion where Obama supporters might get to raise a stink.

With the end-game approaching, let's see if members of Unity Caucus are freed to express their enthusiasm for Obama. Randi, hedging her bets as usual, did do some gentle trashing of Obama's positions on education at a recent DA. The UFT (it will take Randi a bit of time to turn over the top level of the AFT in her image) will make it look like they support Obama, while undermining him. This is where Weingarten is at her most brilliant. Feinting left while going right. Or is it feinting right and going left? Actually, it's both at the same time.

There is sure to be some resentment of Black members within Unity Caucus if the UFT slacks off. Mike Mulgrew, Michelle Bodden and other supposed Weingarten successors will have their work cut out for them avoiding cracks in the machine.

I will miss the daily obfuscation show in the UFT when she starts racing around the county this July after her election as AFT president campaigning for Hillary – in '12.

Get a LIF

The UFT leadership will do everything it can to disparage the ICE campaign to reopen the 2005 contract provision that doesn't allow teachers to grieve letters in files (LIF) even though Randi Weingarten told people back in 2005 this would be possible if there was a spike in LIF's. But we all know that was part of the selling of the '05 contract. They will attack the ICE proposal by denying there has been any such increase (check the numbers of rubber room denizens who haev been written up and removed.)

How will the leadership manipulate people at the Delegate Assembly this Wed. Feb. 6 to keep a full discussion of the ICE resolution from taking place? Make sure to avoid calling on an ICE person to speak during the New Motion period? Shift the agenda so the New Motion period is pushed to the end of the meeting? Or just ignore the NMP altogether, as Weingarten has done so often (her legacy will be taking an already undemocratically-run union and making it even more undemocratic.)

You might be asking why the LIF issue is important? The atmosphere in so so poisonous in so many schools run by dictatorial/abusive principals who, with their new "empowerment" - which is limited to power over the teachers and parents in their schools - have all too often gone hog wild.

Here is a story I heard at yesterday's Super Bowl (Yea Giants, even though I am a Jets fan) party:

A principal is throwing a dinner to honor herself. Besides the high cost, the teacher who I spoke to at the party dislikes this principal intensly - a short, trumped up rubber room visit didn't help - and doesn't want to go. Many of her colleagues are, only half-jokingly, telling her to expect an observation and a letter in her file the morning after the party.

This is the mental state of so many teachers. And for the usual teacher bashers out there, NO, we are not talking about lousy teachers who are afraid. I am hearing this from some of the finest teachers I have known. I have so many of these stories, I could devote an entire blog to them.

When the UFT gave up the right to grieve LIF in the 2005 contract, it was more of a blow to teacher morale as much as a loss of a right that many people never used in the first place. But at least those who wanted to felt they could at least get their day in "court" (a court stacked against them) and force the principal to explain themselves to a higher up. ("The teacher didn't come to my party, so I wrote her up.")

In my 4th year of teaching (1970) I transferred to a new school. I was just becoming active politically and the word was out from the higher ups to "get" me. I was lucky in that the tyrant principal was on terminal leave and the AP who was acting in his place was a milquetoast type. But he gave it a shot and wrote up a U-observation for me.

I may have been stupid, as I was not yet tenured, but I couldn't let this pass. Now, I wasn't necessarily the greatest teacher, but I had just come off a very successful year and a half of teaching and thought I was a hotshot. I hand-wrote a 7 page response and not only attached it to the observation, but posted it over the time clock. Crazy! But it worked and I was never bothered again.

Now I hear that the UFT is telling people not to even bother writing up a response, as what they say could be used against them. I still think in the right situation a teacher should consider doing what I did and go public. If you're a target, maybe going public will serve notice you are not going down without a fight and a principal might move on to a different target. Imagine if everyone banded together and supported each other?

Here is a version of the Leaflet ICE will distribute at the Delegate Assembly, February 6, 2008.

It repeats our points numerous times, but we feel we have to do that to get our points across. Urge your chapter leader and delegate (if they're not Unity Caucus) to support this resolution on Wed. Email me if you want a pdf to share with your colleagues.

After the meeting, the usual suspects are gathering at a local watering hole to celebrate - getting through another DA without snoring. I'll be there handing it out. Stop by and get the secret password for entry.

Independent Community of Educators – ICE

Phase One of ICE’s Plan to Fight Back Against the Givebacks:

Win Back the Right to Grieve Negative Evaluations & File Letters

Since December, ICE has been trying to raise a motion at the Delegate Assembly calling upon the UFT to reopen the Contractual provision so we can win back the right to grieve material in our files. Unfortunately, in December we didn’t get called on and in January there was no new motion period.*

*In the past 10 years, the New Motion time, the only opportunity for non-leadership positions to be presented, has been moved around the agenda or ignored altogether. Throughout the history of the Delegate Assembly under Al Shanker and Sandy Feldman, the New Motion time was always the 3rd item on the agenda after the President’s report and the Question period. Let’s preserve that long-standing UFT tradition. Roberts’ Rules of Order calls for members to have an opportunity to bring new motions before a body. Support our efforts to uphold Roberts’ Rules.

We urge every delegate to support our call to win back the right to grieve material in our files and to have the right to challenge supervisory judgment. We intend to bring this up at today’s new motion period. It would need a majority vote of delegates to be placed on the UFT DA agenda in March.

City Labor Relations Commissioner James Hanley wrote to the union stating that the city agreed to negotiate on the issue (reopening the letters in the file provision) “if there is a disproportionate increase in the number of letters to the file.”
– NY Teacher, October 20, 2005

If you hear the argument that it is dangerous to reopen the contract, let’s make it clear: ICE is asking for this one provision to be reopened as per labor commissioner Hanley’s written agreement with Weingarten, not the entire Contract.

Randi visited our school before the ‘05 contract and stated that she spoke with the mayor about a possible spike in LIFs, and he told her that they would renegotiate that provision.
– Comment on the ICEUFT Blog

Letters in the File Grievances: Resolution to Reopen the Contractual Provision

WHEREAS, in selling the 2005 Contract to the members, UFT President Randi Weingarten answered objections to the removal of the right to grieve letters in the file by claiming the Contractual provision eliminating grievances for unfair and inaccurate letters could be reopened if there is a spike in letters to the file; and

WHEREAS, The Chief Leader reported recently that there was a 36% increase in teachers receiving unsatisfactory ratings in 2006-07 (the first full year under the 2005 Contract), a 39% increase in tenured teachers receiving U ratings, a fourfold increase in the number of teachers forced to extend their probation and a doubling of teachers denied tenure; and

WHEREAS, the UFT reported that there has been a dramatic increase in the number of teachers resigning compared to just a few years earlier; and

WHEREAS, it is reasonable to conclude that the spike in unsatisfactory ratings and resignations would not have been possible without a huge increase in negative letters to the file; be it therefore

RESOLVED, that the UFT reopen the Contract provision on letters in the file as per James Hanley’s 2005 agreement with Randi so this provision can be modified to allow members to grieve negative material in a timely manner and include the right to contest supervisory judgment to an impartial party, in addition to demanding that any material removed from a file can never be used in any proceeding of any kind against any UFT member.


Why Support Our Resolution?

The NY Teacher stated the following in the October 20, 2005 issue: “City Labor Relations Commissioner James Hanley wrote to the union that the city agreed to negotiate on the issue (reopening the letters in the file provision) ‘if there is a disproportionate increase in the number of letters to the file.’”

The evidence on increased discipline of teachers is in and for the first year under the 2005 Contract it is not a pretty picture:

1,333 Unsatisfactory ratings in 2006-07 compared with 981 in 2005-06. U rating increase of 36%;
(Source: Chief Leader)

918 tenured teachers rated U last year up from 662 the year before. U rating increase of 39%;
(Source: The Chief-Leader)

The number of teachers denied tenure more than doubled last year compared to the year before. (Source: The Chief-Leader)

The number of teachers forced to extend their probation increased almost fourfold in 2006-07 compared to 2005-06. (Source: The Chief-Leader)

The UFT’s own figures show that 4,606 teachers resigned last year, up from 2,544 who resigned just a few years earlier; it is sensible to conclude that many of those 4,606 were forced to resign.

Chancellor Klein in 2007 created a “gotcha squad” of lawyers and retired administrators to help build cases against tenured teachers.

There had to be a disproportionate spike in negative file letters to support all that increased discipline. We have to fight back now. The November 26, 2007 candlelight vigil was a good start but it was not enough. Let’s demand a letter in the file grievance process that is better than what we had before so we can challenge supervisory judgment. This Delegate Assembly should take a giant leap toward winning back our rights by putting this resolution on the DA agenda for March. Tell Hanley and Klein we mean business. Klein’s “gotcha squad” makes it “open season” to hunt teachers; we say close the hunt down now!

We are fully aware that if a letter stays in the file for three years, it can be removed if disciplinary charges haven’t been filed. However, the DOE keeps a copy and can still try to use it against you. Three years is too long to wait. Material that is over three years old is not normally admissible in 3020A cases against tenured teachers, but the DOE doesn’t have to wait three years to go after us. Finally, non-tenured teachers can easily be terminated at any point in their first three years of service and having a grievance procedure for unfair letters is their only hope for fighting back against abusive administrators.

If you hear the argument that it is dangerous to reopen the contract, let’s make it clear: ICE is asking for this one provision to be reopened as per labor commissioner Hanley’s written agreement with Weingarten, not the entire Contract.

School Chapters Signal Support

I informed my school and chapter leader at a meeting we held last Friday. I asked for a vote of support and everyone raised their hands (thank g-d).

I’m going to make copies of the resolution and hand it out at our chapter meeting on Friday.
–Comments on the ICEUFT Blog

UFT Delegate Assembly Run Like 3 Card Monte Hustle

Guest Column by

Mary Theresa Lynn, Delegate from Newcomers High School

The January 16 Delegates' Assembly compels me to write to you:

Who wouldn't agree that the city's current mandatory testing policy is a nightmare? At the January 16 Assembly, The UFT Resolution on Assessment-Related Paperwork and Data Collection seemed like a good idea--until I closely examined the wording of the first WHEREAS (emphasis mine):

"WHEREAS, the data generated by these tests and assessments can be useful to teachers as a tool to enhance teaching and learning, the collection, collation and interpretation of this data can be time consuming and require specific skills, technology and resources often not available to teachers...."

Unless we agree that "test-prep" is now synonymous with "learning," which is just what the highlighted section of the resolution implies, we should find this clause in the resolution most disturbing. These tests are not reliable and the data generated by them is not useful to teachers and certainly not conducive to learning. In fact, these tests have had a disastrous effect on both teaching and learning.

I immediately raised my card to call for a friendly amendment to the resolution to omit the offensive clause. However, Randi seemed determined not to see me. In fact, she deliberately filibustered until my raised arm went numb. When I took my arm down to switch my card to the other hand, one of her minions called the resolution to a vote, even though at least two of us still wanted to voice our opposition and were still waving our cards frantically. A staffer who had seen me with my hand up from the start and had even approached me to politely wait for her to finish her rant stood nearby, but as I yelled, "Point of order," I was drowned out by Randi's, "Let's call the question. All in favor raise your cards" and the amens of others who were eager to move on after her filibuster. I was artfully--but very intentionally--ignored. She dodged my objections and steamrolled on.

My biggest concern on this one is that we will be "hung by our own words" somewhere down the line. Basically, the wording of the resolution that passed gives credence to the DOE's tests as "tools to enhance teaching and learning." What a public relations fiasco for us if proponents of high-stakes testing get their hands on the UFT's own words! How could the UFT validate these tests when we know the disastrous effect all of this test-prep has on teaching and learning?

Randi seemed like she was in an awful rush to call this one to question--she even started the meeting on time for a change, no doubt to leave room for Hilary's "surprise" call--which means she was well aware of the wording, and eager for others not to notice it. As a first-year delegate, I was surprised that there was so little vocal opposition to the wording of this resolution. And obviously, I was disappointed that the "Artful Dodger" had, once again, dodged her opponents. Her tactics at these meetings are becoming increasingly deplorable. Sometimes I feel like I'm being hustled in Three Card Monty.

Shuffling the Deck on the UFT Titanic

"He won't last 6 months." Thus spoke an observer upon hearing Jeff Zahler was replacing the affable and capable Michael Mendel as the UFT's Staff Director at the end of the last school year. "He doesn't have the temperament for the job," she said.

And so it has come to pass, as Zahler, noted for his red-baiting attack on Kit Wainer during the 2007 election campaign amongst other lovable things about him, will be leaving the post next week, but will remain as the head of Unity Caucus. Oh, those deck chairs.

His replacement will be Manhattan District High School rep for small schools, Leroy Barr. Barr will be the 4th staff director since strongman Tom Pappas left the post a few years ago. Under Weingarten, the staff director position has lost some of its dominance as she is a hands on micromanager (or meddler to some) and there is not a clear chain of command with so many political appointments who can go right to Weingarten over the head of the staff director.

With her expected move to the AFT Presidency next July, Weingarten must firm up the home front just in case a serious opposition should emerge. The brilliant move of buying off the long-time opposition, New Action, can only last so long as their support in the schools dwindles to microscopic levels. (Is New Action Really a Caucus?)

The staff director has often been viewed as the 2nd in command – Sandra Feldman held that position before being elevated to UFT Presidency when Albert Shanker finally gave up the position after holding both AFT and UFT positions for 11 years. She appointed Pappas, who was considered by some a possible replacement for Feldman at one point. But Feldman and Shanker had their eye on Randi Weingarten as a better choice than the rough and tough Pappas, who has run the all-important Retirement Chapter since he gave up his post as staff director. At that time Weingarten handed the position to Queens Borough Rep Elizabeth Langiulli, which quickly turned into a disaster. Then came Mendel who seemed to be doing fairly well (he always seemed to be available) before he was kicked upstairs. Maybe he was too popular.

So, has Leroy Barr suddenly jumped into the race as a possible successor to Weingarten when she moves to take over the AFT this July? We think not, certainly at this time. The leading contenders to take over for Weingarten one day have been Elementary School VP Michelle Bodden (who is rumored for reassignment), the up and coming Vocational HS VP Michael Mulgrew and Mendel. None of these choices really work for Weingarten's purposes, though Bodden is considered the most "presidential."

Ed Notes' position has long been that Weingarten will hold on to the UFT Presidency as long as feasible, but to do so she needs to strengthen the home front to cover for her while she is traipsing around the country. The next election in 2010 will be the telling factor. If she planned on not running at that time one would think there would be a clear successor who could use the next 2 years to make himself/herself known to the members. Barr's appointment only further muddies the waters.

I remember Shanker running through a few successors - Herb Magidson was one around 1975 before he was kicked upstairs to NYSUT – before settling on Feldman, who some people thought would have a tough time filling Shanker's shoes, but in retrospect, managed fairly well. I find it interesting the number of people who tell me they miss her after dealing with Weingarten, which is surprising considering she was not Miss Warmth. But there was a certain "what you see is what you get" with the late Feldman that would be refreshing today. It is hard to imagine she would buy off New Action, especially with Shulman, whom she had no respect for as the leader. And with his old left background, Feldman's right wing Social Democrats USA (SDUSA) party ideals would curdle in her stomach.

Feldman also had a "teacher" mentality even though she did little teaching. But she trained as a teacher and was a socialist with a trade union background. (I was at the AFT convention in Washington in 2004 when she made her farewell speech and was very impressed as she focused on her activities in the civil rights struggles of the 50's and 60's.) Actually, despite the condescending arrogance that at times came from her and her inner circle, I sort of miss her too.

It was well known before Weingarten ever set foot in a school that she was the chosen one. She never taught and rose through the ranks but was a lawyer who was given a part-time teaching position while also working at the UFT so she could claim legitimacy as a teacher as Feldman's successor. Give both Shanker and Feldman credit in that they defined clear successors. Weingarten is too insecure to have her own Weingarten-like successor and this lack of talent near the top will have a long-time impact.

The UFT, the largest local in the world with almost 200,000 members, controls the NY State United Teachers which recently merged with the NEA in NY state (the idea of a national merger is on hold) and thus controls the AFT. That is why Weingarten is assured of being elected AFT Pres.

But there are serious dangers for Weingarten's power base if she turns the reins over to a powerful and ambitious successor as she was. Stories abound of friction between her and Feldman when the latter tried to tell her what to do. Weingarten quickly moved to replace Feldman/Shanker loyalists with her own people. What would stop a successor from doing the same no matter how much she felt she trusted that person? The reins of power are the reigns of power and we know how power can make people so light-headed they become blind.

Maybe Weingarten is trying to trisect – a troika, or quadrisect – a "quadrumvirate"- the leadership so no one person gets too much power or gets too popular with the rank and file.

Both Bodden and Barr are African-American. Weingarten has diversified the UFT Executive Board ethnically and racially, though certainly not politically, as all members, including the 8 New Action members who received the "gift" from Weingarten, adhere rigidly to the Unity line. Ed Notes has long maintained that a politically diversified EB not dominated by people on the UFT dole and that reflected the realities in the schools, would have a positive impact on the union.

Watch to see who emerges as a major spokesperson when Weingarten is not around. It will be very interesting if it does turn out to be Barr, who from my own limited contact seems a decent guy. In his performance as District Rep I've heard generally good things with a few minor complaints. Everyone in the union benefits with a responsive staff director. We wish him well in his new position.

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.)