UFT Election 2016 Advice: Ignore the Retiree Vote

With 52% of the total vote in the UFT 2013 elections coming from retirees,

Happy retirees - of course

the largest voting block with the highest ballot return rate, there often calls for something to be done. Here I will argue for nothing to be done in addressing the retiree vote - at least until the opposition shows it can get more votes than Unity amongst the working teachers - and we are far from that at this point. When the opposition gets close to winning in the schools and can claim that the retiree vote is the difference, then it is time to go to the membership and demand changes in the UFT Constitution. Last resort- go to court.

I've never met an unhappy UFT retiree
I also hear calls to go out to retirees and organize them to vote for the opposition. Here is why that is a bad idea and a wasteful endeavor. Groups running against Unity should focus on the roughly 108,000 active UFT members, 92% of which voted in the contract vote.

There are about 60,000, mostly happy, retirees who don't face the daily pressures and are given incentives and some perks. Other than the internal UFT politically conscious retirees and some of the recently angry pushouts, what is the incentive for voting against Unity - or even voting at all?

In the 2013 election around 21-22,000 retirees voted, with about 18-19000 going to Unity.

Think of it. Before the election begins, the opposition must make up a 10-1 deficit.

• 23,000 count for the election – Unity has upped number from 15000 to 18000 to 23000 to assure themselves a cushion. 
• 85- 90% retirees vote Unity. Think of it - over the 60 years of the Unity machine, there are thousands - maybe as much as 10-20000 retirees who were in Unity Caucus and they make up a solid block of votes. 

• Most opposition votes against come from long-time opposition – ICE/TJC/New Action voters in past plus some newly angered retirees. Maybe 2000 with a possibility of 3000 in a good year. They barely make a dent.

• Incentives to vote Unity – lower dues, SHIP benefits, low cost courses, trips. I hear the courses are fabulous - in every borough and for about 5 bucks - do working teacher dues supplement the retiree incentive?
• Unity networking chapters in other states, plus Westchester, Long Island, etc hold events.
• Regular events with Mulgrew and other Unity leaders as they make junkets to major pockets of retirees.
• Iron control of UFT retiree chapter where meetings are worse than the Delegate Assembly.
• Almost total inability for opposition to reach retirees. The major opportunity was the spring 2015 chapter election (every 3 years) where Retiree Advocate ran against Unity. Voting turnout in this election is much lower than in the general UFT elections. It is the one golden opportunity to get a piece of literature into the hands of every retiree but I feel RA blows it every time (I considered running a MORE slate but it wasn't worth the time). RA does not go after Unity and focuses on retiree issues instead of exposing the Unity machine. Because most people don't give a crap, RA does get their people out to vote and often get about 25-30% of those who do vote-- their own loyalists. This is pretty much a finite number of maybe 2000 at most.

This is the reason I recommend that due to opposition's scarce resources – ignore this factor and concentrate on 108,000 working UFT members and aim for the positions on the UFT Executive Board that retirees don’t get to vote for.

I'll get into the weeds on the at-large (retirees vote) and the non-at large positions in a follow-up.

=====
AFTERBURN

I was at the 2013 vote count with some Unity Caucus (and UFT) leaders and even if it was clear that Unity won, when the 52% retiree number came in they did not look happy. The low turnout of working UFT members was clearly an embarrassment, especially since they had made more of an effort to get out the vote with robocalls and reminders from their massive Unity Caucus machine in the schools - pizza parties, prizes, stuffing every mailbox in the city numerous times with glossy Unity literature. Clearly the low turnout was a rejection of Unity. But it was also a rejection of the opposition which could not really capitalize on the increasing loss of confidence in the union leadership.

I have lots of theories as to why this is so, including that until there is one caucus going head to head with Unity, some members will say - if they can't get together between elections into one group and only run together as separate groups, why should we trust them? At least Unity is homogeneous.

Well of course Unity is homogeneous - when you have all those perks to give out and a loyalty oath, it is easy. The hard thing for an opposition party is to figure out how to grow within the context of a democratic- non Unity type framework. Why replace Unity with another top-down loyalty oath caucus and fall into a "new boss same as the old boss" syndrome?

Thus, the push 3 years ago - really beginning in 2011- to create one umbrella caucus under the MORE brand - which has had some rough spots - but that is still the goal I am committed to.

Unity, Cadre, Democratic Centralism/Loyalty Oaths, UFT, Mass Organizations and Democracy

Unity Caucus Cadre at AFT Convention

What to do about an opposition party like MORE, even if it is the mildest of threats? If you can't buy them, undermine and destroy them.

Cadre:

• a nucleus or core group especially of trained personnel able to assume control and to train others; broadly : a group of people having some unifying relationship
• a cell of indoctrinated leaders active in promoting the interests of a revolutionary party

Unity Cadre in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYQzoDy_ocA



How Unity Caucus is like the Bolsheviks, not the Democratic Party

I'm doing a series on the UFT, Unity Caucus and the opposition. I'm putting forth the thesis that Unity Caucus is modeled to some extent on the Leninist concept of a party with its own version of cadre whose main purpose is to promote the interests of Unity Caucus and to steer the mass organization it created and controls (the UFT) in the direction decided upon by the Party. Behind Unity from its early days was Shanker's Social Democrats USA - SDUSA, led by Shanker ally Bayard Rustin at one point.

Unity Caucus in the early days was a sort of front group for SDUSA for its national and international policies - like support for the Vietnam war. (Under Weingarten the ideological reigns become looser.)

Here are some recent related posts.

• Is Unity a Democratic Organization: Unity Caucus a...
• How Unity Caucus Uses the District Reps to Control...
• UFT Election Musings: What Can Be Won and Is it Wo... 

I talked about loyalty oaths in this piece --- How Unity Caucus Uses the District Reps to Control... - which is really democratic centralism -- where an ostensibly democratic group whose majority votes everyone is bound to support even if they are in the minority -- sometimes on threat of expulsion when they violate this on an essential issue.

How democratic in reality are these groups given that they almost always have a hierarchy of leaders and followers. Does anyone think that Shanker, Randi, Mulgrew, Lenin, Stalin did not make the basic decisions and pass them down to be voted on by 100%. People tell me Unity Caucus internal votes when they're held are basically a joke.

Let me be clear- while Unity operates under Democratic Centralism, the UFT does not, despite attempts by Unity to make it so. In other words, upon joining Unity you must agree to abide by decisions of the group even if you disagree. Upon joining the UFT (a mass organization) you make no such agreement. But if you dissent they make it seem you are anti-union and a traitor. That is what they tell their cadre to say to the rank and file teachers in their schools.

Organizations run under DC principles are in theory democratic -- 

Let's go back to our analogy between Unity and a Leninist party - both are made up of - cadres - (an organized revolutionary vanguard). Unity Caucus has its own version of cadres -- not all are super active, but the most active will be out front defending Unity policy in every quarter - from their schools on up to the DA, Ex bd, NYSUT and AFT conventions. If you go to these events you see them doing the work of the Unity Party in every quarter. 

(See frequent commenter and Unity defender Paula Washington as an example - Paula lost her election as CL due to her defending the interests of Unity over her own members - but she will be going AFT/NYSUT RAs as one of 750 Unity delegates after next year's UFT election to rep not you but Unity while Arthur Goldstein who represents 300 UFT members in his school will get no voice for his members.)

While not a perfect analogy, clearly Shanker had some experiences with Leninist parties - through his mentor Max Shachtman - a Trotskyist turned right wing social democrat - SDUSA - was the founding mechanism of Unity and the UFT - and almost every member of the top leadership of Unity and UFT was also a member of SDUSA - until Randi - though we don't know for sure if she was too late to that party. (Leo Casey would be considered the left of the right.) Before Randi, key Unity was a bit more exclusive and top people seemed more ideologically pure to SDUSA principles. Randi has no principles so Unity became more open to anyone. At this point I don't think people like Leroy Barr give a crap about the ideology of SDUSA.

Shanker modeled Unity on a Leninist-type Party as a mechanism to control the mass organization - the UFT.

What is the difference between a party and a mass organization?

A party (Unity, Bolsheviks):

Lenin, leader of the Bolsheviks, argued that a revolutionary party should be a small vanguard party with a centralized political command and a strict cadre policy....The Menshevik faction, however, argued that the party should be a broad-based mass movement --- in other words, open to all people who would not have to take a loyalty oath.

The Menshiviks were social democrats - which is where I pretty much stand -- but SDUSA is also SD - but right wing.

Mass Organizations (UFT).

As the membership of a Communist party was to be limited to active cadres in Lenin's theory, there was a need for networks of separate organizations to mobilize mass support for the party. Typically, Communist parties have built up various front organizations whose membership is often open to non-Communists.

The UFT is just one of the mass organizations controlled by the cadre of Unity Caucus. History shows that relatively small numbers of cadre have the ability to control mass organizations with thousands of members - even nations with millions  of people. This control is impossible without the cadre.

Unity Caucus uses its cadre - recruited through many channels - to control a major segment of the national teacher movement through the UFT, NYSUT and the AFT, and even internationally, where it often functions hand in hand with the interests of American government policy (see George Schmidt: The AFT and the CIA).

In other words - how to explain their concurrence with so much of ed deform? They are partners -- the so-called seat - or stool - at the table.

The leadership is incredibly competent at maintaining their control and will stop at nothing to maintain it. There is a lot more at stake for them than just what happens in the schools of New York City.

Almost sixty years of power have validated that they have the wherewithal to do so and will stop at nothing - including:

• buying off so-called oppositions
• encouraging loose cannons to split the opposition
• undermining the biggest threat
• stealing elections at the chapter leader level to maintain as much control of the schools as possible
• selling out whole areas of membership that might turn against them
• making deals with enemies of the rank and file

Maybe they are going to be happy to let the agency fee payers if they are dissidents grow in size by leaving the union and giving them even tighter control even if smaller.

What to do about an opposition party like MORE, even if it is the mildest of threats? If you can't buy them, undermine and destroy them.

More on this in future posts.

How Unity Caucus Uses the District Reps to Control the Membership and Narrow the Growth of the Opposition

CORRECTED: Changes in green

One thing people have to understand about the Unity Caucus on the city, state and national (called Progressive Caucus) is that only 100% control is acceptable - not 60% or 75% or 95%. But 100%. When there are voices of opposition, they are attacked as being disloyal and anti-union.

How does the UFT/Unity bureaucracy keep track of pockets of opposition in so many schools? Through the middle management employees, the District Rep. Every school in the city has a district rep who communicates through the chapter leaders but when there is a strong opposition person in the school, is willing to go around them - sometimes by actively recruiting someone in the school to challenge them.

They track dissident voices and call out reinforcements when a school seems to be going off on an anti-Unity track -- for instance, the district rep informing the teachers at the dissident PS 8X that Mulgrew was coming to see them - soon - certainly before next year's elections -- to try to put out the fire. And to some extent a visit by Mulgrew will move some people on the fence.

Unity works hard to get some of these people into Unit to shut them up.

Remember the Unity Caucus loyalty oath - or what it really is -Wiki says - democratic centralism - the name given to the deontological principles of internal organization used by Leninist political parties, and the term is sometimes used as a synonym for any Leninist policy inside a political party.

Yes, Unity is a Leninist party. Leo Casey in debates with people in MORE likes to defend the Unity loyalty oath by raising the issue that some people in MORE are in organizations that have their own version of democratic centralism -- another diversion by Leo since MORE itself doesn't operate under DC - and if it did I would quit immediately. But I have been pretty open inside MORE that I have reservations about people who subject themselves to a loyalty oath - or democratic centralism - since they are bound to each other and their organization and in a mass organization like MORE that can cause problems - and at times it has. (I'll get more into this in a separate post).

The same thing goes for Unity - they are bound more to Unity than to the people in the schools. Just look at Paula Washington's comments on ed notes defense of everything Unity - which caused her to lose her recent chapter leader election.

In some cases, Unity woos a dissident with promise who they deem ambivalent -- first they say that being associated with an opposition is not a problem -- it is but they are hiding that. Then they entice them with offers of joining Unity and getting to go to conventions with a hint at after school jobs and even the big enchilada - a full-time union job that will get them out of the classroom. I have seen numerous people go that way -- I can't tell you how many people who used to hand out Ed Notes in their schools ended up in Unity - they were targeted to shut down the ability to reach the rank and file. Recently a MORE supporter underwent heavy Unity recruitment and finally succumbed, not totally surprising to me since I detected some game being played -- like guarantees that MORE lit was going into boxes and others in the school saying they never say any MORE lit. Call it playing the double game - using a connection to MORE to make them a more attractive Unity candidate. Once they join Unity they start avoiding saying hello to me -- and other slimy stuff. Reports often come in that they become amongst the worst - they entered Unity in an unprincipled manner and begin to function that way. After all, they were once a critic who felt the union was letting people down and then suddenly go silent and start selling the Unity line. What does that say about their believability - and honor? To me they are the least trustful people in Unity.

(Does anyone think that the same offer could have been on the table for people like James Eterno, Julie Cavanagh, Kit Wainer and even me, who was being recruited into Unity in the late 90s before I went rogue? No job offer would ever tempt us.

There are 32 K-8 district reps and 6 high school districts but they are divided up amongst more than 6 district reps -- the number is fuzzy as some handle small schools - with the proliferation of small high schools, the union added DRs. There are also Drs for paras, special ed district 75 and other special districts. (Yes, it is a job machine for around 40-45 people). Monthly meetings are held where the UFT propaganda is laid down for CLs to follow -- these are not meetings to share problems and issues in schools and come up with solutions.

By the way - every district rep is supposed to teach one period a day - they are on DOE salary but the UFT reimburses the DOE for the time they don't teach during the day and the get additional compensation for the hours from 3-6 plus any other time they put in. Every one of them makes a 6-figure salary.

In all the years before 2002, every district rep was Unity Caucus except for Bruce Markens who was elected by the most dissident group in the union - the Manhattan High Schools chapter leaders. Bruce was re-elected for a decade from 1991-2000 despite Unity attempts to dislodge him. After he retired, Tom Dromgoole, his successor was also in Unity and was independent and followed in Bruce's footsteps from 2000-2002. After Randi made it an appointed position, fearing a backlash from the still strong Man HS CLs -- big schools still dominated - she appointed Tom. But some felt over the next few years with the sword hanging over his head as large schools disappeared and his base disappeared with them, he was forced to adhere more to the Unity line in order to keep his job. And to make it worse, some of Bruce and Tom's former supporters actually ended up joining or supporting Unity with one now having a full-time job. Unity is relentless in undermining any opposition.

As I said, even 1 person not in the Unity fold is unacceptable to the Unity machine.

So in 2002, Randi eliminated district rep elections because she never wanted to see another Bruce Markens. They created a bogus process of interviews but the UFT leadership really makes the choice of this crucial position.

Over the years, some top-notch opposition people have gone through the process just for the hell of it because they know they have no chance. James Eterno applied for the Queens HS DR position at one time. He was clearly the most qualified candidate. Yelena Siwinski applied for the District 22 position - no one is more qualified than she is. And I believe another top-notch MORE candidate is currently applying for a vacancy he will not get.

Even I applied for the position in District 14 before I retired with an understanding that my voice, like Bruce, would remain independent. Top union officials came to my interview to enjoy the fun - and we had a blast - when they asked me to produce sample of my newsletters I had Ed Notes - everyone broke up. Believe me, the guy they chose is tepid at best. If there were an election I believe I had a shot at winning because I was so aggressive in dealing with my principal when I was CL - and many CLs liked that. Also even some Unity people who are there for the conventions wanted an independent voice - it was pre-ICE and I wasn't with any caucus.

At least an election for DR forced them to be somewhat responsive to the chapter leaders - unless these CLs were also Unity and had to follow the party line from above - which was true in most cases. So elections are not an end all until the Unity dominance of the CLS is broken -- part of my strategy of organizing from bottom up instead of making the UFT elections the big deal.

Unity has a machine and that machine pervades most schools with little opposition at the school level except for a relatively few. There are signs of some breaks in that - witness the 60 people who came out for the MORE CL training recently - and new people are in contact regularly. So something did break in the schools to some extent. Unity will try to recruit these people into Unity through the district rep and at their 3 training sessions in the fall -- these are important to Unity in an election year in that they can shut down opposition lit in schools with Unity CLs controlling the gate - unless the opposition has a contact willing to stand up to them in the school. Unity can only be broken by going after them at the school level day by day, month by month, year by year. Election outcomes reflect that work and if an opposition ever had people in hundreds of schools who could organize a serious block at the Del Ass, Unity would be facing a loss of control from below.

District Reps have a major function -- to stop this from happening.

Arwen at NYC Educator: When Will Unity See Its Berlin Wall Fall?

I say without any reservations that there is an illness in Unity.  Presently, its members sense only the "stillness in the wind" and they think it will always be so.  They think they can stand without the support of the rank and file.  The rank and file of today will become the retirees of tomorrow and many are intensely unhappy.  I say Unity is living in a house of cards. They may laugh.  And, they may forget that the Berlin Wall has been smashed and the Soviet Union has crumbled.  They may refuse to look to Chicago.  There are lessons to be learned from history.  I would advise them to consider the Windy City before their house of cards tumbles before their disbelieving eyes..... NYC Educator,

Read the entire post by Arwen at http://nyceducator.com/2014/05/retiree-driven-unionism-and-unitys.html#disqus_thread

Wherefore art thou yon Unity slugs and trolls?

You know, it takes a blatant selling job on the contract - which seems to take place once a decade (1995, 2005, 2014) for people who generally don't feel much disrespect for people they know in Unity to get the message - that just about every single one in Unity - the idiots and the decent - drink the Kool Aid. While are some know what they do, many others actually believe in their own shit. It leaves independent thinking people scratching their heads - and somewhat frightened at the kind of people running the UFT right down to the school level.

I know Arthur points to walls coming down - Berlin, the Middle East-- it happens often in a flashpoint. If there are no organized structures in place - even underground, chaos can reign.

That is why - even though I am not always optimistic, I feel MORE must build structures capable of picking up the pieces if things do begin to crumble. And I also feel that the days of division between opposition forces had to come to an end. (I don't include New Action until the day comes when they join MORE). ICE and TJC learned their lesson after a decade of not really working together - and we learned to work together in GEM - a short-lived transition group it turns out where many people felt comfortable working together.

One simple example of the benefits. When I get a question from a teacher I send it to Jeff, James (ICE), Kit, Peter (TJC) for expert advice. 

Ahhhh, Synergy - I love that word.

Former Unity Caucus Member: Arthur Goldstein is telling the truth about loyalty oaths

Loyalty to the truth rather than Unity makes for better sleeping at night... Roseanne McCosh, PS 8X, former Unity Caucus member

This is in response to attacks on Arthur challenging whether there is a loyalty oath. Remember when Lauren Cohen mentioned the loyalty oath at the NYSUT convention? They started booing her. Touchy, touchy, touchy.

There are Unity Caucus people who agree with us. I know because they tell me. And I think there are  more and more people in the Unity closet who would jump to the opposition if it every shows viability. I know that they never had respect for the opposition in the past, especially New Action - I watched them disparage NAC for years at Ex Bd meetings. Now that they are partners things are a little more subtle. The other night at the UFT Ex Bd meeting, there were 15 MOREistas there - the first time MORE showed up - and an interesting dialogue took place with Mulgrew that surprised a lot of people, including me. But more on that meeting later on.

One of the big fears at the top is that if MORE ever reaches a critical mass -- and to me that is a third of the working teacher vote in an election - like CORE did in their first election -- that is a game changer. (Ignore the retiree issue until MORE gets to first base.)

Until this email from Roseanne, one of my favorite correspondents, came in the other day, I hadn't realized she was in Unity at one time.

Arthur Goldstein is telling the truth about Unity loyalty oaths. I can attest to the loyalty oath.  I joined Unity when I was a much younger and less informed  UFT member and a relatively new chapter leader.  I was nominated by my DR. We even attended a meeting/dinner at a nice restaurant with Randi and her right hand man near Washington Square Park to be initiated into Unity.  Not only did I sign the oath but I also distinctly remember this guy's words when he spoke. 

He said if we disagree with Randi, we are not bad people but we can't join Unity.  I can't remember his name off hand.  I signed the damn oath myself so it definitely exists. 

I stopped paying my Unity dues years ago and started speaking up when I realized we were being led around by the nose.  Loyalty to the truth rather than Unity makes for better sleeping at night.  I might still be a Unity member---who knows---who cares.  ...... Roseanne McCosh, PS 8x