UFT Election Back Stories

Gotham Schools' Anna Philips has a report on the upcoming UFT elections (ballots go out March 7 and must be returned by April 6 - count is April 7 and is open to UFT members). I left a comment.

The reason Randi got 74% in her first election was that New Action, the main opposition at the time, was still a force and able to pull a quarter of the votes. Now they have sunk to below 10%, with many of those coming from retirees.

For a comparison of voting patterns over the lst few elections, see a spreadsheet we prepared 3 years ago at http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgxRf3gM4qtyBFmTshSW1fQ&hl=en

You wiil note that Randi's % dropped in 2007, but her vote total really dropped from 42,000 to 35,000 between 2004 and 2007 while the number of retirees voting for Unity remained constant at over 18,000 votes. Can it be that half if Unity's votes come from retirees? It's late and my eyes are bleary. But here's the skinny on the HS vote.

Elaborating on the high school executive board seats and why they are up for contention:

First of all, our 6 great candidates.

From ICE
Arthur Goldstein, CL of Francis Lewis HS, who you all know very well from his writings on Gotham.

Michael Fiorillo, former CL and current delegate from Newcomers HS who has also commented very astutely on many issues at Gotham.

John Lawhead, CL of Tilden, a soon to be closed school. John used to be at Bushwick HS which also was closed, so he is an expert on the politics of closing schools. He is also has been an expert on the high stakes testing issue for many years and has taught many of us in ICE the implications of the high stakes testing game.

From TJC
Kit Wainer, CL from Leon Goldstein HS, who headed the ICE-TJC slate in 2007. Kit has been a long-time activist and is one of the founders of TJC.

Marian Swerdlow, FDR HS, also a long-time activist in UFT politics and a former delegate.

Peter Lamphere, CL of Bronx HS of Science, who has been active for many years.

Some facts about this particular piece of the election

These 6 high school seats have been Unity's problem for over 20 years (the high school vote always split around 50/50), as they consistently lost them to the opposition, which used to be New Action.

But in 2003/4 New Action started making deals with Randi - they wouldn't run against her if she wouldn't run Unity candidates for these 6 seats, thus ceding them to New Action. Many New Action members also got part-time jobs at the UFT.

This dirty deal led to the formation of ICE (many from the Education Notes circle) for the 2004 elections and an alliance with TJC, which had been around for a decade but had never run in an election before 2003. Both groups had a lot to learn and had to build a new infrastructure from scratch.

With Unity not running candidates for these seats, the direct confrontation with New Action led to ICE-TJC winning those seats, which placed people like Jeff Kaufman and James Eterno (who has been on the EB as a New Action rep but left them over the Unity deal) on the EB. As someone who had been attending the EB meetings for a while, they brought a breath of fresh air to the meetings over their 3 years on the board, forcing Unity to address many issues, including the rubber room (Kaufman's short trip to the RR as an Ex Bd member made some headlines and his experience there and support for his colleagues, plus his legal background, brought many issues into the light.) Their voices were loud and strong in fighting the disastrous 2005 contract.

In order to still these voices, in 2007 Unity guaranteed New Action 3 of the HS EB seats by co-endorsing - which means a Unity vote counted for New Action- and took 3 seats for themselves. ICE-TJC got 36% of the vote and could not top the combined New Action (12%) /Unity (51%) totals, though ICE-TJC outpolled New Action in every division of the union except retirees. (Since New Action sold out their vote totals have dropped consistently amongst working teachers from the mid 20% to single digits in 2007). To make it clearer. New Action got 3 HS EB seats while getting only 521 votes while ICE-TJC received over 1500 votes and got no seats. UFT democracy inaction.

You can see a vote comparison of the 2004 and 2007 elections at http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgxRf3gM4qtyBFmTshSW1fQ&hl=en

New Action also received 5 additional EB seats for a total of 8 as a reward for keeping the independent voices of ICE-TJC off the Board.

We assume that a similar deal will be in operation in this election. If ICE-TJC can increase its vote in the HS to 50%, not an impossibility given the conditions, then the 6 people mentioned above, although an extreme minority out of 89 EB seats, would serve on the Board and give voice to a large group of disenfranchised teachers, paras, secretaries, etc.

And it would further drive a stake through the heart of New Action's bogus claims to be an opposition. If they lose, will it threaten their jobs at the UFT? Probably not, but if you detect an air of desperation on the part of New Action, you know why. Unity will probably offer a similar deal like last time and hand them additional seats in order to make phony claims of bi-partisanship. If ICE-TJC does win these seats, just watch New Action EB members line up on most votes with Unity.

Unlike ICE/GEM people, New Action has been absent from the line of fire of closing schools and charter school invasions (they supported the UFT charter school invasion of 2 public schools in East NY). Will the rank and file be aware of these differences? While the word has been out about New Action to some areas of the UFT, we theorize that a batch of New Action votes come from people who still believe they are the old New Action.


You can follow the UFT elections at the new ICE blog: http://uftelections2010.blogspot.com/

UFT Election Preliminary Results

These are not final as they were counting ballots that came in yesterday -- 700 and not all were counted. These results also do not have the non-slate ballots which take a long time to count -- so individual totals for every candidate will vary.

My % numbers are based on rough estimates and lousy math.

The major story is the incredibly low turnout amongst working teachers. Maybe 22%. Weingarten's "overwhelming" victory should be looked at in that context. Of course that also applies to our votes.

Weingartens' 10,000 votes TOTAL (on Unity slate) from elem, middle and HS is numbing. Add around less than 1500 she got from New Action (a portion of whom did not know they were voting for her.) So she gets less than 12,000 votes out of the teaching staff of 70,000? More likely closer to 11,000 or less real support. I view this as an overwhelming rejection of her leadership. We just failed to capitalize.

An enormous bulk of votes coming from the Unity/New Action totals -- over 20,000 retiree votes. New Action got 1600 and we got 1061 - 5% of retirees.

Out of 50,000 retiree votes sent out around 22, 500 voted. Only 18,000 count as they will be pro-rated.

HS
Unity got 2183 HS votes total out of almost HS 20,000 ballots sent out. We got 1524 and New Action got 521. That means Unity would have won barely if we got all the New Action votes -- but we would have challenged the election results if we had. New Action gets 3 ex bd seats with 521 votes. Democracy Inaction. They also got the 5 at-large seats for a total of 8 with an incredibly low % of votes.

Middle school returns were almost a joke. Out of 13,000 ballots sent out 2384 returned. Here are the results:
ICE/TJC: 444 (almost 20%)
Unity: 1499
New Action: 273

Elementary: Out of 37,000 ballots, 8,904 returned.
ICE/TJC: 1337 (15%)
Unity 6252
New Action: 562

Functional: paras, secties, nurses, speech, attendance, etc
Out of 42,000 votes, 9000 returns
ICE/TJC: 1032
Unity: 6464
Nw Action: 548

Loooking at the teaching staff in the 3 divisions (rough numbers):
70,000 ballots sent out. 15,000 returns
Retirees. 50,000 sent out. 22,400 returns

Positive Trends:
ICE/TJC buried New Action in every division except retirees where New Action got the bulk of their votes (almost half). The goal of replacing New Action as the recognized opposition has been met.

ICE/TJC increased their vote in every division from last time not as much by total but by %.

Negative:
the campaign obviously did not reach the membership. TJC put out about 90,000 leaflets and we did about 50-60,000. The impact if any must be assessed. TJC did a mailing to every middle school teacher in the Bronx. With 444 total votes that impact was probably negligible.

Putting a lot of time and energy into Exec Bd and the DA looks like a waste. The results bear that out.

If an opposition/alternative is to grow (and the removal of New Action as a legit opposition despite their 8 seats is and continues to be a goal) direct, continuous activity to reach the teachers in the schools is necessary. Only a group of people who have the will to do this will make a difference.

Look at the high school results; 1524 total votes.
Think of the number of large high schools with people running with ICE/TJC-- many with 200 members.

Off the top of my head:
Jamaica, Hillcrest, Bryant, Aviation, Stuvesant, Bergtraum, Norman Thomas, FDR, Francis Lewis, Port Richmond, Bronx High. Did the bulk of our votes come from these few schools? Then the leafleting campaign had almost 0 impact.

For Unity it is even worse when you think of only 2183 votes after all the power they have? And New Action's 521 with their massive leafleting campaign? Unity would still have won without them. Interesting that their red-baiting campaign was a slap at new Action too.

(And by the way, New Action is trumpeting that their web site has an objection - tepid at that and that Shulman called Randi and she sort of apologized. New Action grows more pathetic by the minute.)

Frankly, it did not look like either New Action or Unity were happy. The ICE/TJC people at the count had the most fun all day. No spirit is bowed.

The issue: Is there a way to wake up the membership in the schools? What strategy would it take to do that? If the answer is that is not possible, people must decide if it is worth continuing. If the answer is there is a way, then people must have the will.

Corrected: Whither New Action: Mulgrew Tops New Action Slate as 10 NA Candidates Run on Unity Slate, Including 2 co-chairs Shulman and Halabi

Historical correction sent in by Ira Goldfine:

In 1977 and 1979 we ran together with TAC and we called ourselves UNITED FIGHTBACK - in 1981 we formed NAC (the N for New Directions, A for Teachers Action Caucus and C for the Coalition of NYC Schoolworkers) and ran a full slate of 675 people with Pessin as the presidential candidate. We took nearly 30% of the total vote and over 35% excluding the functional chapter.

You won't see these facts stated anywhere in New Action literature as they play their
decade-old assigned role of trying to confuse UFT members into voting for them and dividing the forces opposed to Unity. It always wasn't this way.

From 1990-2001, New Action which formed as a result of the merger of two caucuses (Teachers Action Caucus and New Directions*), was the major voice of the opposition, not always the strongest voice (as Ed Notes began pointing out when I started publishing in 1997) but the major place people opposed to Unity were able to go. They were able to garner over 10,000 votes and win the 6 or 7 (depending on the year) high school executive board seats in every election except one during those years. In 1991 they also won 6 middle school seats, thus giving them 13 EB seats, the most an opposition in the UFT has ever had.

It was directly due to this challenge that Unity, after beating back NA in 1993 when Unity regained 100% of the EB, took the opportunity to remove the divisional vice presidents from being voted on by the members of the division to make sure the opposition never gets to be one of the 11 officers (now known as the AdCom). In other words, if the high school teachers voted NA the HS VEEP would still be Unity. Which is exactly what happened in the 1995, 97, 99 and 2001 elections.

Then Randi, in what is perhaps her most brilliant move, made an offer to New Action which was worried about losing the high school seats in the 2004 elections (Unity pushed through a change from 2 to 3 year terms). She would not run ANY Unity candidates for those seats if NA wouldn't run anyone for president against her.

New Action bit and thus was born a collaboration that has turned NA into a shell of what it once was (check the vote totals as they dropped to an afterthought over the past decade.)

But proving the old adage that lemonade can be made out of lemons, the actions of NA spurred 2 other groups into action. Readers and supporters of Ed Notes, which had been critical of New Action for its tepid role as an opposition even before they did the dirty deal, formed the Independent Community of Educators (ICE-- one of the major forces behind MORE today). They were joined by key defectors from New Action: James and Camille Eterno, Ellen Fox and Lisa North. ICE, founded in late 2003 and just a month old, decided to run a slate in the 2004 elections.

Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC), a decade old advocacy group in the UFT, also decided to run for the first time in the 2004 elections. Both groups ran a joint slate for the high schools directly opposing the New Action slate, which without Unity running at all for these 6 seats, assumed they would win. New Action didn't, which pissed Randi off to no end.

The ICE-TJC slate won those seats and put people like James Eterno and Jeff Kaufman on the Ex Bd. For James it was a continuation of his years as the NA rep but now combined with Kaufman, the two of them raised hell with the Unity agenda, challenging them in a way they had not been before. One can imagine how people like NA dictator Mike Shulman felt sitting and stewing at EB meetings watching James and Jeff do their thing. And plotting with Unity how they could remove these thorns in both their sides.

And remove them they did in the 2007 and 2010 elections when they made sure a mix of New Action and Unity controlled the high school seats by running 3 from each caucus on both the Unity and New Action slates. In addition, New Action was given 5 more EB seats at large, including Shulman, who as a retiree finally made it on to the board.

In both elections, ICE-TJC almost doubled the NA high school vote but when their totals were added to the Unity total that shut out ICE-TJC which got no seats on the board.

A look at the 2010 HS slate voting totals: Unity 2600, ICE-TJC 1350, NA 750. A total of roughly 5000 votes out of a potential of almost 20,000.

In the 2013 elections with the rise of MORE, Unity needed New Action more than ever and has rewarded them with 10 EB seats. Thus if you look at the ballot you will see 10 New Action (and 4 Unity, including Mulgrew) running on both slates.

When you see your ballot you will notice that there are only 2 presidential candidates. Julie Cavanagh for MORE and Mulgrew with Unity/New Action next to his name. Thus there are only 2 real choices in this election, not 3.

And if you are a high school teacher you will see an interesting mix of EB candidates for your division. 7 MORE people and 7 mixed New Action and Unity. These are winnable seats if high school teachers come out to vote and vote for MORE, thus giving a real opposition a beach head in the exec bd. Thus it is crucial to get out the vote from the 25-27% in the last election which would give MORE a chance to defeat the NA/Unity combo.

In an upcoming post I will tell you about these 7 MORE people.

-----

*A history of the roots of New Action: Teachers Action Caucus (TAC) and New Directions (ND)

In 1990 the 2 major caucuses in the UFT merged into one caucus with a lot of promise.

TAC was founded in 1968 as an outgrowth of Teachers for Community Control (TCC), which consisted of people who had been associated with the old left Teachers Union which had disbanded in 1964 after suffering from years of persecution from the Board of Education over their ties to the Communist Party. (The very founding of the UFT was part of this anti-left push, but that's for another time.) TCC supported the community against the 1968 UFT strike and when they formed TAC they were branded scabs for many years by the UFT. Despite that they ran campaigns in UFT elections and found a following among teachers on the left, many of whom entered the system in the late 60s. Some were with what was termed the "New Left" and internally there were struggles between what was termed the "Stalinist pro-Soviet" old left and the mostly Trotskyist New Left.

As a non-leftist I entered into this world in the fall of 1970 in my 4th year of teaching. I was associated with a group of left-oriented people who were in neither camp but willing to build alliances. We tried initially with TAC but found that organization locked in its own narrow frame of politics and could make no headway moving policy changes. So we left and formed not another caucus but an advocacy group called the Coalition of NYC School Workers. We had no intention of running in elections but spent a lot of time analyzing and writing on policy and we attracted a large group of followers, including many from the New Left/Trotskyist groups who had no where else to go even if they were unhappy with some of the direction we were heading in.

Sometime in late 1975/early 1976 they split the CSW in half and formed New Directions which was aimed at running a slate in the 1977 UFT elections directly against Unity and TAC. We were adamantly opposed to doing that and formed an alliance with TAC to run together in the 77 elections. I believe we called ourselves New Action Caucus. ND ran its own course, but in some irony they threw out the Trotskyists that had fomented the split from us. (The trots formed a new group that never was a caucus that was called "Chalk Dust" and it lasted until the late 80s.)

It wasn't until around 1980 that New Directions began to join with us to run in elections throughout the 80s, even winning the high school vice president seat for Mike Shulman in 1985, an event that shook Unity. (Some irony here and an entire story how Unity sued themselves that the election was unfairly run and forcing another election, thus keeping Shulman from being seated for almost a year).


Sometime after that, ND had another purge, tossing out their leader Marc Pessin (I could write a book on him) who was apparently obstructing a move to merge with TAC, which had been a bitter enemy and would never have joined with ND as long as he was involved. ND had moved steadily to the right in a sense in that it ignored almost all social issues. Which was interesting and seemed to pave the way for a merger between the old left TAC which had been branded as scabs for breaking the 68 strike and more right ND.

The idea of Unity making a deal with anything to do with TAC was inconceivable until both Shanker and Feldman were out of the picture given their history of ani-communism. Even people like me were preferable and I had quite a few conversations with some of the upper echelon Unity people who loved my critiques of New Action, who they considered spineless. And so they turned out to be.

When Randi made the deal with New Action in 2003 there was just a bit of churning and turning in the graves of the old UFT right wing social democrats. The old guard was not happy, but there was such turnover in Unity, there was no real resistance.

Ed Notes Redux: Why I Left New Action by James Eterno

I should not be surprised that the newer activists who are teaching 15 years and less often don't have a full understanding of the historical context behind many issues. Recently there has been some discussion inside MORE about New Action and I see the need to connect some of the dots. I am going back into the Ed Notes print archives for some stories and here is one from James at the founding point of ICE where he left NA to help create ICE and wrote this piece for the January 2004 edition of Ed Notes.

Ed Notes: Jan. 2004

New Action/Unity in Corrupt Bargain
Why I Left New Action!!!
by James Eterno, UFT Executive Board

Since 1824, historians have debated and criticized an alleged corrupt bargain that made John Quincy Adams President of the United States, even though he had fewer votes in the general election than Andrew Jackson.  In exchange for the presidency, Adams supposedly agreed to dole out a patronage job to Henry Clay if he would prevent Jackson from securing the White House. Adams was elected President by the House of Representatives where Clay was a leader, and soon after Adams appointed Clay as his Secretary of State.  This little bit of presidential history is being repeated in UFT politics, except now the corrupt bargain is being made before the union’s presidential election.

A deal between the two main caucuses (political parties) has been reached.  New Action has agreed not to run a candidate for president against Randi Weingarten in next spring’s UFT Election but they will run a slate for other positions.  How can a political party (NAC) run in an election and not run for the top office?   Would any citizen vote for the Democratic Party’s Vice Presidential candidate next year if the Democrats decided not to run a candidate for president against Bush, but a Democrat ran for VP?  If NAC is not opposing Randi, why run at all?  What will be their slogan?  “Randi and New Action. Perfect Together.”  Anyone who votes for NAC will be voting for a fraudulent opposition and essentially supporting Weingarten. 

In return for not running against Weingarten, Randi’s Unity Caucus has agreed to open up part time union jobs for New Action (NAC) members and to not run candidates against NAC’s six High School Executive Board candidates in the upcoming election.  Unity also agreed to have an organizing committee that includes NAC members to organize weak chapters and to have a bipartisan UFT Action Committee formulate an action plan. Finally, Unity will support a change to the UFT Constitution to allow a caucus to replace its UFT Executive Board members if seats become vacant between elections. These cosmetic changes will not exactly alter the Union’s fundamentally undemocratic structure.

This modern UFT version of the corrupt bargain has convinced me to end my eight year association with New Action.  I joined NAC in 1995.  NAC leader Michael Shulman helped me a great deal when I became chapter leader of Jamaica High School in 1996.  Furthermore, since 1997 I have been elected three times by the high school teachers, with NAC’s endorsement, to the UFT Executive Board.  My resignation may cost me my Executive Board seat, but I would rather lose my seat than to be involved in a sham election.

Shulman, NAC Co-chair David Kaufman and their cohorts believe that the UFT is in a war with Bloomberg/Klein and we all have to pull together and support our president to fight the common enemy at City Hall.  Shulman is half correct.  We are under attack from the city, but NAC’s leaders are wrong because we have an obligation to challenge a UFT president who might not even try to truly fight City Hall.

Bloomberg/Klein have: eliminated the Education Evaluators, virtually ended sabbaticals, laid off paras, imposed double period block programming without our input, imposed 50 minutes of extended time in most schools twice a week in violation of our Contract as well as State Law, deprived us of the right to choose the best approach to how we teach in many classrooms, and they are refusing to hear safety grievances.  These are just a few of the many indignities that have been heaped upon us.  The UFT has filed grievances, had a rally and gone to court but meanwhile Klein continues to abuse us.  Weingarten is not winning the war and I wonder if she really wants to clash with the city.

Ask yourself the following fundamental question.  Do you think Weingarten/Unity will risk dues check-off (the union’s right to automatically deduct $37 in UFT dues from each of our paychecks)?  Automatic dues check-off could be lost if we have a real job action.  A job action could deprive the Union of the funds that support its huge patronage system.  I hope my fears are unfounded; however I seriously question whether the UFT leadership will encourage anything more from the membership than symbolic actions, and without a full scale mobilization, Bloomberg/Klein can continue to mistreat us.  Therefore, it is crucial that we have a real choice for UFT president in 2004.

Had Britain followed New Action’s logic and backed its prime minister during World War II, when they were not winning in 1940, Neville Chamberlain (appeasement’s great champion) would have remained at the helm and Winston Churchill would never have ascended to power.  The UFT needs a Churchill now and not a Chamberlain.  At least we should have the option to vote for a different line of attack.

Traditionally, New Action took a militant approach to unionism.  Strong, valid criticism of Unity/Weingarten for allowing our union to be weakened to its current state was what led to NAC winning the high schools in the last four UFT Elections.  However, since the last UFT Election in 2001, NAC has moved closer to Unity, although there have been bitter disagreements within New Action.  At some point last summer [2003], Shulman and Weingarten met and the corrupt bargain was proposed.  Later in the summer a majority of New Action’s Executive Board, despite a great deal of strong dissent, agreed not to run a candidate for president in the upcoming election.  With the corrupt bargain in place, Unity and New Action are now virtually interchangeable.  Hundreds of rank and file New Action members never heard about this deal.  I resigned from NAC as I could not conceive of supporting such a bogus election scam.

Unfortunately, the biggest losers in the corrupt bargain are the members of the UFT.  We could be deprived of a serious choice for UFT president in 2004, an election that will determine the future direction of the Union.  That is of course unless some rank and file group can come together and save the day by nominating a viable alternative to Weingarten to run for president.

This modern UFT version of the corrupt bargain has convinced me to end my eight year association with New Action.  I joined NAC in 1995.  NAC leader Michael Shulman helped me a great deal when I became chapter leader of Jamaica High School in 1996.  Furthermore, since 1997 I have been elected three times by the high school teachers, with NAC’s endorsement, to the UFT Executive Board.  My resignation may cost me my Executive Board seat, but I would rather lose my seat than to be involved in a sham election.

In the UFT election held in March 2004, James Eterno, running for HS Ex Bd on the newly formed ICE/TJC slate won the HS seats from New Action (as part of the corrupt bargain, Unity did not run) thus ushering in a 3 year era of militant opposition to Unity/New Action policies on the EB led by James and Jeff Kaufman. In the 2007, 10 and 13 elections, Unity and New Action cross endorsed candidates to make sure this would not happen again. But in the 13  election, MORE got within a few hundred votes of capturing the 7 HS EB seats from the NA/Unity slate.

Don't think there isn't some heavy worry going on over at NA/Unity HQ over this possibility and developing strategies to counter the possibility that MORE could win any EB positions in the next election.

Historical Perspective of Education Notes

A short history of Education Notes, its relationship to the UFT leadership, the formation of the Independent Community of Educators (ICE) and the Grassroots Education Movement (GEM) was distributed in the hard copy Dec. '09 edition of Ed Notes at the Delegate Assembly, where I have been handing it out almost every month since 1996. That's pretty much the entire Brazilian rain forest. There is a pdf available for downloading if you wish to share it with someone who has no life. (http://www.scribd.com/doc/24276475/Ed-Notes-Dec-09)

I began publishing Education Notes in 1996 at Delegate Assemblies because I was frustrated at the process that allowed the chair, usually the UFT president, almost total domination of the procedures. If you wanted to get the floor to make a resolution they had total control over who got to speak and if you were too outspoken on issues not liked by the leadership, you could easily get shut out. By distributing Ed Notes before meetings, I got to say my piece, whether I was called on or not. Ed Notes grew in size from one sheet to a 10-14-page booklet and then in 2002 when I retired, it became a full-sized 16-page tabloid published 4 times a year.

Having come out of the opposition movement to Unity Caucus in the 70’s (I was mostly inactive in the union from the mid-80’s through the early 90’s) I became active again when I replaced a Unity Caucus chapter leader in 1994 at my elementary school, which had a “my way or the high way” principal for over 15 years and we had butted heads all the time. My becoming chapter leader freaked her out and I began publishing a school newsletter, often once a week. That freaked her out even more and I began to understand the power of the press, even at the most local level.

I took a look at the opposition groups and didn’t find much that appealed to me. New Action was the major opposition caucus and was fairly ineffective though it did win support in the high schools by winning the 6 high school Exec Bd seats on a regular basis. Six out of 89 gave them little leverage and after leading the successful battle against the first 1995 contract to be rejected by the membership, they started fading. PAC, a smaller opposition group was totally focused on the teachers who were losing their licenses when they didn’t pass the teacher exams. Teachers for a Just Contract took positions I agreed with, but I thought they focused too much on a narrow range of issues.

I would attend UFT Exec Board meetings and was so frustrated at the way New Action would deal with Unity, so often cowed into submission. There didn’t seem to be enough fight in them, though a few like Marvin Markman and James Eterno were at times effective. But New Action leader Michael Shulman was the dominant player and so often seemed to throw a blanket over the Caucus.

Thus I figured the only way to create some change in the union was to appeal to what I felt had to be a progressive wing of Unity. At that time, Randi Weingarten was about to take over the union and presented herself as leading that progressive force. She reached out to me, claiming she agreed with me on so many issues, sometimes through late night email exchanges. Her people whispered that she was going to make changes in the union to democratize it and even make changed to liberalize Unity. But absolute power --- you know the drill.

By 2001, it was becoming clear that Randi was not only not liberalizing the union, but also making it more undemocratic than ever. As a small example, the new motion period ever since I became a delegate in 1971, took place immediately after the question period. Suddenly, if Randi didn’t like a resolution I was proposing, she either eliminated the time altogether or pushed it to the end of the meeting. She became more and more of a demagogue. In 2001, I became increasingly restive as she started supporting merit pay schemes and mayoral control, and I became increasingly critical of her and Unity Caucus, seeing that whatever progressive wing there might be (and I had plenty of conversations with people who came off that way) was cowed by Unity Caucus discipline. It became clear that the caucus was like a black hole. Once you went in you never came out.

Many of the positions Ed Notes took in the late 90’s - opposition to high stakes testing and the ridiculous accountability it engendered, unbridled principal power, drastic reductions in class size, support for chapter leaders under attack, a stronger grievance procedure, total opposition to merit pay, a broader curriculum not based on standardized tests began to attract some of the few independent delegates not affiliated with the other opposition groups. People like Michael Fiorillo.

The New Action Sellout
For activists in the union, the dirty deals made between Randi and New Action Caucus in 2003 whereby they wouldn’t run a presidential candidate against her in the 2004 elections and she wouldn’t run Unity Caucus candidates against their 6 high school Ex Bd candidates was a seminal event. Dissidents in New Action who opposed the deal contacted me. James and Camille Eterno, Ellen Fox and Lisa North. They were outraged at the sell-out, especially over the fact that all of a sudden, New Action members were on the union payroll.

Eterno, who had been serving as a New Action Ex Bd member for years, turned down that guaranteed opportunity. We called a meeting of the New Action dissidents and the independents I had been meeting through Ed Notes. Incredibly impressive people like John Lawhead (now chapter leader of Tilden HS), Sean Ahern, Jeff Kaufman and Julie Woodward. Added to that were some of the people who I had been active with in the 70’s: Ira Goldfine, Loretta and Gene Prisco, Paul Baizerman and Vera Pavone.

Formation of the Independent Community of Educators
Out of that meeting on Halloween 2003 came the Independent Community of Educators (ICE), which decided to run a slate in the 2004 elections and challenge New Action for those 6 high school seats, which given the fact that Unity was not running for those seats, we had a chance.

In the meantime, TJC was emerging as another group willing to challenge the Unity/New Action alliance. There were some differences and some ruffled feelings at the time but TJC and ICE united to run one group for those 6 seats, and surprise, surprise, we knocked New Action out of the box by getting more high school votes than they did. This put Jeff Kaufman and James Eterno, along with some strong people from TJC on the Board. For the first time, I saw some fight at these meetings, as Eterno now out from under the New Action blanket, teamed with Kaufman to run Randi ragged. The schlep into the meetings every 2 weeks now became worth it.

By the 2007 elections Randi was desperate to get Kaufman and Eterno out of her hair at these meetings and took her alliance with New Action one step further. She ran a joint Unity/New Action slate for 8 seats, including the 6 high school seats. Thus, every Unity vote would also be a vote for these New Action candidates. Shulman, like a porno salesman with dirty pictures approached one of the former New Action members who was with ICE and offered one of these positions. He was turned down.

Thus, New Action, which actually tells people they have these 8 seats on the Ex Bd without telling them how they got them, tries to claim they are independent. But dare them to declare their independence by running directly against ICE/TJC and without Unity support and see what they will tell you. Shulman actually has the nerve to brag that he refuses to take the double pension from the UFT he could get for his job.

In the upcoming UFT elections, ICE/TJC are running a full slate for the officers and Exec Bd, with an outside chance to win back those 6 high school seats as a beachhead on the Ex Bd to force the leadership to examine its disastrous policies on mayoral control, testing, closing schools, charter schools - you name it, they have been wrong. In response to New Action’s contention its qualified support for Unity has helped the union, I ask them to show us where. By abandoning its historic role opposing Unity, no matter how weak that was, it left a vast vacuum that ICE and TJC have struggled to fill.

ICE/TJC Candidates for HS Ex Bd
There is a superb slate running for all positions, but for now I’ll focus on the six high school candidates, who if elected will have an impact:

Michael Fiorillo is an ICE founder, when Michael speaks or writes on the educational issues of the day, people sit up and listen. He was the chapter chairman at Newcomers HS and is now the delegate.

Arthur Goldstein was recently elected as Chapter Leader of Francis Lewis HS, one of the most overcrowded in the city. Widely published in numerous newspapers and a regular at the Gotham Schools blog, Arthur has established a national reputation as a witty and incisive commenter. In his short time as Chapter leader, he has led the battle to address the overcrowding issues. His commentary on the conditions in the trailer he teaches in has embarrassed Tweed on numerous occasions.

John Lawhead, now chapter leader at Tilden high school, was an ICE founder. He contacted me when he found a copy of Ed Notes in his mailbox at Bushwick HS and wrote some articles. His depth of knowledge on educational issues, particularly on the high stakes testing, is astounding. I went with him to a conference of activists opposing NCLB (remember the UFT/AFT was supporting it) in Birmingham Al, back in early 2003 and hobnobbed with the national resistance to NCLB and high stakes testing. There is not one ICE meeting that goes by that John doesn’t say something that puts things together in a way that makes me say “Aha!”

I’ve known the TJC candidates for years, but I’ll leave it to them to provide more details in their campaign literature.

Kit Wainer, chapter leader of Leon Goldstein HS in Brooklyn for many years, was the ICE/TJC presidential candidate in 2007. Every time I hear him talk at a meeting, he makes complete sense and says it in an amazingly impressive manner.

Marian Swerdlow, who was a long-time delegate from FDR, has been a stalwart of the opposition for almost 20 years. She is as good as anyone I’ve met in breaking down an issue and analyzing it. For years Ed Notes published her awesome DA minutes, which she is still producing. They are not to be missed. If for nothing else, it is worth seeing her on the Ex Bd for those delicious minutes. Imagine the impact Swerdlow, with her ability to think on her feet, would have when Unity tries to pull its shenanigans.

Peter Lamphere, chapter leader at Bronx High School of Science, has been engaged in an epic struggle with a horror story of a principal. Peter was one of the leaders of the 20 math teachers who filed a complaint over harassment. He is as impressive in a public forum as anyone I’ve seen.

Formation of GEM
I must conclude with an account of the origins of the Grassroots Education Movement (GEM), which has been leading the battle against charter, schools and school closings. GEM emerged out of an ICE committee addressing the ATR issue in Jan. 2009. Spearheaded by John Lawhead and Angel Gonzalez, a recent retiree who had been part of the FMPR group supporting the teachers in Puerto Rico and had come to ICE for help and joined, the committee began to address the issue of the roots of the ATR issue by bringing together NYCORE people who were fighting high stakes testing and people from closing schools (it was Lawhead who put these concepts into a neat package for us). GEM held a conference and a march from Battery Park to Tweed last spring and during the summer worked up in Harlem to support the teachers and parents being invaded by Eva Moskowitz’ Harlem Success schools. In a short time, GEM has become recognized throughout the city as the group to go to for support, since the UFT has left such a vacuum.

....to be continued

UFT Elections by the Numbers: 2013 Results Are Baseline for #MORE2016

One reason I am usually pessimistic about UFT election outcomes is that the numbers rarely change drastically from election to election. At times in the past we did expect change. Like after the 2005 contract we expected better outcomes in 2007 - they were better but not by all that much. But when the day comes that the numbers get shaken up by a serious percentage we will know something is shaking.

Why an opposition can't focus on retirees or functionals: lack of resources
52% of the returned votes in 2013 was by retirees. 

The participation results, listed by division:

                               Mailed  ballots           Returned ballots

Functional:         51,040                          7,704

Retirees:              58,357                          22,462

Some people tell us to go after retirees. I'm opposed to putting resources into retirees - there are 50 years of thousands of Unity Caucus retirees who are still alive and they would never switch. I think the recent retirees might vote for us. Last time between MORE and New Action we got about 3000 votes from retirees.

Here are the totals:
                                   2013                                      2010

Functional Division (non-teachers)

MORE                       951                                                 708 for ICE/TJC

New Action             754                                                  1,175

Unity                         5,167                                              7,337

Retiree Division

MORE                       1,490                                             1,037 for ICE/TJC

New Action              1,880                                            2,234

Unity                          18,155                                          20,744

Unity lost about 2000 but MORE and New Action made little gains - in fact New Action lost a lot of functional and retiree votes.

While we are running a full 19 member functional slate for Ex Bd with secretaries, paras, OTs, guidance, social workers etc we still need a critical mass in each of these units to make inroads. So we can't do very much inside the functional units unless we have people who work in those non-teaching areas to do some essential organizing. But most of them are scattered among many schools and a big change in the functionals can only be expected when we see their individual chapters captured from Unity iron-clad control.

Focus on non retiree vote areas of the union
So my strategy and focus is on the teaching portion of the union where retirees don't vote:  the 3 basics --  elem, ms, hs divisions where a total of 23 Executive Board seats can be won which would give the opposition close to 25% of the seats and and a real foothold.

Elementary schools are the long-term key to winning power in the UFT
The key to any opposition getting a serious hold in challenging for power in the UFT is in the elementary schools which have been death valley for opposition caucuses - forever.

Let's look at Unity Caucus total for 2010 and 2013 in Elementary School Division (11 EB seats)

   Mailed  ballots(2013)           Returned ballots

Elementary:         34,163                          7,331

                              2013                             2010

Unity                          5,111                                7,761

Unity dropped over 2500 votes in elem schools alone between 2010 and 2013. 34,000 elem ballots were sent out. The historic problem for the opposition has been a serious lack of penetration out in the far flung district schools where Unity gets many elem CLs into the caucus. The District Reps keep a hawk eye on them to make sure they don't stray into opposition territory.
And they still can only manage less 7300 returns.

Look at the MORE and New Action totals:

Elementary School Division

                                  2013                                                2010 

MORE                       1,140                                               703 for ICE/TJC

New Action                534                                                 978

Basically MORE picked up what New Action lost plus a few hundred. Total of about 1700 - a number that makes me so pessimistic about making big inroads into the Unity majority in the elem schools. I've also seen Unity recover from big drops and it is not impossible for them to bounce back up to 7700. There is no way to gauge because last time we were surprised at all the low totals. But you never know. Theoretically, if MORE/New Action doubled their vote to 3400 (and I have no indication this might happen) and Unity dropped again - well, I can dream.

Which is why all the elementary school ed notes readers can go into their schools on May 6 and take out an organization sheet and go around the school and ask people if they will vote for MORE - and then send those tallies to old Norm so he can get an idea of where things stand. Then you can do one better -- have them bring in the ballot  - everyone has to make sure to not screw up the ballot or it won't be counted. Ideally, since so few people use snail mail and don't even know how to find a mail box, make sure all the ballots get mailed that day.

Middle schools - a slim maybe
Now let's take a look at the middle schools which the opposition one once - in 1991.
                                  2013                                                        2010

Middle School Division

MORE                       398                                                  248 for ICE/TJC

New Action               161                                                    421

Unity                        1,185                                                 1,981

                               Mailed  ballots           Returned ballots

Middle School:   10,807                          1,879

Astoundingly low totals of return and votes for both Unity and MORE and New Action. Unity dropped 800 ms votes and MORE gained 150 while New Action lost 250. If they doubled their vote to 1000 this time and Unity lost 200, VIOLA!

High schools in play
Now when we get to the high schools things get interesting.

                               Mailed  ballots           Returned ballots

High School:      19,040                          3,808

The returned totals are sad and the Unity totals dropped by 1000 between 2010 and 2013 - but they picked up the 452 from the New Action cross endorsement.

High School Division

MORE                       1,430                                              1,369 for ICE/TJC

New Action              452                                                  774

Unity                         1,592                                              2,595

Now if you just assumed the same totals as 2010 the MORE plus New Action would outpoll Unity in the high schools. But never underestimate Unity and I don't assume they will not do what it takes to increase their votes to fend us off. What I would love to see one day is the MORE/New Action vote once again, as it did in the 90s, reach 3000 in the high schools. Pipe dream I know but to me that would be a break. I think with the closing of so many big high schools the large opposition vote totals of the past is something we may not see again.

The totals will be a reflection of the work MORE people are able and willing to do in their own schools to get out the vote. Too bad we can't track the individual school voting pattern - we could reward the MOREs whose schools did well with wine and song and punish those who didn't do well by withholding snacks at meetings.


This data was compiled by Peter Lamphere.

Unity Propaganda Machine Treads in Dangerous Territory

Considering the attack on ICE-TJC presidential candidate Kit Wainer as being old-century, the McCarthyite tactic of branding the opposition as "Reds" seems so old century. But this is an old tactic on the part of Unity Caucus. Ironically, they used this time and again against their current allies New Action, many of whose leaders have strong connections to socialist political parties and are themselves so-called red diaper babies, whose parents actually faced persecution by the real deal, Joe McCarthy himself and have a visceral response to "Red-baiting." Not the least of risks for Unity in taking this action is the potential is the negative reaction from some of New Action's core members who have gone along with the Unity/New Action deal out of loyalty.

Of course, there's the UFT legacy itself where most of the leaders are/were members of the Social Democrats, USA. And then there's the additional danger that the same right-wing audience Unity is trying to incite against ICE-TJC will come back to bite them. What if the right wing anti-Unity forces (of which there is a considerable number) start mud-slinging and get other areas, such as race-baiting or gay-bashing? Ultimately, a right-wing group, not comfortable with some of the politics of ICE or TJC will spring up. Unity may consider that a good thing, but when you get what you wish, sometimes there is a high price to pay. They ain't seen nothing yet.

Before I even knew about the mailing, calls of outrage started coming. Some thoughts expressed were, "Isn't it a slam dunk Unity will win? This smacks of the kind of desperation of someone who is losing a political campaign instead of expecting to win with a 90% vote. Why is it so important that a 70% majority is not enough? "

I agree sending out this to the homes of so many people appears desperate but desperation is in the eye of the beholder.

To Randi Weingarten/Unity/New Action there are a lot of balls in the air in this election.

The most common analysis I heard from people is that Weingarten is most interested in an overwhelming victory so she can sail into the sunset with a glorious victory and head off to the AFT in the summer of '08.

It is not that simple. For Weingarten, it is important to keep the ICE-TJC vote low as a way of margianalizing ICE-TJC, which if it starts attracting 25-30% if the vote, threatens to pass the vote totals New Action was getting when it was THE opposition. For Weingarten to leave an orderly union for her successor, she must reduce the threat ICE-TJC present and promote her home grown opposition New Action.

By getting more votes than the ICE-TJC upstarts New Action can claim, despite their alliance with Unity, they are still the main opposition, albeit totally tied to Unity's apron strings. They also have to prove to Weingarten that they are viable and that she still needs them. It should be pointed out that despite enormous inroads ICE and TJC made into the New Action support base 3 years ago, New Action with the addition of retiree votes actually outpolled either of the 2 groups.

For ICE and TJC, this election is about establishing a base of support and then building out from there. (ICE got less than 5% and TJC around 6-7% in 2004.) It takes a long time to establish a brand name and both groups are beginning to work themselves into people's consciousness as an alternative to both Unity and New Action. But legitimacy as an opposition will not truly come until they begin to reach into the 25-30% range.

As pointed out in a recent article in The Chief, the real battle is in the high schools where Weingarten is desperate to keep the ICE-TJC people off the Executive Board where they can raise questions about UFT policy. They would be especially dangerous when she is not around to keep things under control. A lot of issues are coming up with the expected UFT support for the current system of mayoral control (with just a few cosmetic tweaks) high on the agenda. No embarrassing questions, no answers.

Weingarten is so enamored of New Action's leader Michael Shulman because he has proven time and again he can control the troops. When she announced the purchase of the new buildings on Broadway in 2003 just as the alliance with New Action was in the earliest stages, some of the New Action members on the Ex. Bd at the time wanted to raise questions. Shulman, not a member of the Board, passed by each one and ordered them not to raise any questions. "Randi doesn't want this to become an issue, so don't say anything," Shulman said.

Now there's the kind of opposition Randi can be proud of.

New Action Attempts to Distort Reality

New Action in their mailer to chapter leaders made references that they were ONLY opposition caucus. Every reporter talking to MORE people have said that Mulgrew/Unity/UFT have refused to discuss or give a comment on MORE or the election. We wondered what their strategy would be. Mostly, they are just trying to pretend that we do not exist.
--- a MORE member

In the UFT elections members will see three caucuses on the ballot but only have a choice of 2 presidential candidates since New Action is endorsing Mulgrew, claiming if they win he would be a better president than he would if Unity wins. You really can't make this stuff up.

Last spring Halabi contacted a MORE member asking for sit-down between MORE and New Action and such a meeting did occur in the fall. It seems he has amnesia/

Gotham linked to a JD2718 blog post where he discusses James Eterno's recent blog post with these comments:

James Eterno, a leader of the ICE caucus,...I don’t usually link an opponent caucus (I support New Action), but James’ speech, on the ICE blog, is worth reading.

James is a leader of the MORE caucus and is running for high school executive board in which he would replace Halabi if MORE wins those seats. But why not use a little distortion, which is New Action's purpose -- toe confuse UFT members. ICE has done nothing as an oranization at any UFT event in years while MORE has been incredibly active.

I left this comment at Gotham:

Is Gotham joining the JD2718 and New Action/Unity attempt to blot out the existence of MORE, (certainly John Gambling recognized MORE in his interview with Julie Cavanagh -- and note no Gotham mention --- listen to the interview to see MORE is real -- http://www.wor710.com/player/?mid=22943474&station=WOR-AM&program_id=johngambling.xml&program_name=podcast)

Really, if Gotham is going to link it should do some basic fact checking. Maybe tell JD2718 that ICE is no longer a caucus as he claims in his post. But then again he must have forgot that months ago he as a leader of New Action requested a meeting between New Action and -- what is that new caucus again -- oh yes, MORE. Amnesia must be at fault given that it has been blasted all over the place that ICE, TJC, NYCORE, GEM and others have all come together to form MORE.

But why give any credence to a real rival to his caucus, New Action, which will be endorsing some guy named Michael Mulgrew in the upcoming UFT elections in exchange for some guaranteed seats on the UFT exec bd, thus leaving UFT members with 2 choices for president: Julie Cavanagh or Michael Mulgrew. A vote for New Action will be a vote for Mulgrew. The choice is obvious -- except to JD2718 and other New Action members, even though some of whom have cast their lot with MORE in this election. Guess the message didn't filter up the New Action food chain. Or more likely an intentional attempt to distort reality. Too bad Gotham goes along with this sham.

Union Leadership Promotes New Action - 12/2001

While glancing through a back issue of Ed Notes, this item popped up from the December 2001 edition.

When [former UFT Staff Director] Tom Pappas said “We have a 2 party system in our union” at the last DA, a lot of people had to suppress a laugh. We assume Pappas was referring to New Action as the party of the 2nd part.

But exactly where has the 2nd part been? Now that NA has been lured into a United Front with the leadership as a show of unity until we have a contract NA has been completely silenced. Smiles had to be suppressed by Unity Caucus people, since they have little respect for NA and consider them opportunists. NA has put out little literature since the United Front.

Unity’s biggest fear is that NA will fade into obscurity and a real opposition might blossom. Unity needs an opposition to claim we are a democratic union. What better opposition than New Action, growing steadily weaker and less effective? Much of their support comes from being perceived as the only opposition game in town. But many of their supporters are disgruntled with New Action’s collaboration with Unity. They are also unhappy with the autocratic way the United Front policy was decided.

By breathing life into NA, the union leadership can give them an air of legitimacy as the “loyal” opposition. NA is perfectly happy to occupy the position. As long as they play this role for Unity, there is little chance of seeing a serious opposition take hold. If NA didn’t exist, Unity would have to invent them.

Unity and New Action make nice

Ed Note:
It took two more years of New Action's canoodling with Unity Caucus before The Independent Community of Educators (ICE) came into existence in November 2003 and Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC) became more active as an opposition. In the 2007 election, New Action received only 9% of the vote, coming in last, behind the ICE/TJC slate, especially in the high schools where they doubled New Action's totals. The high schools had been a particular strength for New Action for 20 years.

But our prediction about Weingarten breathing life into new Action in 2001 came true in 2007 when their special arrangement handed New Action 8 seats on the Executive Board while ICE/TJC have none. The New Action EB reps have totally supported Unity on every single issue without a note of criticism. New Action goes to Delegate Assemblies with leaflets that totally support Unity and try to pretend they are a legitimate opposition.

UFT election figures for New Action Over the Years

New Action Goes CURR
The non-Unity active membership has declared New Action a CURR (Caucus Under Registration Review). In dropping from 31 to 21% of the vote in 10 years ( a 32% decline) New Action has clearly failed to meet the standards. If there is no improvement in the next election, New Action will be closed and reorganized into a debating society.- ED NOTES, MAY, 2001

Wow. Call me Nostradamus or what?

I found some interesting stuff in the 1999 and 2001 election issues of Ed Notes.

Here are pages of the May 1999 edition of Ed Notes, along with the April and May 2001 issues, which contained Marian Swedlow's election analysis and comments and a report card from me on New Action. OK, I was pretty critical of them even at that time for the way they didn't seem to be building an opposition. (Click on images to enlarge.)

In 1999, New Action received 11,400 votes – 1700 coming from retirees, 1900 from non-classroom functionals, 2463 from elem, 1710 from middle schools and 3000 from high schools. (There was another opposition caucus that ran and got just over 1000 votes.) They won all 6 high school exec bd seats.

In 2001, the totals for New Action were pretty much the same but Unity went up as more people voted. The drop for NA from 1991 when they were getting about a third of the vote to around 21% was behind their move to become a house opposition under the control of Unity. How has that worked out for them?

Ed Notes, April 2001

In 2007, New Action received a TOTAL of 3520 votes: 1600 from retirees, 543 funct. 562 in elem., 273 in middle schools and 521 in high schools. With Unity endorsement, they received 3 high school EB seats and 5 at large seats for a total of 8. Thus, in the undemocratic UFT, you can lose 75% of your support in the schools and actually end up with more Executive Board seats.

Look at these numbers over a 6 year period from 2001 to 2007:

A drop from 3000 to 521 in the high schools, from 1700 to 273 in MS and from 2463 to 562 in elem. over 8 years. While they stayed consistent with the retirees, New Action's loss of support with working UFT members was awesome.

What will the 2010 numbers show for New Action?
Unless New Action makes a comeback this time, Randi Weingarten's brilliant legacy may turn out to be her destruction of the long-term opposition in the UFT.

You can see our spreadsheet comparing the 04 and 07 elections here.

Ed Notes New Action report card, May 2001.

The ICEman and Woman Meeteth

Yesterday afternoon we had an ICE meeting and as usual some great conversation and analysis of current union events plus some heavy duty petition signing - like 300 of them. I felt like a slave driver keeping Mike Schirtzer from eating his bagel until he had signed a batch.

James and Camille Eterno called in from their car on the way home from Georgia. Too bad they couldn't sign the 300 petitions virtually.
But I'll get to them when they come home.

Once petitions were signed and we were fed we tackled a draft of an upcoming MORE leaflet and that is where the deep experience of ICEers shone brightly as paragraphs, sentences and words were parced and sliced and diced until more clarity emerged. We don't get the luxury of engaging in this process very often in MORE due to the larger numbers of people at meetings, so work is often done in committee on the phone. Having some time in a mixed group of working teachers and retirees was a real treat.

And then there was the gossip.
My lips are sealed.

Working with New Action
We talked about the relationships with New Action. There is no group that has been more critical of New Action over the last decade than ICE. And when the new arrangement between MORE and New Action was first being explored there was some raised eyebrows coming from some ICEers. But people seem to have accepted things and I didn't hear much in the way of criticism.

There was some discussion of the New Action leaflet going out to schools that talks about their arrangement with Unity over the years and what broke that and why they went with MORE. People did not agree with the case New Action is making for that having hd that arrangement. ICE has been more heavily critical of the UFT/Unity leadership and many in ICE consider the leadership as being lined up with the deformers and politicians who have gone after public education. Even in MORE, the ICE crew is more vehement about the MulGarten leadership than some of the younger recruits. But I think that is due to our relative age - we've been through the wars with Unity. On the other hand, most of New Action is in the same age range as the ICEers and they do not seem to have that same level of vehemence.

People did point out yesterday that ICE and MORE have been consistent in the position that once the New Action deal with Unity was over, we could work together. And so we have and as far as I can tell things have gone fairly smoothly, though there have been a few glitches here and there.

I believe the way ICE has dealt with MORE is a potential model for New Action going forward. ICE people had a choice: join MORE and work within MORE while also maintaining ICE as a group, though not an official caucus that would run in elections. A few ICE people did not join MORE or have any interest in working with MORE. They have not been involved with ICE very much if at all.

I feel after the elections, New Action has the opportunity to do something similar to ICE. MORE would welcome those in New Action who wanted to work within MORE while still being connected to New Action, which could take positions in support or even counter to MORE.

No loyalty oaths here.

Gotham Schools seems to think New Action is an internal opposition group

Have I got a bridge to sell them.

I left a comment at Gotham after they posted a link to the New Action positioning statement. Yes, NA is all about political positioning for the upcoming UFT elections so they can hold onto the 8 exec bd seats handed to them by Unity Caucus. The "house" opposition.

Calling New Action an internal opposition group is like saying Christine Quinn stood up to Bloomberg. New Action has been the UFT's house opposition for over 5 years. Weingarten ran at the top of their ticket in the 2007 election and all 8 of their exec board members were endorsed by the UFT leadership Unity Caucus. In the 2007 election they got the lowest vote total of all groups running but only won their seats due to Unity Caucus votes.

So how are they an internal opposition when the party in power controls their fate?

Their original sellout in 2003 was based on the same premise they are advocating in this post: it is time to fight Bloomberg. That was their excuse for not running a candidate against Weingarten in the last 2 UFT elections and they will not run a candidate against Mulgrew in the upcoming elections. Since they owe their continued existence to the beneficence of the UFT leadership, they cannot be critical or they will lose their support. Thus they have to come up with the "mistakes were made by the leadership but let's not dwell on them" argument to justify their sellout.

New Action mentions charters but in fact backed the UFT all the way when it set up its own charter schools in public school buildings while ICE and TJC took positions opposed, knowing full well the charter dagger was squarely aimed at the heart of the union.

The New Action statement says:

Today we need a united stand. We will need to talk about the mistakes that we as a union have made: Mayoral endorsement, governance, term limits, but another day. This is not the time for recriminations. This is the time for a united fight against this corporate mayor.

When is the time to talk about the mistakes of a misguided UFT leadership that New Action has been uncritical of since the sellout? Note there is no mention of the other mistakes: the 2005 contract – which both members of New Action who served on the negotiating committee at the time voted for despite their attempts to rewrite history. Or the mistake of the end of seniority. Or the ATR problem that was created by the UFT and BloomKlein. New Action supported the leadership throughout these "mistakes."

New Action has supported the UFT leadership without dwelling on the mistakes for all these years. They act like there will be a change despite the fact that New Action has been around for decades and seen little change in the way Unity Caucus operates.

There was a time when New Action put up a fight to create a more democratic union. Now they are part of the problem. Progressive teachers looking to reform the UFT in no way consider them an internal opposition, but a former opposition that has sold out to the leadership for a few Executive Board seats and some minor positions on the payroll of the UFT.

UFT Election Musings: What Can Be Won and Is it Worth it to Try?

The Eternos and I at Tues Nite Yankee game

The other day I posted some thoughts based on the recent MORE retreat:
MORE Doesn't Retreat at Retreat Plus Some of My UFT Elections Thoughts - Don't Kvetch, Organize!

ICE, MORE, New Action get together at Yankee game: a precursor of things to come?

James and Camille, joined by Ellen Fox and Ed Beller talked about some of this election stuff at the Yankee victory-- NORM SCOTT, CAMILLE AND JAMES ETERNO PLOT ELECTION MOVES
- they were happy even though Camille, James and Ed are Mets fans because the Mets won too. Other than Ed, we are all UFT political junkies - we tried to talk between innings or during pitching changes.

All of them were in New Action until the 2003 sellout. Ellen and the Eternos left to help form ICE while Ed remained in New Action. Ed, James and Ellen were all elected and re-elected as high school executive board members repeatedly during the 90s through 2001, getting over 3000 votes each time.Ed is no longer active in union politics.

I pointed out in my blog piece that the 7 high school UFT exec bd seats were winnable by MORE in the upcoming election based on the 2013 numbers. They are winnable because retirees don't get to vote in that portion of the election. And neither do any of the high school non-teaching staff like secretaries, paras, guidance, social workers get to vote for these 7 positions. Classroom high school teachers only. This used to be the case for the HS VP position - until Unity lost in the mid-80s and changed the rules in 1994.

Unity is used to changing the rules when they lose. After New Action once again won the then 6 HS ex bd seats in 2001 - with over 3000 votes - Randi figured out a clever way to prevent this from happening by buying New Action and offering to hand them these seats by not running any Unity candidates against them. All they had to do was let Randi run unopposed. And so they did - except ICE and TJC threw a monkey wrench into the scheme by running and winning these 6 positions.

James and Jeff Kaufman for ICE did such a powerful job for 3 years, Unity - and New Action were mortified and thus made sure that no independent voice (non-Unity endorsed) representing classroom teachers without conditions would get on the Ex Bd. In 2007, for the first time, Unity put New Action people on the Unity slate so they could win -- and they split the HS Ex Bd seats between them. (When they raised it from 6 to 7, the split was 4-3, Unity.

New Action would ask some questions, maybe raise a reso or 2 and then make sure everyone got to go home on time. They are the loyal, well-behaved "opposition", so unlike the aggressive Jeff and James were. Everyone goes home happy - when James and Jeff were there, Unity did not go home happy.

New Action high school vote totals dropped from 3000 in 2001 to around 700 in 2004 - and 450 by 2014 - so how did that work out? Pretty good for them I guess since they are handed 10 ex bd seats and some jobs. Not so good for rank and file teachers.

So, let's get back to the 2016 elections.
To beat Unity + New Action + any other vagrant caucus running would take an extraordinary effort and require MORE to focus most of its resources on the high school election, probably ignoring other areas like elementary and middle schools and functionals - all areas where retirees don't vote.

To win 7 out of 100 Ex Bd seats - for what purpose? To make some noise? To take us to where New Action was 15 years ago? Their focus on these seats never led them to build much more of a base outside the high schools. And what do you do if you win? Go to meetings like ICE did every 2 weeks to support your people in a total Unity environment?

On the other hand, a win would show that Unity can still be beaten and it would restore an independent voice.

On the other hand, if MORE intends to go much beyond where New Action was before the dirty deal with Unity, it needs to reach deep into the schools. A focus on winning the high schools could distract MORE from that goal.

On the other hand, MORE could use the actions at the Ex Bd to raise issues of concern - it is easier to do there than at the DA since once you get 5 Ex bd people to sign on a reso must be dealt with.
And given that nothing else can really be won, why not go for this?

On the other hand, how exactly do you sell people on getting involved in an election that can win only such a small sliver of 7% of Ex bd and no officer or AFT/NYSUT delegate positions?

OY VEY!

While touching on some of these issues at the retreat, MORE did not get into the discussion in depth and is still far from getting deep into election stuff, focused more on supporting people in the schools.

Should MORE go for these seats even if the other parts of the campaign suffer? Given that MORE got almost 5000 votes in the 2013 election, can even 5-10% of these people be activated in a way to take part in the campaign beyond just voting - like becoming a spokesperson for MORE In their school and making sure people vote?

As for me, I am still not committed to getting deeply involved in yet another election but would appreciate any of your thoughts either in the comments section or by email.

UFT Elections, 4:30PM: Elementary Schools and Functionals

Only division left is Retirees in about half an hour but I'm leaving for the victory party while Ellen, Joan and James hold the fort.

This may be the only division we lose to New Action. We were running last on some quick looks in this category -- we estimate New Action with about 10+% of the retiree vote and MORE with about 6-7%. Actually, this may be the beginning of some minor erosion of Unity but we have to check the finals vs past elections.

Elem total slate 6870  Non slate 297 to be counted.

MORE - 1140
NA 534
Unity 5111

In 2010:
Total: 7761
ICE/TJC - 703
NA - 978

2013 Functionals (non teachers)   Ballots Returned: 7704   Ballots Counted: 7113
MORE: 951                   NEW ACTION: 754                UNITY: 5167



Keys are in comparing results for ICE/TJC and MORE over past few elections.
Unity dropped in functionals by over 2000 votes while MORE gained 200 but still did not top ICE/TJC 2004/07 totals. NA dropped by over 300.
This is slate votes only with 500 split ballots.

Only elem and retirees to go.
We're aiming to come in with more total votes than New Action and then use their 10 seats on the bd while we have none as a democratic battering ram.

Here is James' report on the ICE blog before we had the elem results.

Thursday, April 25, 2013

FIRST ELECTION RESULTS SHOW MORE MAKES SUBSTANTIAL GAINS OVER ICE-TJC NUMBERS FROM 2010

We have initial slate only numbers for the high schools and the middle schools in the UFT election and although Unity and New Action will hold onto their monopoly on power, the new Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) established itself as the main opposition group in the secondary schools by a wide margin.

Here are the slate numbers for the 2013 and 2010 elections in the secondary schools.

2013  Hi;gh Schools   Ballots Returned: 3808   Votes Counted: 3595    
MORE: 1430 (40%)   NEW ACTION: 452 (13%)       UNITY: 1592 (45%)

The remainder are people who split their ballot. 

2010 High Schools    Votes Counted: 5203
MORE: 1369                 NEW ACTION: 774               UNITY: 2595

2013 Middle Schools   Ballots Returned: 1879      Votes Counted: 17886
ICE-TJC: 398                NEW ACTION: 161                   UNITY:1185

The remainder are people who split their ballot.

2010 Middle Schools: Slate Votes Counted: 2881
ICE-TJC: 248                NEW ACTION: 421                UNITY: 1981   

2013 Functionals (non teachers)   Ballots Returned: 7704   Ballots Counted: 7113
MORE: 951                   NEW ACTION: 754                UNITY: 5167

The remainder are people who split their ballot.    


We still have not heard from the traditional Unity strongholds of the Elementary Schools and the retirees so Unity will easily win but with much lower totals than in 2010.

Something is wrong with the UFT electoral system when New Action gets only 13% of the high school votes but wins half of the UFT Executive Board seats for the high schools while MORE's 40% will get MORE no representation on the Executive Board.

It is obvious that a clear majority of the high school teachers who vote do not want a Unity monopoly on power.  Had this been a traditional two party UFT election, there would be truly independent opposition representation (no Unity cross endorsement needed).

Two other stories emerge at first glance.  First, the turnout was pitiful as only 43,138 ballots are being counted.  More significantly, 22,462 of those votes are from retirees.  That constitutes 52% of the voters. I would question if having retirees as the majority of the electorate is healthy for the union.

In addition, Mulgrew's vote will more than likely drop in a major way compared to 2010 among active UFT members.  It appears many members did not vote for the opposition but they certainly didn't vote for the incumbent.  For the next election, those members need to be persuaded to vote.