Sunday, October 23, 2022
The UFC Committee alleges that the UFT has violated the LMRDA with a range of conduct
relating to the conduct of the Delegate Assembly, the UFT’s representative legislative body.
These allegations are broadly divided into three categories: (a) alleged violations of Roberts
Rules; (b) procedural inadequacy; and (c) procedural changes made in conjunction with the
election... UFT Election Complaint #21
For decades some Unity Caucus people have been telling us how Unity and the leadership prepped for Delegate Assemblies through what they call their "Speakers Bureau". People get assigned roles. They even rehearse. They held two
rehearsals for a recent DA so Mulgrew could get it right. Mulgrew even has seating plans. People are set up to ask certain questions that allow Mulgrew to expand on
his already way too long opening report. They have designated plants to
speak on leadership backed resos and people known as "call the
question" plants to end debates. One former Unity told me a clue is when Leroy Barr removes his glasses. Which makes this report Leroy gave at the Oct. 3 Ex Bd hilarious:
UFT President Michael Mulgrew does not determine who is called on based on caucus
affiliation...Concerning the allegation that no delegate not affiliated with the UC has been permitted to
present a resolution and no UFC candidate member has been recognized during the new motion
period of the Delegate Assembly, this is false. While the UFT does not track caucus affiliation
for attendees or speakers at Delegate Assemblies, UFT rejection of UFC Complaint #21 - LOL
While I don't expect the Department of Labor or the AFT to rule against
the UFT on the way they run the Delegate Assembly, we need to keep
pointing their behavior. Last year's - a UFT election year - the
behavior by Unity was the worst as Mulgrew shut out voices of the
opposition at last years' DAs after the opposition had won or came close
on some resos.
Unity shuts out opposition voices by controlling the
10 minute New Motion period by inserting its own motions and making it
look like they are random.
Ex Bd UFC member Nick Bacon exposed the continuing behavior in his report on the Oct. DA:
No time for opposition:
Mulgrew called on one
opposition member all night – H.S. executive board member, Ilona Nanay
(MORE), who asked a good question (and got a bad answer) on changes to
the city council administrative code. It was no accident that Mulgrew
called on a known opposition member during the question period, but not
during the new motions period. During a question period, it’s easy for
Mulgrew to regain control of the room. He can spend lots of time
answering a short question, and making it clear that his perspective is
the right perspective.
During a new motion, opposition has far more
space to convince the audience. Mulgrew knows that, so we haven’t been
called on since last November, 2021 to raise one (and that’s when I was
technically still a member of his Unity caucus). It’s also worth noting
how obvious it was that Mulgrew knew who he was picking in advance. One
of the people he called on, Maggie Joyce, is someone he calls on
frequently to raise new motions. She is a familiar Unity face to him,
often present at UFT functions. Another of the people he called on was
raising a motion he noted before it was even raised (on migrant
children).
Nick points out how Unity prevented UFC from presenting a strong healthcare
reso to protect the members (rejected in a strict party vote at the
UFT Ex Bd - Oct. 3:
Our healthcare reso didn’t stand a chance. We didn’t even get to the business of motions on 10/12’s agenda. We
lost all that to the most brainwashing filibuster Mulgrew has ever
given. I’ll give my same advice again – if you want to see diverse union
perspectives, come to executive board meetings where you have any
chance of actually seeing them.
Unity put two "message" resos on the agenda - on immigrants and support for Iranian women - and watch them attack us for calling them out on this as an attack on the substance of the resos - not true - they could have been added as special business and not taken away from the normal 10 minute new motions.
This tactic is intentional and happens time and again when they are threatened with a strong oppo reso and we will raise this tactic with the Department of Labor, though I don't think they will get what we are talking about.
Leadership sponsored resos are presented to the Ex bd and then put on the regular agenda of the DA. The ten minute time had been used by the opposition for decades to raise new motions. So especially since Mulgrew took over the UFT, Unity has coopted this time period to raise "late" resos, often handed out unlabeled as to sponsors. Now I understand that stuff may come up last minute -- so my suggestion is to allow them to do this but not count it against the 10 minutes. And if Mulgrew doesn't filibuster for an hour this would be easy.
Adding to the hilarity are the examples they cite of calling on UFC candidates at times before UFC even existed. The funniest was this:
At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board
candidate Nick Bacon made a motion regarding potential health care plan changes,
which was voted on and defeated;
Nick, who did not become a candidate for UFC until January 2022, pointed out at the Exec Board meeting he was still in Unity in November 2021. In fact, my guess is that Nick was turned off to Unity due to their behavior at the DA. In fact, over the past 25 years, a number of people who were neutral delegates were pissed off enough at the DA to move toward the opposition.
And on this one from the UFT report:
At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board
candidate and member of the Educators of NYC (EONYC) caucus Daniel Alicea had a
motion listed on the agenda as a special order of business, regarding the UFT’s position
towards mayoral control of New York City public schools, which Mr. Alicea withdrew
from consideration;
Daniel, who a year before the election was still fairly neutral about Unity - in fact he voted for Unity in the 2019 election - tried to get a mayoral control reso on the agenda in the spring of 2021 but found himself thwarted at every turn and withdrew his reso after its relevance had expired. That they used this example at a time when UFC did not exist and Daniel was not associated with the opposition - yet - makes their response even more of a farce.
In my opinion the thwarting of his attempt to get a discussion going on mayoral control at the DA was what helped open his eyes. When Daniel raised the point that many of the speakers at DAs are UFT employees on the payroll Unity went ballistic on him - he became public enemy #1.
Below is the complete section of the UFT report:
Complaint #21 – The Allegations Do Not Demonstrate Violations Of The LMRDA
