"I write as a White, Jewish anti-racist educator who is heartsick over the role his union played in this sordid affair." - Steve Quester
The resignation of Debbie Almontaser as principal of the proposed Arab language school in Brooklyn has caused a great deal of controversy. The DOE replaced her with Danielle Salzberg. (That ought to inspire the Arabic community to register their kids for the new school.) There's so much stuff flying it is hard to keep track of it all. An interesting interview by Amy Goodman posted on Democracy Now can be found here. Also this piece written by Almontaser, not long after 9/11. http://www.gothamgazette.com/commentary/107.almontaser.shtml
Steve Quester, a UFT chapter leader, comments on the role the UFT President played.
Imagine...
A veteran Latina educator, with a years-long record of service supporting Latino/a youth and building bridges between Latino/a and non-Latino/a communities, is slated to be principal of a new middle school with a focus on Hispano-Caribbean studies and Spanish language. She endures months of vitriolic attacks from right-wing hate websites and blogs, and from the Murdoch news organizations. Finally, the Murdoch media uncover that she’s on the board of an organization that shares an office with a Latina girls’ empowerment organization. The organization has produced a T-shirt with the image of Che Guevara and the words “Hasta la victoria siempre.” The Murdoch media point out (rightly) that the “victoria” to which Che referred was the violent overthrow of all capitalist governments, including the U.S. The media demand that the educator condemn the T-shirt, but instead she says that the girls’ intention was to point to the victory of tolerance and coexistence over anti-Latino/a bias in New York. The media howl. The educator quickly apologizes, admitting that she did not take into account the effect that the image of Che has on Cuban-American refugees of Castro’s oppression.
After the apology, the UFT president, who had been supportive of the new middle school and its principal, is quoted condemning the educator’s initial defense of the T-shirt. The president makes no mention of the educator’s exemplary record, or the racist context in which the controversy about the T-shirt has taken place. The UFT president says, "maybe, ultimately, she should not be a principal." The print, broadcast, and Internet media trumpet the UFT president’s condemnation far and wide, and the next day, the educator resigns from the principalship.
Now imagine that the educator is a respected African-American, and the new middle school will have an Afrocentric focus. The T-shirt has an image of Malcolm X holding a rifle and the words “By any means necessary.” The media point out (rightly) that the “means” to which Malcolm X referred included armed struggle. The educator says that the girls’ intention was to point towards non-violent African-American empowerment, not armed struggle. When the educator apologizes, she admits that she did not take into account the effect that the image of Malcolm X holding a weapon might have on efforts to combat gun crimes in New York City. The UFT president is quoted saying, "maybe, ultimately, she should not be a principal." The next day, the educator resigns from the principalship.
In reality, it’s unlikely that these T-shirts would have prompted sustained media attacks, or that the UFT president would have ever taken such an extreme public reaction. And if the president had taken such action, there would have been an outcry from the rank and file, and not just Latino/a or African-American members. In New York City, T-shirts of Che Guevara, Malcolm X, Mumia Abu-Jamal, or Leonard Peltier do not instill fear, provoke tabloid campaigns or result in demands for any person to make a wholesale repudiation of other members of their community.
Now imagine that the veteran educator is an Arab-American and a Muslim, with a years-long record of service supporting Arab-American and Muslim youth and building bridges between Arab-American, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian communities. The new middle school will focus on Arab studies and Arabic language. After months of vitriolic attacks from right-wing hate websites and blogs, the Murdoch news organizations uncover that she’s on the board of an organization that shares an office with an Arab-American girls’ empowerment organization. The collective has produced a T-shirt with the words “Intifada NYC.” The Murdoch media point out (rightly) that for most New Yorkers “intifada” connotes terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians.
When the media demand that the educator condemn the T-shirt, she says, “The word [intifada] basically means 'shaking off.' That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic. I understand it is developing a negative connotation due to the uprising in the Palestinian-Israeli areas. I don't believe the intention is to have any of that kind of [violence] in New York City. I think it's pretty much an opportunity for girls to express that they are part of New York City society… and shaking off oppression."
The media howl. The educator quickly apologizes, saying, “The word 'intifada' is completely inappropriate as a T-shirt slogan. I regret suggesting otherwise. By minimizing the word's historical associations, I implied that I condone violence and threats of violence. That view is anathema to me.”
After the apology, the UFT president, who had been supportive of the new middle school and its principal, is quoted in the media condemning the educator’s initial defense of the T-shirt. The president makes no mention of the educator’s exemplary record, or the racist context in which the controversy about the T-shirt has taken place. The UFT president says, "maybe, ultimately, she should not be a principal." The print, broadcast, and Internet media trumpet the UFT president’s condemnation far and wide, and the next day, the educator resigns from the principalship.
The third scenario happened, in August of 2007. Our union could have stood with Arab-American and Muslim students and educators against the onslaught they have endured since 9-11, but instead we joined the chorus of racists, led by the teacher-hating, Arab-hating New York Post and Fox News, who hounded veteran educator Debbie Almontaser out of her job as principal of the Gibran Academy.
In writing all of this, I do not claim to speak for the members of my chapter. I did not consult them. I do not claim to speak for a UFT caucus. I do not belong to one. I certainly do not claim to speak for Debbie Almontaser. Although, as a District 15 educator, I am acquainted with Debbie and her work, I have not seen or spoken with her since long before the Gibran Academy controversy erupted at P.S. 282. In presenting the imaginary scenarios, I do not claim to speak for the political views of anyone in the Latino/a or African-American communities.
I write as a White, Jewish anti-racist educator who is heartsick over the role his union played in this sordid affair.
Peace,
Steve Quester
UFT chapter leader
P.S. 372/418K The Children’s School
Thanks for the historical and structural overview described in the post and the first comment. You can rely on ICE to provide background information on grave union issues such as these, and I regret deeply, both on a personal and a collective level, that the people running this union and ultimately responsible for maintaining our existing job protections break so frequently with long-standing union goals.
I would like to comment on something the Chancellor has pushed for and what he has actually done.
One of Klein's earliest and most continuously iterated goals has been to be able to put good experienced teachers where they are needed, in the more difficult schools. His two recent initiatives, the Open Market hiring system and the way teachers will soon be paid (directly from the principal's budget), have not only hobbled his cause, but have shown him to be duplicitous.
Experienced senior teachers who indeed want to work in tough schools for a variety of reasons (the commute, the level, the challenge) have just become expensive. It is attractive for a principal to avoid calling them in for an interview, let alone hiring them.
Young teachers who spend a year or two in a difficult school are already looking to transfer out, to what they think is a better school in another district or out of New York City altogether. There is no reason for a new teacher to settle into a school with a difficult environment or one they're not happy in when adequate skills and a low salary makes them highly marketable. They'll apply to the schools with good reputations, and by gosh, they'll get those jobs.
It used to be that job vacancies were frozen until excessed teachers were placed, but the Human Resources people are no longer allowed to do this. The vacancies will be filled with new and fairly newly instructors, some of whom do not yet have a Masters. And even before these young teachers get tenure and full certification, they too will get the chance to look for and take that job in a "better" school. This is not conjecture, I already know of many examples.
The Lead Teacher program puts a few experienced teachers in difficult schools - for a salary bonus, and for only half their time teaching. That's a failure for the city's kids no matter how they spin it, and since it's a form of merit pay, it's a failure for labor, too.
There is not one item in the chancellor's agenda that will put good experienced teachers in full-time teaching programs in difficult schools and make them want to stay there.
The Chancellor is a fraud, the Mayor still backs him, and it looks as if Union leadership has a different agenda than what's in our best interest. I can't believe they thought these schemes would be of any use to the profession in the long run. It's something else, and they don't want us in on it.
We should not view the issue solely from the perspective of teacher rights. One issue I would like to deal with is the argument Klein makes that a school system should not be about job protection but about teaching and learning. Weingarten I believe goes along with these beliefs as evidenced from her actions and by info from the inside that she talks about getting rid of bad teachers and not being worried about protections. I believe there's an argument to be made that seniority rules create stability and school cultures that overcome the instances of the bad teacher being protected (I still think there are as many poor teachers if not more since BloomKlein and many people loyal to the principal will be protected no matter how bad they are.) Stable schools include experienced people who often share their knowledge. Kids have long-standing relationships with teachers in these schools. The assault on seniority had done as much damage if not more to the educational institutions as it has to the traditional union perspective that you raise.