Absurd Assertions from UFT-Unity Apologist

Peter Goodman has a pretty cool gig as unofficial UFT Unity blogger and often broadcasts the rationales for various and sundry counterproductive decisions by leadership. He wrote pieces in Edwize defending the 2005 contract, and like every good UFT Unity Caucus member, supports all their decisions. His most recent blog, cited by Randi Weingarten on Twitter, concerns the Heavy Hearts Club Agreement to rate us largely on state test scores. I will not link to his blog. 

Goodman wrote maybe a thousand words and they seem to move here and there. He's got a roundabout approach to writing. His primary point, which he takes some time at reaching, appears to be that there is marginally less chance you will be rated ineffective under the matrix than the percentage plan. This is an absurd contention.

For one thing, UFT insisted there was little chance anyone would be rated ineffective under the current system. Leo Casey wrote various posts on Edwize attacking Carol Burris and showing charts that suggested people would have to get very low scores on exams for that to happen. More importantly, a very small percentage of people were rated ineffective. While of course this is no consolation whatsoever to those who were, now possibly facing job loss, this is a fact Mulgrew regularly brings up at the DA to ridicule those of us who've opposed the junk science system from its inception.

More to the point, the new system was expressly designed for the purpose of firing more teachers. Cuomo's right out there in public, saying he wants to break the "public school monopoly," you know, the school system it's ostensibly his job to champion and run. If indeed Mulgrew is half as clever as he claims to be, if indeed he planned this system so as to result in few poor ratings for teachers, this plan has backfired, and quite spectacularly.

The new law, passed by our so-called allies in the Assembly, grants little flexibility to districts and strongly ties our jobs, our tenure, and our fate to state test results that will have little to do with what happens in our classrooms. For this, Mulgrew thanked the legislature. Any teacher who's actually read this is unlikely to do the same.

Someone has to stick his hand in the freshly produced elephant dung and try to pull out a prize. I'm grateful that it's Peter Goodman and not me. I have no reason whatsoever to believe this new system will help a single teacher or student, and am very much persuaded it will result in dissuading thoughtful teachers from entering the profession. It will cause deserving, potentially great teachers to not only be denied tenure, but also be dismissed.

If you don't think the do-or-die test scores will be an incentive for administrators, fearful for their own jobs, to issue negative observation and performance reports, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Say Anything

It's been a trying week for UFT leadership, having just fired writer Jim Callaghan, who refused to go quietly into that good night. Callaghan claims to have been fired for, of all things, his efforts to unionize.  Naturally, brass needs to paint a more favorable portrait.

Yesterday, UFT mouthpiece Peter Goodman was waxing poetic over at Gotham Schools about the democracy that flourishes in the UFT.  As usual, no mention was made of the controlling Unity Caucus.  Said Goodman:

The give and take, the variety of opinions within the union is healthy, the thousand delegates, selected by members in each and every school gather monthly, debate is wide ranging, and usually strongly supportive of Weingarten, and now Mulgrew.

The latter is true, of course, because the overwhelming majority of those present belong to Unity and have surrendered their right to publicly dissent.  In addition, there are a few from the faux-opposition New Action, who are permitted superficial disagreement as long as they do not oppose the Unity presidential candidate (imperiling their patronage gigs).  Then there is a ragtag, disorganized bunch of individuals that truly disagree.  This group is routinely booed and ridiculed by both Unity and New Action.

Goodman contended those at the DA  "may or may chose to belong to a political party within the union."  I responded:

As you well know, Unity is not a choice. It is an invitation-only caucus that requires its members to sign an oath not to contradict it in public.

Goodman called that "almost laughable," and went on to claim,

"I’ve never signed an “oath”....  

This was remarkable.  The defining characteristic of Unity Caucus is its non-negotiable demand that its members represent the Caucus rather than the membership.  Most UFT members are unaware of its existence.  Personally, I never heard of it before I started blogging about five years ago.  That's the way it's supposed to be, of course.  Very few teachers would vote for a chapter leaders they knew followed orders from up high rather than promoting the interests of rank and file--and make no mistake, the 2005 contract, relentlessly promoted by Unity, was not in the interests of rank and file.  I responded to Goodman:

Verbatim from the Unity application, members agree:


To express criticism of caucus policies within the Caucus;
To support the decisions of Caucus / Union leadership in public or Union forums;

Are you saying you never signed that agreement?

I'm still waiting for Goodman to respond.  I suppose the best approach is to sit while I wait.

In the UFT hierarchy, chapter leaders are routinely bought off.  They sign the Unity oath and are kept in line with free trips to conventions, where they dutifully genuflect before the likes of Bill Gates.  Many live in hope of getting a union job just like Peter Goodman did.  Then they can drop most or all of that inconvenient teaching, earn a second pension, make considerably more than teachers, and get even more free trips and perks.

When UFT chapter leaders sign the Unity application, they agree to be "activists."  In reality, they agree to do whatever they're told without question.

Those who agree are not leaders, but followers.  This in itself is not necessarily bad.  But lately, they're following the dictates of demagogues like Bill Gates and the Wal-Mart family, to the detriment of teachers and working Americans everywhere.