UFT Delegate Assembly--You Get FOUR Observations, Not Two, and No You CAN'T Hear That From Anyone Who Actually Gets Observed

President’s Report:

Michael Mulgrew—holds moment of silence for first year teacher in horrible traffic accident.

National—speaks of attack campaign. Doesn’t know what to say about hearing. Asks if we brought guns to ward off grizzlies. DeVos doesn’t know much, particularly on special ed, but supports guns in schools. Says we must have fun with it or it’s depressing like Cathie Black with fangs and more money.

Normally would report on state budget process, but must focus on DC. Said we would support people for both DC and NY marches. Buses to DC are full. Still don’t know where they can drop people off, believe it’s being done on purpose. Want more people at march than inauguration. Over 1,000 people with UFT on Saturday. Rally point 47 between 2 and 3. Will rally and march to Trump Tower.

State—Said our strategy is build defense around our state and attack what happens in DC. In Albany I met with leaders to talk about possibilities for DC. Said we have research on Michigan and Indiana, bad situation, open market, no accountability, transparency, or regulations. Cannot close schools because they aren’t educating, only if they don’t make money. That is basis for state policy. Destroyed public school system except for special ed. Children are dollar amounts, special ed. students cost too much for voucher schools.

Albany looking at business as usual, but we went back. We reached out to state of Michigan. We brought their people to Albany. Quite a few volunteered. We chose policy person and parent leader. We basically had a breakfast conversation with legislature. They told people that they first thought choice was a good idea. Four or five years later they realized it was market choice, not parent choice. Political money killed any chances of relief, schools are now among worst in country, privatizers got them all. Once they lost 15% in public school was tipping point and they started to fail. Cyber schools opened up and things got even worse.

These are not conspiracy theories. Charters are just a tool to do what they want to do, to make education an open for-profit marketplace with no accountability. Person who pushed Michigan agenda will probably be next Secretary of Education. DeVos focused on making money, not educating kids. We will push transparency in Albany to keep them in line.

Michigan rep said they didn’t know that what they were pushing wasn’t actually public education. NY must protect against such activity.

Hearing last night—texts and emails all day about grizzly bears. Says technically one could come after a school. We will get cartoons about this. Last night we launched Thunderclap 1600 members and we need more. Reached many more. Tweeting during hearing was impressive.

Pundits say she didn’t do well because staff didn’t prepare her, and unions made Democrats ask tough questions. This is work AFT has been doing for last month. Didn’t know it would be so easy. Didn’t think she wouldn’t know difference between growth and proficiency. Will probably just label it fake news, which they say about everything.

We have to make a positive campaign, and it can’t just be NYC. We need to get people to stand up and fight, not just hope nothing bad happens. Stand up for your school. We have to push this.

State budget—will be details we don’t like. Starting base for education not to bad, but not where we want it. Governor will be tested, as he’s being our friend right now. We will ask him to protect it. Glad he’s keeping millionaire’s tax. We pushed for that. We must support that. Are other revenue ideas. We need to see proposals from governor and legislature. Senate will have a lot of charter stuff. Eva had rally today. Heavy duty production. Will want space money and rent because she’s broke.

Education—idea is to push through and make moratorium permanent. Right now they won’t focus, much infighting on governmental affairs. Lobby Day March 14th.

Since last DA, new evaluation system. Heard it was end of world, but said it was alright. Amy Arundell and Jackie Bennet trained 800 CLs. How do you like matrix now? You love it. We didn’t get away with anything, but advocated for fair system. Student learning measures not nailed down, moving toward them that aren’t test based so we build in safety nets. People need to feel someone’s watching them. We don’t want change that will screw us or our kids. We need to know which changes make sense and which don’t.

How did principals react? Bad day, just say matrix. My kids learn, you lose.

There are not more observations. If you’re HE or E you have more choices for less. Intervisitation not observation. Will it be bad word later? We’ll see. To learn, better other people come in.

Danielson equal to 4 letter word. Charlotte didn’t intend it this way. But we have to own this. Ask principal to work out intervisitation policy. No paperwork. We have 100 schools with resolved paperwork issues. You have to file.

Chalkbeat wants to know if Renewal program is failure. Lots of people want to focus on failure. Why do some work and some don’t? We need a plan, everyone to understand it, we need to collaborate and move forward. Schools were losing 25% students, 60% staff, but other Renewal schools where people want to get in. Principal autonomy should be gone. We need teacher autonomy. We need to design and implement our lessons, but admin has right to say we want things differently.

We need DOE to overlook admin when kids and staff leave. We don’t need this with DC environment. Paperwork committee directed principal to do something, and DOE won’t make her do it. We are in arbitration. Principals work for DOE.

Positive campaign—#PublicSchoolProud 2017. Thanks team for work it’s done. Celebrating neighborhood schools. Honoring educators, students and parents. Want campaign transferable. Says people will express freedoms and creativity. We can get buttons, bumper stickers. People love neighborhood schools. That’s what public wants, except millionaires.

We want strong neighborhood schools, accessible to all. Illustrate joys of teaching and learning.

Bumper sticker—show your love for public schools. That is our vision. Asks us to talk about classrooms and kids. Talk about projects, how students inspire you, why teaching is important, and how you make a difference. Talk about our students, why they love their schools, how they’ve surmounted challenges. Says hands around schools photo gallery was thousands.

Says nothing is written in stone, these ideas can change, we hope you will change them. Wants hearts to show why kids love school, school spirit rallies, videos. Get school community involved. Sign up for campaign on UFT website, discuss within school, share stories with UFT.

Want to make this model for AFT, build grassroots groundswell up, get people off of floors where they are worrying about what will happen to them.

Shows video—Attack on Devos, never spent time in classroom or taught, billionaire, not ed. experience or school admin, kids never went to public schools. Applause—video made by CL.

People in Michigan said don’t let what happened her happen in NY. They influenced with simple messages, then used might and money and it was too late. Says UFT goes all out in this campaign and shares across country to win this war. Calls for resolution. Moves to suspend rules. Passes.

Motion—Mulgrew says his report has motivated it. I have not even seen motion. Being passed out, Resolution to support UFT Public School Proud Campaign. UFT refuses to give in to privatization, for-profit charters, and vouchers. Quotes Diane Ravitch. Unopposed. End of Report. 5: 18

LeRoy Barr—Women’s March—buses full, waiting list. Emails on DC and NY tonight.

UFT Black History Month, next month, three films. Chisolm, 13th, Rising from the Rails. Discussions to follow. Open to non-UFT.

National school counseling week, February, Guidance counselors conference, High school awards, next DA February 8th.

Mulgrew—Paras aren’t supposed to do lunchroom duty. Principal’s weekly says unless it’s on IEP that child needs para, lunchroom duty is off for paras, who get duty-free lunch.

Questions—

Retired teacher—HS often not neighborhood schools. need other phrase.

Mulgrew—Most people believe HS neighborhood schools, will take under consideration.

CL—I took teachers to PROSE seminar—PROSE doesn’t mean contract changes, but school is collaborative. If school has great idea DOE will let you try it. Why can’t everyone be collaborative? My principal is recovering dictator, now doesn’t send memo unless I’ve seen it. How do we get to point where we can talk that way about all principals? I’d leave if I worked in some schools.

Mulgrew—political implications, more schools with improper leadership, no coffee cutter model. Good principals believe in respect. When that’s not case, principal shouldn’t be in position. We complain about how teachers are trained, but isolation is not cooperation, and doesn’t make good principal. We know difference between friction and bad management. As long as we need lawyers, system not being run properly. We should have good teachers rise through ranks.

CL—What was your feeling in bipartisan reaction to Michigan people in Albany?

Mulgrew—Was bipartisan audience. We asked folks from very small regions of state. They heard it because both parties always talk about public schools. Charters came from Democratic party. We realized there were bad players and educated folks. Bloomberg made people angry. Charter industry full of privateers. Dumped money into state races. Hope something good comes.

Delegate—Evaluation system—best I’ve seen in 20 years was s and u, why can’t we go back.

Mulgrew—principal had total control. Who wants to go back? I don’t believe in unfettered control based one whether principal likes you or not. People who had problems don’t like it. Since we started using new system fewer teachers rated badly. We can push back on morons who talk about testing. We are point A to point B, and now looking at growth.

CL—Principal on record at safety meeting we don’t need SAVE room. NYS says all schools need them.

Mulgrew—We will have people at your school. Principal doesn’t get to reject regulation. Must be plans around SAVE rooms. Implemented properly makes sure classroom process not impeded.

Motions—5:38

Mike Schirtzer—MORE—For next month’s agenda—Resolution in support of immigrant New Yorkers. Body approved immigration liaison, for those of us with undocumented students, they will have rough day Friday, will get worse. These are our kids. You’ve seen students and family members at a loss, so this is personal. We want like Portland and SF, to lobby chancellor to do programs and discussions. Even radio uses term illegal immigrant, no such thing as illegal human being. Want to protect students and want DOE to protect student data. Want DOE campuses to be safe zones. We want to do all we can to protect students.

LeRoy Barr—Rises to speak against. Over months have had conversations and voted to support our fight for immigrant students. Have already discussed immigrant liaisons in every school. Want to know what type of info we will give. Have done some of this. We have to be careful about words like every. Have implications. We will work with whoever brought this forward to find things we can agree upon but please vote down.

Resolution does not pass.

James Eterno—MORE—Asks because state law mandates two observations, asks UFT demand 2 observations for most teachers. Teacher observation process broken beyond repair, used as scare tactic. People petrified of drive by observations with cookie cutter rubrics used to bludgeon teachers. Vast majority of us learn nothing from them and they are waste of time. Most NY teacher unions settled on 2 observation minimums. This year we went with four, Next year we should go with two, which will make teachers and sane admin happy. Argument is more makes them do their job, but reality is they get better at it. My wife has been under relentless attack but they learn and do better. Why give them that. We could just put in clause that 2 is minimum and more for teachers with particular needs. This would make them do it right. Also Friedrichs 2 is coming. Union dues won’t be mandatory. We can show our members we’re looking for what they want. Asks speaker against be someone who is evaluated under Danielson.

Howie Schoor—You don’t get to pick who speaks against it. 2 is not mandate but minimum. We’ve been pretty successful. Before this we had 3% U. Was upheld. We don’t have that anymore because principals have to do some work. Fewer than 1% rated ineffective. We think this model even better because of the matrix. We will see at end of year or two. Urge you to vote no.

Mulgrew—We tried to get two.

Resolution against school vouchers—

passes unanimously

Rich Mantel—Resolution against DeVos

passes unanimously

Sterling Roberson—Resolution for creation of cafes for UFT members in every school—

Amendment—delegate adult ed.—Let’s also look for one room dedicated to adult ed. classes taught by adult ed. chapter teachers.

Gregg Lundahl—These are two different things..

Mulgrew calls him out of order.

Dave Pecoraro—not germane, and we need to extend debate. 6:02.

Extends to end of reso.

Mulgrew says he can rule it isn’t germane, and does.

Point of order—Isn’t it true there is already an order from DOE that there is supposed to be a lounge for only teachers, but that cafe aspect is not a law from DOE?

Mulgrew—don’t believe it’s true, will research, but cafe is not.

Resolution passes.

Time for raffle.

Downsides of Democracy

Donald Trump is about to become President of the United States, and that wouldn't be possible in a democracy. First of all, the guy actually lost by almost three million votes. Second, his agenda doesn't fly with most of the American people, including a whole lot who voted for him. And with more people voting for Democrats in the Senate than Republicans, he just wouldn't be able to enact his agenda if some votes weren't worth more than others.

A majority of Americans want health care for all. A majority of Americans want college to be affordable. A majority of Americans want a vibrant middle class and a society in which people who work can actually support themselves. But Donald Trump and the GOP think people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, whatever the hell bootstraps are, and make do with the millions of dollars they inherit from their Daddies, as Trump did, or with whatever they can steal while in office, and everyone else can go to hell.

In the UFT, the system is similar in that democracy is kind of frowned upon. I sit on the UFT Executive Board, elected by the high school teachers along with six of my colleagues. And yet James Eterno, who the high school teachers selected as Vice President, is sitting home watching his two kids. Now there's nothing wrong with watching kids. In fact I've met his kids and they are lovely. But why isn't James representing us at AdCom, and why isn't anyone representing us ad AdCom?

It's the system, don't you know. Once in the eighties, Mike Shulman of New Action won the election for high school VP, and that was unacceptable. The only thing to do was contest the election and hold it again in order to get the result demanded by leadership. Well, the second time they did it, not only did he win again, but he also won by a higher margin. Therefore they did the only thing they could, which was rig the vote. Once Shulman was gone and they controlled everything once again, they changed the rules so that elementary teachers, retirees and nurses could help select the High School VP. Voila! No more Mike Shulman, and no James Eterno, ever.

So now there's something called Team High School that doesn't have to bother to actually represent the majority of high school teachers. Consult with elected representatives? Nah. Why bother? After all, are they gonna stand up and do whatever is asked of them by leadership? Probably not. For one thing, the UFT high school reps haven't signed loyalty oaths and won't stand for whatever they're told, like mayoral control, charter schools, junk science ratings, and substandard contracts.

Here's what they stand for--When the high school Executive Board reps got in, they pushed for a resolution against abusive administrators. Alas, that was not acceptable to leadership, which likened it to a scatter gun and stated that administrators were represented by union and therefore deserved to be respected. Oddly, when teachers are brought up on false or ridiculous charges, the administrators bringing said charges never seem to say, "Gee, they're represented by union like me. Maybe I shouldn't place letters in their files or try to fire them for no reason."

So we're nicer than they are. And when we try to enforce existing class size regulations on our contract, we're told we've sacrificed pay to get them there. That's an interesting point, given it happened fifty years ago and most of us were in diapers if even alive at that time. More interesting is the fact that the resolution didn't ask for anything more than enforcing the UFT contract and state law.

Then there was a resolution that we look closely at the Netflix documentary 13th and examine the effect that has on Americans of color in the United States. Though most at the Executive Board hadn't even seen the documentary, that was voted down. They weren't even able to honor the modest request of placing an article about it in NY Teacher.

It's important, if you aren't going to do the whole democracy thing, to marginalize people who don't share your agenda. Thus Bernie supporters are wild-eyed lunatics, Hillary supporters can go to hell, and 20,000 high school teachers, more than the entire Philadelphia teacher union, should shut up and sit down.

After all, we're gonna do another round of Union Loud and Proud, which seems to entail placing a logo on UFT email, and that oughta be good enough for anyone.

The Part 154 Police Visit Our School

I've written in the past about Part 154, the newly revised regulation that effectively cuts direct English instruction and reduces ESL teachers to support staff for teachers of other subjects. In New York State, learning the English language is subordinate to mastering things on which you can be tested. Therefore, in the same time American-born students are studying Macbeth, ESL teachers are supposed to stand around and make sure students who don't understand English acquire the language via studying a form of it no one uses anymore.

Last year, the state was rather benign about enforcement. This was a good thing, because it was a huge stinking mess. Small schools with one ESL teacher would expect said teacher to be everywhere, teaching everything. As you can imagine, that's not a task that can be easily accomplished. What actually happened was that these teachers ran around like headless chickens accomplishing little or nothing. That's too bad because on this astral plane, it's actually kind of important to learn the prevalent language of the country in which you reside.

I know of other small schools in which the ESL teacher is treated as an annoyance. There's the social studies teacher, teaching about the Spanish American War, and that pesky ESL teacher is always interrupting, handing the ELLs vocabulary sheets and stuff. How are they supposed to pay attention to the lesson? How are they supposed to grasp what the social studies teacher is offering when the other teacher is continually interrupting? And how are they supposed to teach not only the subject, but also the language, when newcomers have the same 40 minutes as American-born kids to learn in?

On the other hand, I work in a large school. Aside from the issue of concurrently teaching the subject and basic English, the demands of Part 154 are equally impossible there as in any setting. There are a whole lot of things that just don't make any sense. For example, students are not allowed to be more than one grade apart, so it's virtually impossible to make up classes based on language level rather than grade level. You can, of course, run one section of 4 students and another of 44 students. While that might not make sense to any teacher or administrator who hasn't eaten LSD for breakfast, rules are rules.

The geniuses at Tweed, of course, have the answer. What you do, you see, is you hang up bulletin boards with student work. Also, you make sure a rubric is attached. You see how that fixes everything? Also, you make sure there is a library in the back of the classroom. You also make sure that every ESL teacher does all this stuff, because of course they have nothing else to do. This helps everything. Those are just a few things I noticed in 23 pages of rubrics and demands the DOE helpfully sent us last week.

To further help us, they're gonna visit us six times this year and rate us on said rubrics. That's great. Because just last week, a whole lot of UFT members were approaching me and saying, "Hey, you know what? I don't feel enough pressure on myself as a teacher. I'm just not being micromanaged enough." So naturally, we're all glad the New York City Department of Education, which knows absolutely everything, is coming around with a ponderous and detailed document that no one has ever seen before and demanding we do absolutely everything on it. Because a day without rubrics is like a day without sunshine.

I guess if I were an effective teacher I'd make up 23 pages of rubrics for my students and demand they tow the line. Instead, I've been limiting my focus every day trying to make them learn English so they can, you know, communicate, have lives, and maybe be happy. The truth is I have never seen any of those goals on any rubric detailing college and career readiness, so they must be frivolous and unnecessary. Only the NYC Department of Education, which actually has a PowerPoint somewhere that says acquisition of English is strictly for the purpose of excelling in academic subjects, has the answers. Otherwise, why would they be in those air-conditioned offices in Tweed while we just hang around having big fun in classrooms?

Me, I'm just glad they're coming. I know my colleagues are delighted. Like all teachers, we haven't got enough pressure on us. Being visited and judged six times by people wielding an incomprehensible rubric designed by a bunch of bureaucrats with no idea what we actually do, or how impossible it is to meet their regulations, is just what we need to keep us on our toes. And naturally, as our jobs are so breezy and easy, we have plenty of time to sit around and incorporate their demands into what we do each and every day. Evidently, the DOE thinks we sit around each day and wait for them to tell us what to do, so they are performing a great service by swooping down like the Spanish Inquisition.

The Sword of Damocles that is the APPR system isn't enough. The huge exodus of new teachers isn't enough either. So lets focus on one single department and support them six full days. Let's amp up the observations and judge the teachers on not one, but rather two distinct rubrics. Because Danielson, while it's on par with the Ten Commandments and never to be questioned, cannot truly assess quality even though it assesses quality perfectly.

Oversized classes? Not our problem. Kids never been to school in their first language? Too bad for you. School at 214% capacity? Deal with it. We're from the Department of Education and we're here to help.

MLK Was a Strong Proponent of Union--Let's Honor His Memory

AFL-CIO has an entire section devoted to Martin Luther King Jr. and his ties to organized labor. Make no mistake, he would be horrified by what's going on in the United States today. While King is largely remembered for his battle for civil rights, it's less widely known that said battle included raising all boats via a unionized work force.

I have a lot of disagreements with union leadership about how the UFT is run, but one thing I hope I have in common is a strong and unyielding belief that we are stronger when we stand together. I look at our enemies, people like Michael Bloomberg and Donald Trump, people who'd have us fend for ourselves against huge corporations, and I know our best bet is to stand strong.

Trump knows it too, which is why he believes in the misleadingly named Right to Work nonsense. He knows human nature often suggests the path of least resistance, which is keeping your union dues in your pocket and letting someone else do the work. In fact, that's a huge part of our own union's issue. Even as we all pay into union, we are plagued by the twin menaces fear and apathy. I understand fear. After all, I've been watching Andrew Cuomo bloviate for years about how awful we are and how he couldn't wait to fire us. I've seen him refer to his own programs as "baloney" because not enough teachers were on the unemployment line. I don't trust anything he's had his paws on, including the state APPR system.

Apathy is something else. We are quite guilty of it, and though though UFT voting has risen to 24 from 17%, we're still nothing less than a disgrace. MLK believed in people taking a stand and so do I. As long as we're hiding in the bushes our voices will not be heard. MLK's fight was not for any one group, but rather for all of us. When some of us are oppressed, all of us are oppressed.

It's pretty sad that we're facing a President, a Senate, a Congress, and soon a Supreme Court that hasn't got our interests at heart. But MLK didn't give up against overwhelming odds and that's why we remember him. We can't allow Trump and his flunkies to move us back without a fight.

Let's honor MLK's memory. Let's not watch the grass grow under our feet. Let's stop being afraid of anything but our own apathy. MLK would want us to stand against the execrable Donald Trump and his band of thugs. Let's do so. Let's honor his memory not only today, but also next Saturday. Find your warmest winter coat and meet me, meet MORE, and meet the UFT at 10:30 AM at 1 Dag Hammarskjold Plaza on 47th Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenue.

In fact, King was in Memphis to address and stand up for the Sanitation Workers when he was assassinated. Let's go to Manhattan, take our own stand, and follow in MLK's footsteps. Let's stop Donald Trump and the morally bankrupt GOP from moving us backward.

Will I see you there?

Blogger's Day Off...

...but you can read my piece on class sizes and what UFT and DOE do about them in today's Daily News.

A Breakthrough for ATRs?

It's kind of remarkable to read a piece like this that may perhaps give hope to members trapped in the purgatory we call the Absent Teacher Reserve. Randy Asher, principal of Brooklyn Tech actually has a job trying to shrink the Absent Teacher Reserve. What really caught my eye was this:

“Teachers are the heart and the soul of the program,” said Asher, 44, who’s assuming the newly created position of senior adviser for talent management. “They’re on the front lines and they’re with students every day. This is about making the right matches and finding the right people for schools.”

That's not your typical teachers suck and must be fired comment. While only time will tell, it sounds like this principal is looking to actually, you know, put teachers to work. That's always been the best way to resolve this issue. It also seems that Asher has actually hired people from the ATR. While that in itself doesn't guarantee results, it appears he doesn't suffer from the anti-ATR prejudice I often see in the papers.

Obviously, the very best solution to the problem of the ATR is to simply get everyone teaching again. That's not possible since the 2005 contract jettisoned placement based on seniority and made principals lords of all they surveyed. Nonetheless, with someone in charge who may really wish to put ATR teachers in classrooms again, we could see better results.

There is already an incentive for schools to hire ATR teachers, but it clearly must not have worked well enough. I also question the number of 981 ATR teachers since it doesn't include teachers who are provisionally placed. When you consider the fact that any school with provisionally placed teachers turned down the chance to have the city pay100% of their salaries this year, it's likely close to all of them will end up in the ATR at year's end. So 981 isn't an accurate representation at all.

I work in a school that hires ATR teachers. There are at least three former ATR teachers, permanently assigned, in my department alone. But I'm sure there are a lot of places where they don't stand a chance. I read and hear stories about biased administrators who won't give them a chance on a regular basis. And it's not just administrators. I hear about teachers, even chapter leaders, failing to give a fair shake to ATR teachers.

I worked at John Adams High School for about seven years. It's clear to me that, if I hadn't transferred out via an old UFT seniority plan, I'd probably be an ATR myself. It's important to note that this was totally a matter of chance. It's kind of like the whole nonsense about "failing schools." The only thing they have in common is high percentages of poverty, learning disabilities and ELLS. You may as well call schools failing and make teachers ATRs based on their zip codes.

Maybe I'm crazy to harbor any optimism whatsoever about Asher. Just because his words sound reasonable doesn't mean he is. I'm sure you don't have to be a genius to guide Brooklyn Tech into success, what with 100% of its students being selected based on a placement test. But I very much like that he credits us for what we actually do. I'd have expected someone in his position to be talking about firing people. He talks about placing people.

Let's hope he walks the walk.

The Only Thing Worse than a Two-Party System

A two-party system has been problematic for the United States. We were particularly hurt by it this year, and will feel its effects for at least four years to come. I didn't think there was anyone worse than GW Bush, but American ingenuity is and always has been unlimited, and we've managed to find someone.

It was pretty frustrating to see a brilliant candidate like Bernie Sanders fight a David and Goliath battle against a preordained candidate like Hillary Clinton. A big reason was that we'd become accustomed to Democrats who didn't really stand for working people and gave us valuable lip service instead.

Health care for all? A pipe dream. Unionized labor? Not necessarily bad, but we support non-unionized charters and Barack Obama could never find shoes comfortable enough to take a stand in Wisconsin, let alone anywhere else. A living wage? Maybe we'll compromise and give you a higher non-living wage. College education for all? Maybe Donald Trump will send Ivanka to Queens College, so forget it.

So what do we get? Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. With that menu, I chose Hillary Clinton, though I had very strong reservations about her. I don't regret it because I'm proud to be among the near 3-million votes she got over Big Orange. Trump's pathological lies and execrable bigotry put me off big time. His victory put me off even more.

As frustrating as that is, it's just as frustrating facing a union controlled by only UFT Unity. Now it wouldn't be so bad if they were out there fighting for us, but I don't get that feeling at all. We've given in so many times, on so many bad ideas, that I wonder whether leadership knows the difference. It's hard to forget, for example, that the only time I've ever seen Michael Mulgrew fighting mad was when he was defending Common Core and offering to punch all our faces out.  But that's the tip of the iceberg.

The iceberg itself is full of mayoral control, which we endorsed for Mayor Mike both before and after he showed himself as our blood enemy. There are the Green Dot Charters that Randi brought to the Big Apple, partnering UFT with Steve Barr after he snookered LA teachers but good. And who can forget the 2005 contract that not only sent seniority placement the way of the dinosaur, but also gave us the Absent Teacher Reserve, the one with which we're still grappling now.

But they're always right. It doesn't matter what they do. When they win something, it's a victory. When they lose something, it's another victory. When they support Hillary, they tell us how smart they are. In fact, they're still defending that decision, despite the massive and ruinous consequences that will rain upon us in the coming months. They never do anything wrong. They never have and they never will. As long as you're willing to accept that, you can sign an oath and join the team.

Here's the thing, though. The team is losing on a massive scale, The ship is sinking and leadership is still telling us how clever they are. When we ask what on earth we're gonna do about this they tell us there's a new loud and proud campaign--more of the same. It's very hard to tell an entrenched and patronage powered bureaucracy that we need to actually organize in ways that haven't been attempted in decades, ways they've not seen in their professional lives.

But the only thing really worse than a two party system is a one-party system, and as long as the Prime Directive remains perpetuating the system, the smart money is on massive and crushing losses the likes of which we've never known before.

UFT--No Rank and File Voice in Evaluation System

Like a lot of people reading this, I'm in the classroom every day. I also talk to teachers every day, both online and in person. So far, not one single teacher has expressed happiness about the new evaluation system, not this iteration, not the last one, and not the first one either. In fact, the only place I hear enthusiasm expressed over APPR is at UFT meetings, except for the ones at my school.

Inspiring though it is to hear good things about the evaluation system, I only hear them from people like Michael Mulgrew. Now I'm sure Michael Mulgrew was a teacher at some time, but he's not one now, he hasn't been one for years, and he isn't affected by the evaluation system. I'm not exactly sure where Mulgrew or any of the union's APPR enthusiasts get their information, but I'm certain it isn't from me.

The other day at the Executive Board I asked whether we would be consulted about changes in MOTP, specifically a reduction in the minimum number of observations. Though no one directly addressed that question, I presume the answer to be no. As for consultation in advance of this negotiation, I can attest that I wasn't consulted and neither was anyone else I know.

There's an overarching pattern of leadership doing any damn thing it pleases with utter disregard for rank and file. This is the system we've devised, it's wonderful, so now your job is to love it. Actually the Executive Board is supposed to meet around the Delegate Assembly so as to help it do its work. And AdCom, which is leadership, is supposed to do the same for the Executive Board. In fact, the reverse is true. AdCom makes decisions, UFT Unity in Executive Board does precisely as it's told, and the DA pretty much carries the mandates of AdCom. Rank and file? Meh.

A few years ago, when the first iteration of this APPR came down, there was a vote in the DA scheduled. I dragged my school's three delegates there to vote against it, as my members would've wanted. But Bloomberg decided he didn't need no stinking evaluation system, so there was no vote. Rather than try to negotiate, Michael Mulgrew found the reformiest man in NY State, John King, and had him decide for us. Since then rank and file has had absolutely no voice in evaluation, not even via the DA.

When I suggested we reduce the minimum to two, reserving extra for those who were in need of support, I was told that a higher number of observations was more likely to result in a higher rating. That's an interesting argument, but it doesn't address my suggestion that only teachers receiving unfavorable ratings be observed more. In fact, if people who got good observations were to stop at two, that would mean that others could get even more than four. By the logic that answered my question, this would be a win-win.

So why doesn't anyone take my suggestion? I'd have to say because the issue has been decided by leadership and they don't need any stinking input from me, thank you very much. People on the 14th floor know everything already. That's how they got up to that floor, elevator or no. The 95 rubber stamps in the Executive Board all nod their heads in agreement, because that's exactly what leadership hand-picked them to do. Only the high school reps dissent, and everyone else kind of wishes we would shut up and go away. Before we showed up the food was better, and they were all allowed to sit there, eat more peacefully, and just vote yes to absolutely everything.

My friend Sam Lazarus says there are only two problems with the UFT--the leadership and the membership. He's right of course. Leadership thinks it knows everything and manipulates the system so it can do any damn thing it wants with no checks or balances. Membership is beaten down by crap like the evaluation system and rightly has little expectation of influencing leadership. The overwhelming majority thinks it's a waste of time to vote in union elections, and for the most part it's a self-fulfilling prophesy.

But once membership finds out it can save $1300 a year by not joining the imperious top-down UFT, things will be different. From everything I see and hear, leadership simply cannot adjust its attitude or behavior in any fashion whatsoever. This bodes ill for all of us.

What does it take to wake up a hopelessly entitled machine?

UFT Executive Board January 9, 2017

Secretary Howard Schoor—welcomes us,

Approval of minutes—accepted.

President’s Report—Mulgrew is in Albany.

Schoor—Mark Twain said "No man’s life, liberty or property is safe while the legistlature is in session."

Staff director’s report—LeRoy Barr—Mayor’s committee met, will meet again this week, will come back with reservation. Will be video series on Black History Month at 52. Will show movie 13, discussion about A. Phillip Randolph and something on Shirley Chisolm.

Says Cuomo spoke positively on education. Speaks of Randi Weingarten’s speech, against DeVos. Next EB the 23rd. DA January 18th.

Questions—

Jonathan Halabi—New Action—We have an issue with a principal, Sean Mengar, came in as Teaching Fellow at Truman, became principal in NE Bronx. Among worst turnover, 50%, much untenured staff, Sent all staff home one day except new teachers, discontinued large portion of staff.

I was horrified to see this principal’s picture on subway wall as model, place by DOE and Teaching Fellows. Can we stop this?

Schoor—We didn’t have approval, of course. I’m concerned about what’s going on at the school. Please inform me so we can investigate. We are focusing on a group of schools to bring to attention of DOE


Arthur Goldstein—MORE—I recall coming here to vote on an evaluation system, and Bloomberg scuttling it. I don’t recall being asked to vote on any subsequent agreement. I would like to know how many rank and file directly affected by this agreement had a voice in crafting it. I know high school reps on this body weren’t surveyed or asked anything whatsoever.

This notwithstanding, it’s likely there would be a broad consensus among membership for fewer observations than we currently require. It might make sense, and certainly would in a large school like mine, for administrators to adhere to the state minimum of two, and reserve further observations for members in need of support. I grant this will be unlikely to help in cases with supervisors who are insane lunatics, but that is another discussion.

Are MOTP revisions coming, and if so will we be consulted, and how?

Schoor—will be report later, you may ask questions.

Ashraya Gupta—MORE—  What about immigrant liaison and paid parental leave?

Schoor—nothing on liaisons, no union has negotiated paid parental leave as of yet. They cannot impose system on us as they did for non-union employees. First union to agree with set a pattern. Right now they are saving money when we go on leave. We would prefer to set our own pattern.

Gupta—Are we advocation for paid family leave or parental leave?

Schoor—We will get, likely, what they’ve offered others.

Amy Arundell—This is parental leave.

Mike Schirtzer—MORE—I asked about ICT classes out of compliance. Do you have any data and is there anything we can do?

Carmen Alvarez—DOE doesn’t exactly track it. We may do surveys of our own. We’re trying to figure it out and work with DOE.

Schirtzer—How many complaints have been filed?

Alvarez—We can do general numbers, but complaints confidential.

Amy Arundell—Update on evaluation.

UFT has prepared an evaluation guide, emailed link to members. Guide covers evaluation system for next 6 months. We will prepare a more comprehensive guide for next school year. We have offered CL meetings to update them. Began last week. 80 CLs came to 52. Have trainings in other boroughs this week. We have 450-500 CLs getting info. Also providing training in districts, for CLs who can’t attend otherwise.

Feedback generally positive. Questions about matrix and MOSL.

We cover changes to MOTP for 2017-18 school year. We’ve tweaked options three and four. Rank and file wants to know why option 4 unavailable to them. 3 for HE and 4 for E. 4 now available to HE and E.

We’re not interested in reducing number of for stakes observations. Principals are. Does everyone remember drive bys with S and U? We wanted to overrule people giving judgments based on little data. We want to hold admin accountable. States that answers my question.

Jackie Bennett

Will be guidance on MOTP. Many things will stay the same. Guidance is coming and selections will be easier because there will be only one measure. Our final scoring is better because now we have the matrix, and benefit of doubt that will push people higher.

There is a question about an asterisk. Law gave us two options and we opted for lower stakes. If you use a certain option it will be more rigorous. This is only if you choose optional learning measure—simpler and lower stakes. E and H combinations gave you E. They will now give you H.

State tried to correct for that. In NY, 3.25 or up was H. State law tried to counterbalance that by raising 3.25 to 3.5 or up. That was, like other things, an attempt to reduce the number of HE teachers. We don’t think it will have much of an effect. State would have allowed for difference between E and D to move to 2.75 but we kept it at 2.5. That was crucial to us.

There is less than 1% ineffective in NYC. We don’t expect that to go up. We expect that teachers will now get benefit of doubt.

Schoor—Peer validator has been successful

Mike Shirtzer--MORE—You said people got one or two drive bys in past. We know most locals got two. Was there any consultation? For those teaching 20 years, why 4, why not two?

Arundell—I’m not sure it’s a waste of time. We now require observable evidence. We get many arbitrary and capricious reports overturned. We’ve raised bar. With very few rules it was worse, now you can’t make it up. More teachers are engaging and pushing back. Level of discussion around teaching in my estimation is that we’re shifting how we thing, people empowered. Research shows people observed more bet better ratings.

Schoor—This is negotiated. Not UFT’s plan. We don’t get everything we want. CSA also wanted fewer observations.

Ellen Driesen—D28 rep—I want to support Amy. ESL teacher used what she learned in DOE training. Admin marked her lower for it. Went back in with training info and rating was changed. Win for her.

Arthur Goldstein—MORE--I didn’t simply ask for fewer observations. I asked for fewer when well-rated people didn’t need more. Also, I’ve seen evidence of supervisors making things up. Wouldn’t be actionable until I rating. In fact they can make it up.

Jonathan Halabi—New Action--What percentage are getting D?

Schoor—About 7%

Bennet—Many D will go to E. Expects decrease, but doesn’t want to predict.

Schoor—Used to represent people with U ratings. Principal would go first, say they stand on the record, though there was nothing in teacher’s file. I’d say nothing was in the file, there was no documentation. That used to happen. They can’t do that anymore. 
Reports from districts

George Altomare—On Saturday February 11th social studies conference. We have an excellent honoree, pres of  central labor council.  Would like good showing. If you can’t make it, please get some really good social studies teachers.

Glad to hear there was bargaining. In 1962 when we had just won first election, we were ready to negotiate. Didn’t have collective bargaining. On January 10, 1962, no one had ever been to 10th floor Livingston St. We went in and there was this long oak table. When we walked in that room, we sat on one side and faced others with equal power, not because they gave it to us, but because we earned it.

Think of that anniversary. It’s something you can’t buy or get any other way than fighting for it.

Legislative Report

Paul Egan

Cuomo looking more friendly. Special election in Bronx.

LeRoy Barr—requests we vote on NYSUT resolutions as block.

Zika virus, ELLs, Consent education, opposing constitutional convention, new teacher induction. We’ve done them before.

Schoor—favor of voting as six—no opposition.

Barr—Speaks to them. 500 cases of Zika in NYC, 50 in pregnant women. Appropriate instruction for ELLs. Support consent ed.—1 in 5 women, 1 in 59 men reported rape. Constitutional convention—urge no vote—Respect for All—communities have suffered hate, locals will show support—Meaningful new teacher induction.

Schoor—asks vote.Passes.

Janella Hinds—Resolution on scoring of Regents. Should be in school, not outside of school. Exams have been lost. Inconvenient to students. Time and money wasted. There is another way. We are pushing DOE to change policy.

Mike Schirtzer—MORE--I am sent out regularly. Depends on leadership structure in building. Some places have been good, others disasters. We know we can grade one another’s Regents. All US History exams last year were graded per session. We would like to add a resolved, that CLs stay in schools and represent visiting scorers until this is fixed.

Hinds—Important that we have union representation in all sites. Informally, we visit sites, and ID CLs in site. Would be dangerous to support this because we are not responsible for assigning members to sites. We do not have authority to do that, though it is important we have representation. We, the UFT, do not assign people. We may negotiate it but cannot mandate it.

Stuart Kaplan—Agrees with Janella.

Jonathan Halabi—New Action--Resolution important. There are state standards but not state curriculum. Geometry taught differently school to school. Have seen kids marked wrong for doing things not accepted in their schools. This is a big deal, teachers and students hurt by this.

We should endorse home school CL supporting everyone in building. Have run into difficulties with crazy APs imposing stupid regulations. We need representation in buildings.

We should support this and perhaps modify it. Reps are great, but there for short time

Eliu Lara—All DRs go around and cover every single site. Strange for people to say there is no representation. We have borough offices. We have nothing to do locally on Regents days. Opposes change.

Vote on Schirtzer amendments—fails on party lines

Resolution passes.

We are adjourned.

Observations--Are More Better?

My friends at the ICE blog say that NJEA wants more and longer observations. There is an argument to be made for that. For example, the fewer times you are observed, the more each one counts. If you're only observed once or twice, a bad day could be quite costly. I wouldn't write a test or quiz with only two questions and expect it to represent how well my students knew a topic. (Of course I wouldn't write one with four questions either.)

There is an argument to be made that the larger the sample is, the more accurate the results will be. That, in fact, is one very good reason why the entire NY evaluation system is nonsense. It's entirely possible that a group of students may not represent the teacher's abilities or competence. In fact, since the American Statistical Association says teachers influence test scores by a factor of 1-14%, it's highly unlikely that any group will reflect teacher ability. This notwithstanding, it's where we are.

Since we're here anyway, we may as well go with something that makes sense. To me, at least, if a teacher does well with two observations, that ought to suffice. We ought to give more observations to those who don't do well, thus giving them a chance to improve. This would reduce stress on those who had less to worry about, at least. It would also give supervisors a chance to actually help those teachers in need of support. I don't see how, especially in a large school like mine, supervisors even keep up with the required volume of observations.

There is some reason for hope. At the last meeting I went to, we were told that MOTP was going to be further negotiated. It's common sense to help those who need it, rather than bother with those who don't. I'd think the principals' union would believe that too. In fact there's evidence for that. Last year, the six informals was dropped to four, which I'm pretty sure the principals argued for. This year that was revised--you can ask for four informals but that comes along with two non-evaluative visits from colleagues. The fact that this part of MOTP was negotiated makes me question whether they're really going to do much to improve it in the future, but I'd be glad to be proven wrong.

The one factor that has not been addressed is the most egregious and troubling, and that is the number and practices of insane administrators. UFT reps like to say that the S and U system was flawed because it was completely dependent on the whims of administrators. That's true, to an extent, but it doesn't pass muster as the last word.

For one thing, the stakes were not quite as high. Right now, in NY State, if you get two ineffective ratings, the burden of proof is on you. Now it's one thing for the district to prove you are incompetent. It's quite another for individual teachers to prove a negative, that they are not incompetent. That's a tremendous burden, and fundamentally un-American. When we go to court, we're innocent until proven guilty. It's the other way round for doubly I-rated teachers. That's plainly awful, and perfectly evident to everyone except UFT Unity loyalty-oath signers, who can and do make preposterous arguments about teachers owning the process.

The other is the fact that no one has chosen to address the rather large percentage of blitheringly incompetent supervisors. If, in fact, their judgment is so poor that we need to compensate for it via junk science, crap shoots, and hoping for the best, doesn't it behoove us to address the issue of supervisors who don't know their ass from their elbow? Shouldn't we actually do something about people in charge of education who operate via personal vendetta and petty vindictiveness?

I know some great supervisors. I have seen supervisors act in supportive and helpful ways. But I've also seen the polar opposite. It turns out that people who wish to escape the classroom because they don't like teaching are not precisely the best equipped to support those of us who choose to stay. Who would've thunk it?

We can modify junk science in many ways. Perhaps the matrix does so in a way that fewer teachers will be dragged down for no reason. Perhaps it's true that more teachers will have to do poorly on both axes to be unfairly rated ineffective. But it's all plainly obvious that both axes are still heavily flawed. If we're going to judge teachers, we ought to do so on the basis of ability and competence. I see two axes in the matrix, and both still rely heavily on chance and luck.

President's Message--Get on Social Media!

Hi it's me, your old pal "Punchy" Mike Mulgrew! Put em up! Nah. Just kidding. You didn't think I was really gonna hit you over that Common Core stuff, did you? I was just showing everybody I was, you know, passionate and stuff.

Anyhoo, I'm just writing to let you know that we're gonna do a Thunderclap against that bad old Betsy DeVos. Because it's really important we all take to social media and let them know that we're opposed to Betsy DeVos. Do you know that she supports charter schools? Can you imagine? Hey, that's outrageous. Now it's one thing when we support charter schools, because we support, you know, the right kind of charter schools. She supports, more like, you know, the wrong kind of charter schools. Yeah, that's the ticket. Do you support the wrong kind of charter schools? Of course not.

Because, you know, charters divert money that could go to public schools. That's why we sort of oppose them sometimes, except really we don't. In fact, the UFT Charter School (which is one of the good charter schools) is co-located in a public school building. But because it's, you know, a good charter school, well, you know, it's not a bad one, so it's, you know, OK. And we firmly oppose privatization of public schools except, you know, the good kind, like, when we do it.

So anyway here's the thing--Betsy DeVos supports vouchers, and vouchers are bad. Why? Well, they take money away from public schools, and that's bad. Except when it's done for good schools, you know, like the UFT charter, which is OK. So we need to, you know, get on our computers and do the whole social media thing and do a Thunderclap, whatever the hell that is.

Well, OK, when I say that we need to do it, what I actually mean is that you need to do it. You know, I'm the President and stuff, and I'm really busy. I have to, you know, go places and do stuff. And lots of the stuff I do is, you know, important. For example, I missed one of my own Executive Board meetings because I was out traveling around the country campaigning for Hillary. And it was vital that I did that because if I didn't, who knows, maybe Donald Trump would be President and we'd be facing an Education Secretary who supported privatization and charter schools. Not that that would be bad, you understand, if it were a good Education Secretary supporting privatization and charter schools, like, say, Arne Duncan.

Now you remember Arne Duncan, who did that Race to the Top thing. That's why we have this evaluation system. And this evaluation system is much better than the old one. I know, because I helped write the law that created it. Then I thanked the Heavy Hearts Assembly when they passed the new version, and now I've negotiated this new thing with the Matrix and a bunch of new stuff that doesn't exist yet. And who better than me to judge it, because I'm like, objective and stuff because it doesn't affect me at all. How cool is that?

But anyway, like, what I'm saying is, you know, you need to get on social media. Jeez, I use a flip phone and I don't even know what the hell social media is. All I know is that bloggers are purveyors of myth and while I don't read the blogs I know none of them are true, so, like, don't read them.

Oh crap there's another Executive Board meeting on Monday. I'm gonna have to take the elevator all the way down to the second floor and say some crap about something or other. Man I am sure glad to be the President so I don't have to sit through the whole meeting and, like, you know, vote on stuff or speak or listen to anyone. I hear those MORE/ New Action people want to do stuff like, you know, reduce class size and fight against abusive administrators. What a bunch of losers.

Anyway, like, get on social media and do the Thunderclap thing, and, like, say whatever we tell you to say because that's, you know, what activists do. Thanks for all you do, and please keep doing it, because I sure as hell don't want to have to do it myself.

NYC Schools Reduced to Begging for Air Conditioning

It's 2017, in case it's escaped your attention, and city schools are still not universally air-conditioned. My building is better than most, in that it's largely air conditioned, but as anyone who works in a city school can attest, things break, and they aren't always fixed instantly. Last year the AC in my classroom dropped dead sometime late spring, and I remember a particularly miserable day that I was observed. I didn't fare all that badly, but I'm absolutely certain the lesson would've gone badly if the kids and I were not so miserable in the heat.

And it's not really about being observed or not. NYC has made big noises about being putting, "Children First, Always." The fact is you don't do that by placing kids in miserable learning conditions. When I lived in a non-air conditioned apartment I remember retreating to the library to do work, simply because it had AC. In fact, when Chancellor Carmen Fariña wanted to rationalize keeping schools open during a massive snowstorm, she cited the fact that Macy's was open. Well, if we're gonna go by what Macy's does, it probably isn't working out that well, since they just closed 68 stores and fired 10,000 people. Aside from that, there's no way Macy's would open on a summer day without AC.

The principal of Fashion High School is now running a GoFundMe campaign to get air conditioners for his school. I have to applaud his efforts. He's really showing concern for not only the kids he represents, but also his staff. There's no way that kids can learn efficiently, or teachers can teach efficiently when it's 98 degrees in the classroom. There are only so many articles of clothing you can take off, roll up or loosen, and then you're pretty much stuck wishing you were anywhere but here. How you are "highly effective" under those conditions is a mystery to me.

But as laudable as the principal's efforts are, if I were Carmen Fariña, I'd be utterly humiliated. This principal's efforts are her failure. Fariña can talk until she's blue in the face about how much she cares about schoolchildren, but leaving something like this out there in the public eye is a huge embarrassment. It would be for me, anyway. I mean, it's very nice that she takes a group of seven or eight kids to a museum somewhere and discusses fine art with them. I'd be delighted to do that. Of course, it's not quite as easy for a lowly teacher like me to get away with a small group to a place like that. To portray that as typical in NYC is absurd.

More likely you're in some sweltering classroom with 34 kids, trying desperately to keep them alert and stay alert yourself. In fact, that's where I found myself this September, except I had 40 kids rather than 34. Our AC was replaced, in fact, and our class was reduced to contractual limits, but there are still 42 oversized classes in my school, at last count, and new kids are coming in each and every day.

It's nice that Fariña can bring a few kids to a museum. That's great for those kids. But in terms of big picture, NYC still has the largest class sizes in the state of New York, and they haven't been changed in fifty years. Also, just about everyplace is air-conditioned now except New York City schools. Principals ought not to have to take to funding campaigns for basic necessities, and if anyone at Tweed thinks this represents putting children first, second, or anyplace but last, they need to have their heads examined, and not by a DOE doctor either.

Thanks to Mike Schirtzer

Dialogue from a UFT Meeting

Me—Why can’t we have an evaluation system that isn’t nonsense?

UFT—Well, just because you think it’s nonsense doesn’t make it nonsense.

Me—It’s not only me, it’s also the American Statistical Association and Diane Ravitch.

UFT—Well, Diane Ravitch isn’t God.

Me—Then why do I have her statue on the dashboard of my car?

Being Observed in NYC

Last night I went to a chapter leader training about the new evaluation system. I heard a few things. One is that the new portfolio and student achievement stuff doesn't actually exist yet. I'm not sure how I missed that. So not only does that stuff sound odd and potentially time-consuming, but no one actually knows what it is yet. Will it help teachers or students? It's hard to say, but I doubt it. When you make up a program out of whole cloth, when you haven't got any studies or research to support it, when you then enact it and hope for the best, it's hard to vouch for its validity.

Another is that MOTP reform is supposedly coming later. So maybe we won't have to worry quite as much about random drive-bys. I saw no indication that this was a UFT goal, but teachers would like to see fewer, and so would administrators. There are a whole lot of them who are overwhelmed by the demands of these observations. A single department in my school has 54 members. Can you imagine doing 200 observations and writing up reports? I guess you could do it, and I guess you could meet 200 times with teachers. I guess you could also do the rest of your job too. How well? Who knows?

If UFT leadership wants to improve this system (and who knows what they want, what with a President who doesn't answer email or attend his own meetings), they will meet the law's requirement of 2 observations per year. They will arrange for additional observations on an as-needed basis. A principal, not mine, told me that she could observe someone once a year, and if there were no issue, she could leave it at that. If they needed additional help, she could do more observations and work with the teacher in question. This was someone I respect, and I always remembered that.

Thought the MOTP reforms are supposed to come later, at least one of them is already here. Though presented as some kind of improvement, the four informals option now included two visits from colleagues. I'm not bothered by that. But I'm one person, and I'm not as sensitive as some of my colleagues. Teachers are beaten down and demoralized and terrified. This has been happening over time, and the new evaluation system hasn't helped. UFT reps can stand and talk about what an improvement this new system is, but that shows how out of touch they are. I don't know a single teacher who likes it better. I hate getting a checklist, and if it says I'm effective I don't much care what else it says.

This is not the only reason that UFT leadership is out of touch with how working teachers feel about this. You can't overstate the fact that no one in leadership has actually been subject to this system. No one. No one knows how it feels. And all their feedback comes from those in the Unity echo chamber. Since they've all signed loyalty oaths, their judgment is suspect. How can you trust someone to represent you if that person has signed an oath to support Michael Mulgrew in all things? How can you trust people who've agreed to speak one way even if it negates your personal experience? How can you trust people who've taken patronage jobs that depend on loyalty to leadership? Shouldn't someone who represents members be loyal to them first?

The first time we got an evaluation system we went to 52 Broadway to vote on it. That was kind of a pro forma exercise, as UFT DA is dominated by loyalty oath signers, and it was very clear how they were supposed to vote. When that didn't work out, Michael Mulgrew left it in the hands of Reformy John King. Evidently Mulgrew thought the reformiest man in New York was a fair arbiter. Chalkbeat reported that neither UFT nor DOE wanted so many observations, but John King knew better.

The system was revised two more times. UFT sent their band of negotiators, none of whom had lived under this system, because they know best what's good for us. Always. They didn't bother putting it up for a vote, because why bother? Democracy is for losers, and America should know that, having cast 2.9 million more votes for Hillary Clinton than President-elect Donald Trump.

My mind keeps running to Friedrichs two, and what will happen when dues are optional. If leadership wishes to help itself, it's gonna have to be responsive to us, to say the least. I'm not sure a dynasty can change its spots. But I'm always hopeful.

I Don't Do This for My Health

We live in a funny place, but not many of us can afford to laugh. I may have had a disparaging word for the steep rise in co-pays we've faced this year, but relatively, they're not nearly as bad as they could be. I have to now think twice before spending 50 bucks at an urgent care, but usually when you or a family member need a place like that, 50 bucks is the last thing on your mind. The real issues are the fact that Mulgrew never presented this to us when selling the contract, and we have no idea how many more add-on costs will pop up these next few years.

We're the only wealthy nation that doesn't guarantee health care for its citizens. As if that isn't bad enough, the new GOP leadership is getting ready to roll back the few improvements Obamacare achieved. I've read a lot of complaints about it. There are high deductibles, for example, and high premiums. Nonetheless, there may be fewer bankruptcies over catastrophic medical emergency, and fewer homes being sold to pay crippling hospital bills. I learned that this was a thing decades ago, and it's remarkable that we've allowed it to continue.

When I was in college at SUNY New Paltz, I played weekends in a band. Most of our work was in Queens. I would hitchhike or take buses and trains on weekends, go to work, and come back. One of my band members was in Queens too. We would stay at his house sometimes. His mom had some issue, and lost first her leg and then her life as a result.

My friend's dad had to sell his house to pay doctor bills. He moved into the basement of the home of one of his sons. One Christmas he took a gun and blew his brains out. That was the first time I started to think our health system, to say the very least, was not all that good. In fact, it began to look unconscionable at that point, and time hasn't done much of anything to change my mind. While Obamacare was far from ideal, it was the first and only improvement on a system designed to enrich insurance companies rather than help working Americans.

The first time I got health insurance myself was when I became a teacher. I think at that time you had to wait six months before you took out insurance. Either that or no one told me I was eligible. In any case, I was at John F. Kennedy High School, and I asked my chapter leader what insurance I should get. He didn't want to tell me, saying he couldn't be responsible and this and that. I pressed him, though, and he told me to get GHI with CBP. I did, and I still have it.

Before I got this chapter leader job, I spent a lot of time playing music when I wasn't at school. To ensure I would never make any money at all doing this, I chose to play bluegrass fiddle. Another really cool thing about doing this is that almost no one in this area even wants to hear it, so I'd travel a lot to New Jersey and Pennsylvania. One Sunday I had a job playing in a historic theater in Pennsylvania. We were opening for the late James King and his band.

The folks who hired us sent us out to lunch down the block from the theater. I remember that I sat with his banjo player. He was the only person in his band who appeared to be in good physical shape. I'd brought my family, and I remember that the banjo player and I both ordered Reuben sandwiches.

Later in the week I got a call. The banjo player experienced chest pains on Monday. Knowing that a visit to the ER would've run him thousands of dollars, a number of dollars that not a whole lot of bluegrass musicians have, he decided to tough it out. The next day he died.

How could this happen? If he lived in Canada, in Europe, in any other wealthy country in the world he'd almost certainly be around today. But he isn't. Back when I was heavily into this bluegrass thing, I'd often hear news about a benefit somewhere for some professional musician or other. These were not weekend warriors like me, but rather folks who were out on the road doing this all the time. How could our country not support artists? In fact, how could we not support everyone?

Obamacare made some improvements. No one gets excluded for existing medical conditions. Kids were covered under parent plans until 26. It did away with plans that didn't meet a minimum standard. It helped some people who needed financial assistance. But it still relied on private insurance companies focused on profit rather than people. And the GOP refused to work toward improving it, focusing rather on killing it and moving us back toward the nothing we had earlier.

Now they pull all the levers of power and their plan appears to be to kill it and tell us all to sink or swim. While anyone with the option will choose the latter, not all will be able to afford it. As if that weren't enough, they want to roll back Social Security and Medicare. Me, I can't believe anyone would vote for these people. I can't believe they persuade anyone with a job they have their interests at heart. But Fox News is a thing, people watch it, and they believe what they say. Some people don't need no stinking facts and won't be swayed by them either.

What we really need is single-payer, which seems to work better than our system everywhere it's used.  Most Americans agree. So how can we allow Donald Trump, Paul Ryan, and all their flying monkeys actively work against our interests?

More importantly, what can we do now to advance the agenda we actually prefer?

Will Stronger Together Caucus Buy Into Fatal Timidity of the UFT, NYSUT and AFT?

After a bruising loss in a presidential campaign, United Federation of Teachers leadership has redoubled its quest to learn nothing whatsoever. It wasn't enough that we went all out for a presidential candidate who stood up for half-hearted, warmed-up pablum rather than real solutions for America. We needed to continue our march toward mediocrity because that's our prime directive.

As such, even after a loathsome reptile manipulated his way into the Presidency of the United States, even after he swore to cripple our power via the Supreme Court, even after he enabled and emboldened vile bigotry, racism and homophobia all around the country, we remained too timid to even utter his name.

Leadership knows best, after all. They understand about manipulated elections and suppression of democracy because that is their stock in trade. When high school teachers get uppity and elect officers of whom they disapprove, they change the rules so they can't do that anymore. When chapter leaders dare to elect the District Reps they wish to support them from opposition, they simply change the rules and hand pick them. That's how you maintain power by any means necessary without regard for democracy.

And now there are stirrings in NYSUT. After UFT and NY State Unity leadership led a coup to overthrow a sitting President who objected to financial support of Andrew Cuomo, there are still hundreds of locals who feel disenfranchised. There is a lot of anger, rightfully so, that NYSUT has now become just another arm of the UFT, and doesn't even bother to pretend otherwise. Thus, there is for the first time ever, an opposition caucus in NYSUT called Stronger Together. Stronger Together is largely the brainchild of firebrand Beth Dimino, the outspoken President of the Port Jefferson Station Teacher Union. Alas, Dimino is stepping down and while there are some very capable people remaining, it's an open question whether there is anyone remaining who can rival her vision and passion.

There is, of course, a potential NYSUT solution for all those pissed off locals. They could run a few members of the opposition on the Unity ticket. This would not only preclude a contentious campaign, but also perhaps mute the vocal opposition. It might even give NYSUT locals the impression that it is no longer being run by the machine that shoved Hillary Clinton down the throats of rank and file with little to no member input. The new members could voice opposition within NYSUT, and perhaps the machine would be forced to pay lip service to member concerns. But it's hard to believe that they will accomplish anything substantive. In fact, it's hard to believe the machine would do even that, obsessed as it is with perpetuating itself via absolute control.

Remember this? This is the campaign pamphlet that Revive NYSUT passed out at the convention in which they overthrew mean old Dick Iannuzzi, who'd finally objected to Pallotta buying tables at Cuomo fund raisers. Despite ostensible opposition, President Karen Magee pretty much said it was Common Core or anarchy. NYSUT never opposed Cuomo, and never opposed APPR. In fact, the only legislative accomplishment they can boast of is making sure that leadership got double pensions.

There really are good people, smart people, in Stronger Together. I'd feel better with them in leadership than the current UFT pawns. But the fact is, even if they make any such deal, I'm absolutely certain it would be contingent on said pawns staying in place. When one of them is replaced, it will be by a sitting UFT official. That deal is already in place and UFT leadership can't even be bothered keeping it secret.

As bad as UFT leadership is, a strong bastion of principled resistance to the counter-productive and anti-democratic machinations of the dual Unity Caucuses is still right here in Fun City. I am very proud to be part of it. It's nice that Revive NYSUT can campaign on transparency, but the heart of NYSUT still lies at 52 Broadway, and they are nothing if not secretive and manipulative. We're still waiting, for example, to learn when it will be okay to mention Donald Trump's name, as opposed to disingenuously attributing the explosion in racism and bigotry to "The Presidential Election."

I certainly hope that Stronger Together succeeds in reforming the union. The rationale is that we are facing a really tough time, and that the only way we can face it is by presenting a united front. Here in NYC, we've heard that song before, specifically from the New Action Caucus. New Action made a deal with UFT Unity in the Bloomberg era, citing the threat that Bloomberg faced to our very existence. But New Action learned that didn't really work for them. Last year they decided to join the MORE Caucus and we took the important first step of winning the high school seats on the UFT Executive Board. Though we are massively outvoted by the Unity machine at Executive Board, we've shown that leadership is unwilling to take firm stands against things like class size violations and abusive administrators. When members see proof of what leadership does and does not stand for, high schools will no longer be alone in opposing ridiculous "seat at the table" politics.

MORE is affiliated with Stronger Together, and has been for a few years now. We ran in opposition to the machine, and I was proud to run a David and Goliath campaign against Executive VP Andrew Pallotta. I don't speak for MORE and I don't make decisions for it. But as a New York City high school teacher, I certainly pay dues to NYSUT, and I can't help but notice that there are exactly zero people elected by UFT high school teachers who have a voice in its decisions.

You could argue that NYSUT has UFT representation, and that's certainly true. But the fact is, in the last UFT election high school teachers decided to go another way. And before you dismiss us as a bunch of cranks, the fact is we have more members than the Philadelphia Teacher Union, not to mention the overwhelming number of NYSUT locals. In fact, my school alone has more members than some NYSUT locals.

Again, I'm not speaking for MORE, or ICE, or any UFT-affiliated caucus or teacher organization. But I can't and won't support any movement that doesn't provide a voice and vote for the high schools I represent. I'd be very surprised if MORE took a position contrary to that. If Stronger Together chooses to go ahead and ignore or even tacitly endorse our disenfranchisement, it's no better than the machine it purports to oppose.

And if UFT, or AFT, or NYSUT thinks that backroom deals will protect it from Friedrichs Mach 2, it's laboring under a serious misconception. We need representation, not rationalization. We've had the latter for decades, and it's gotten us precisely where we are today. 

US Presidential Election--Coincidence or Coup?

What do you call it when voting rights are under assault, and those affected are largely those who'd be pivotal in a national election? Does anyone really believe that we're having a crisis because people don't show photo ID when we vote? I know a guy who watches Fox News who told me that. Now me, I believe that it's blatant manipulation to favor the Republican Party, which is squarely the worse of two less than perfect choices in the United States. Clearly this is manipulation, and clearly it may have turned the tide in this presidential election.

Then, of course, you read all this stuff about Russia and Putin. You see candidate Donald Trump ask the Russians to leak crap about Hillary to Wikileaks, or wherever. Some are now saying this is a big smokescreen and the Dems are just using all this Russia talk to deflect blame for their miserable failure to defeat one of the least popular presidential candidates in history. So perhaps it's not true, and the FBI and CIA are incorrect that Russia had something to do with this election. I don't really know. But the whole thing stinks regardless.

And hey, let's talk about those wacky funsters at the FBI. What is the deal with James Comey coming out with Hillary email stories during the election? Have you ever heard of federal agencies talking investigation of candidates for presidential office during the campaign? First they decide there's nothing to it, and then they come out again and find some stuff on Anthony Weiner's computer or something, issuing grave warnings in the campaign's final days and then drawing them back. With the whisper-thin victories in swing states, it's hard to imagine that this had no effect. It's also hard to imagine that Comey had no idea how important his statements might be. In this case, it's absolutely conceivable that he turned the election. 

Then there's the media, with its odd coverage. Ronald Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine, enabling crap like Fox News and consistently biased coverage. Bernie Sanders was a loser and not worth covering. Then Bernie started to win and he was still a loser and not worth covering. At no point, evidently, did he have any chance of catching up with Hillary. And that, perhaps, was a self-fulfilling prophecy. To see this man, this man who said all Americans should have health care, who said all Americans should have a living wage, who said all Americans should have access to college education, portrayed as a wild-eyed lunatic was truly outrageous.

And then there's the press now, with its odd coverage of Donald J. Trump. The Wall St. Journal is evidently refraining from calling Trump lies "lies." That's beyond the pale, evidently. We need to respect things like Trump University, because that, for all I know, is where Wall St. Journal editors studied journalism. Of course they didn't cover the voting rights rollback, nor did many media outlets. For that, you'd have to go to The Nation or some equally weirdo site. And who knows who reads stuff like that? Probably loonies like Bernie Sanders and me, with crackpot ideas about taking care of Americans even after they are born. Trump lies outright, and maybe WSJ will get access for not reporting it. Media outlets are nonetheless nervous, with some seeing this man as more or less pathological, and expect a rocky road ahead. They need to get real and tell us the truth, or they're useless.

Then of course, it bears mention that we don't even have a democracy. With 42% of the vote, GOP controls the Senate. And then there's this insane and ludicrous system called the Electoral College that exists for no defensible reason. Donald Trump actually lost by almost 3 million votes and yet he's headed for the White House. But you add all this stuff up and it really looks like a coup. Let's try to be fair. We didn't see anyone storm any palaces. There haven't been any beheadings. But there was a long-term goal, a bunch of people worked toward it, and we now have a juvenile lunatic set to become President of the United States, perhaps something even those who manipulated the system so cynically did not anticipate.

Can it be called a coup if no shots were fired, and rules were bent and manipulated and perhaps not outright broken? I don't know. Sixteen years ago we had an equally odd situation, with Bush losing the popular vote, wacky antics in little brother's state (which is still disenfranchising enough people to turn a Presidential election), and Daddy's Supreme Court making the final decision. So maybe there's precedent. But here's what I know for sure--it stinks to high heaven. This isn't the United States they taught me about back in grade school. It more closely resembles the banana republic from Woody Allen's Bananas, which may one day prove as prescient as Orwell's 1984.

But it's very much beginning to resemble that too. 

Right to Citizenship

Here we are in 2017, and I sincerely wish you all a joyous new year. My hopes for the new year are a little muted, professionally at least. For one thing, my union is still run by an insular group of people with astoundingly poor judgment, and no amount of egregious errors will persuade them they've ever made even the tiniest of mistakes. There are a lot of people who will cheer their actions no matter what their implications, and most of them are on the payroll one way or another.

I go to meetings and watch certain people roll their eyes as we speak, but I am nonetheless a staunch supporter of union. Leadership can roll their eyes when we speak, and invent ridiculous excuses for their lack of commitment, but those of us in opposition understand the value of union. That's why we see "right to work" as such a scam. And make no mistake, those who opt out of paying for union services hurt all of us.

The idea of right to work is that no one should be forced to join a union. That idea is absurd because no one is ever forced to join a union. They can opt out, but if they do they still have to pay a fee for services union provides for all. Those services include negotiating on our behalf. Now I will admit that I don't think UFT leadership does a very good job at this. But on the other hand, they keep getting elected and it is not entirely their fault that three out of four UFT members can't be bothered to check a box and walk to a mailbox to vote.

Of course it's your right and mine to disagree with leadership. You may have even seen me doing so once or twice on this space. Nonetheless, union is our right, organizing is our right, and going hat in hand to ask Mike Bloomberg or Rudy Giuliani for a raise is not anything I'd want to do alone. Right to work supporters disagree. They think they should reap whatever benefit there is from union membership and that payment for such benefits ought to be optional.

If that is what's right, that is what's right. In fact, incoming President Donald J. Trump supports "right to work" as well, and he plans to appoint Supreme Court justices who will make it national policy. Now perhaps you believe that is a good thing. Perhaps you believe that Donald J. Trump is looking out for working people when he does stuff like this. If you believe that, I congratulate you, because you are surely in a better state of mind to begin 2017 than I am.

Of course, based on that line of thought, as someone who supports Donald J. Trump not at all, I ought to be able to opt out of paying taxes. It is really inconvenient to see all those deductions on my paycheck. Since I don't support "right to work," since I don't support any Trump position I can call to mind, and since I don't expect him to represent me or anyone I care about, I ought to be able to opt out of federal taxes. After all, Trump seems not to have payed them. The problem is, though, that he still seems to think I should pay. That's unfair, of course.

But aside from the fact that he has one set of rules for himself and another for working people, if I can't be compelled to pay union dues, I ought not to be compelled to pay taxes either. If there is no responsibility attached to being part of one community, why should there be any attached to another? If I can rightfully expect the United Federation of Teachers to work on my behalf with compensation being optional, why can't I expect the same of the United States of America?

The answer, of course, is that people like Donald J. Trump don't want us to organize against ideas that hurt us. They do want us, however, to be compelled to support the very same government that fights against our interests and impedes our right to organize. If you support "right to work," you may as well support more work for less pay. I don't support that, and I therefore don't support the legislative priorities of Donald J. Trump.

But he's out to weaken us and our unions, and there's no way he's gonna let us off the hook for supporting such counterproductive priorities. Because he and his BFFs are so incredibly greedy and selfish, they don't even understand that hurting and discouraging a middle class is not healthy for this country. As long as he doesn't have to pay taxes, he couldn't care less about those of us who do.

If you believe that weakening union via disingenuous policies like "right to work" are the way to go, and you think paying taxes is different in any way whatsoever, you're laboring under a serious misconception. When Donald J. Trump makes federal taxes optional for all of us, instead of just billionaires like himself, then I'll be happy to listen to him extol the virtues of optional union membership.

Until that moment, you know as well as I do that he's moving us back to the 19th century and that we're gonna have to repeat struggles we thought were over for decades just to get back where we were last November.