UFT leadership, or perhaps AAA at their behest, hasn't released the slate results for our election. This is odd because they usually come out as a matter of course. You need not be a genius to conjecture why this is. Along with six of my colleagues, I won a seat on the UFT Executive Board. The only reason that happened was because these seats were voted on by high school teachers, and high school teachers only. And this happens to be an uncharacteristic sign of life and joy in the otherwise monolithic and predictable UFT leadership.

But the HS Vice President position is "at large." This means that elementary teachers, middle school teachers, and pretty much everyone else who votes in the UFT election helps us choose who our Vice President is. It's quite clear to me that, if the slate results were released, they would show that high school teachers chose James Eterno to be VP. (Correction--I'm now told slate results are released, though not by division.)

So why didn't that happen? Well, I think it was 1985 that New Action's Mike Shulman won the post of Academic High School Vice President. As a brand new teacher, I saw him as the underdog, voted for him out of sheer instinct, and he won. This was quite upsetting to UFT Unity, which fought the result. For a year, Shulman was not permitted to take his seat. After another election, and a year with no VP, the high schools elected Shulman again.

UFT Unity then determined that the high schools had no right to choose their own VP, since they might choose someone like James Eterno (and of course they were right, because we just did).  Imagine if someone like GW Bush decided that New York should no longer elect its own governor, because they might vote too liberal. Imagine he therefore granted votes to Oklahoma and Texas to balance it out.

There would be outrage. It would be an affront to democracy. But that is precisely what UFT Unity did.

 I didn't even know about it until years later. On the one occasion where I spent 45 minutes splitting my vote, I wrote "NA" on the part where I was asked to vote on Elementary and Middle School VP. And few teachers, even now, are aware that VPs are elected "at large," or why that is. Three out of four of us, in fact, still couldn't even be bothered to walk to a mailbox with a ballot.

Furthermore, though the high schools chose us to represent them, we still have no vote in NYSUT or AFT. This is outrageous. We pay dues to both organizations, have no voice whatsoever, and this is nothing less than taxation without representation. And though the high schools chose MORE/ New Action, the high school VP is Unity. (To be clear, this is not a personal attack on the High School VP, but rather on a system that denies us the right to choose our own representative by ourselves.)

We will work to make the UFT an organization that gives voice to working teachers rather than entrenched leadership. That's democracy 101, and we believe it applies to UFT members too.

I'm kind of on pins and needles wondering what's going on in the UFT election. Voting is up, and UFT Unity is patting itself on the back for getting out the vote. After all, everything they do is a great victory. Three years ago, 4 out of 5 working teachers didn't bother filling out ballots. This year, only 3 out of 4 working teachers didn't bother filling out ballots.

The question is who actually got out the vote. Was it Unity or was it MORE/ New Action? We will know later in the day. I know I did everything I could think of in my building, and I know we got a much higher turnout here than three years ago.

But Unity has the edge in that a whole lot of their members don't have to, you know, show up and work anywhere. I can't really just say, "Hey, Mr. Principal, can I not teach today so I can run around and explain that the UFT is ruled by a 50-year-old monolithic caucus that allows for no dissent whatsoever?"

Well, I can ask that, but I wouldn't be highly optimistic about a favorable response.

Because there is quite a lot here that hangs in the balance. To wit:

Have we woken up and realized that our leadership aids and abets the reformies on a regular basis? Do we know that they supported mayoral control for Michael Bloomberg? Do we know that, upon its renewal, UFT Unity demanded minor changes, failed to get them, and then supported it anyway? Do we know that Michael Mulgrew boasted of co-writing the law that enabled the punitive evaluation system that makes life a misery for so many of our working members?

Do we know that most chapter leaders sign a loyalty oath to support whatever they're told to? Do we know that the last contract enabled second tier due process for ATR teachers? Do we know that, on top of the 4/4 that most city employees got, Michael Mulgrew negotiated a 10% raise over seven years, the lowest pattern in my living memory, and probably ever? Do we understand that putting off our back pay for ten years effectively reduces it considerably? Do we understand that a reformy mayor might renege after 2018?

Do we understand that the health care increases we've seen were not explained by Mulgrew when he sold the contract? Do we know that these are by no means the only ones we can see under the savings agreement Mulgrew bound us to in this contract? Do we understand that Mulgrew's tale that we'd have to get behind 150 other unions if we didn't take this offer was an appeal to fear, a logical fallacy? Do we know that logical fallacy is the Unity Caucus' prime and preferred form of argument?

Or were we bought over by the happy faces of loyalty oath signers who don't have to show up to schools and teach each and every day? Are we so afraid that we're unwilling to stand up and say we've had enough?

Are we unionists, or are we residents of yet another Animal Farm bought off by empty and ridiculous promises?

Or did we actually wake up, take a good look, compare Michael Mulgrew to Jia Lee and decide, hey, it's time to turn the page and stand up for ourselves? And even if Jia doesn't win, did we get ourselves seats in the Executive Board and finally create a genuine union voice for those of us who actually experience what it's like here on the ground?

We'll know the answer later today. Stay tuned.

Lohud reports there are 13,000 fewer teachers in NY State than there were five years ago.  I know there are thousands fewer teachers in NYC alone, though I can't say offhand just how much of that figure it represents. We know that in NYC, Emperor Bloomberg had a habit of allowing teacher ranks to drop through attrition. Retiring? Fine. One more person I don't have to pay, figured Emperor Mike, and screw the inevitable larger class sizes they'd cause.

For the rest of the state, there is the Gap Elimination Adjustment, which Cuomo now proposes to end, but which has still cut state aid for drastically for many districts since 2009. Couple that with the Cuomo's tax cap of 2% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower (a measly .12% this year, if I recall correctly), and districts all over the state are strung out for cash. Cuomo, who fancies himself a "student lobbyist" has set it up so districts need a super-majority to aid their children. This, in fact, gives more power to those who'd deny students than those who'd support them, let alone "lobby" for them.

Cuomo gives lip service to moves he's made toward a less insane system, like his so-called moratorium on Common Core testing. This is much ballyhooed not only by Cuomo, but also by UFT leadership, which placed it on the cover of the most recent copy of NY Teacher. In fact, this affects only the scores on state ELA and math tests in grades 3-8, so for most of us, it's meaningless. In fact, it's not even clear whether these scores are entirely not going to be counted in future years.

With all teachers about to be rated 50% via test scores, an entirely invalid measure, it's getting harder to encourage newcomers to go for this job. We now know that we are to be observed by "independent" observers, since of course school supervisors may be prejudiced in favor of the people with whom they work. What an outrage. This follows, of course, the state's brilliant move not to allow teachers to grade their own students. After all, we're just a bunch of thieving, unscrupulous, self-serving bottom feeders who will do anything to look good. We'll never be paragons of integrity like Andrew Cuomo.

We're looking at an insane law, a law for which UFT President Michael Mulgrew thanked our Heavy Hearted Legislature, and a law which neither UFT nor NYSUT appears poised to reform. Mulgrew told us that he'd decided to focus on funding rather than reasonable evaluation. Doubtless, as he always says, he has very smart people with very smart reasons why we should not fight the increase in junk science evaluation for working teachers.

So while UFT declares victory on the cover of NY Teacher, we're looking at yet another evaluation system. This is becoming an annual event in NYC. Once you get a little bit used to the nonsense used to rate you, Cuomo decides not enough of us are being fired and makes up some new and more draconian BS for the teacher-hating charter school enthusiasts who give him so much money. To try and appease the opt-out people who frighten the crap out of him, he proposes a few changes, including the "moratorium" and nebulous promises to adjust Common Core.

UFT leadership declares victory, as it always does no matter what, and opt-out promises to keep up the fight. Again, we are on the wrong side doing the wrong thing, just as we were when Mulgrew promised to punch our faces out if we touched his precious Common Core. Of course, now it's a victory that Cuomo is doing just that, and he spend $1.4 million on a commercial telling NY State what a great guy we thing Cuomo is.

It's hard for me to believe these words as I write them, but that's pretty much the way it is. It's time for our union to get on the right side of history, whether Michael Mulgrew likes it or not. Fortunately, there are teacher groups who notice this and are urging leadership toward sanity.

It makes me kind of wish the UFT election were not rigged, so that it weren't dominated by retirees, so that high school teachers could select their own VP, and so that the winner take all system didn't mean absolutely every delegate to NYSUT and AFT were a loyalty oath signer bound do do Any Damn Thing Leroy Barr Says.

But I'm a dreamer. I'm a teacher and it's my job to see potential and act on it.

That's the song I'm hearing now from Unity members. We are, in fact, facing a dire threat. The Friedrichs suit can result in the decimation, if not the destruction, of public sector unions nationwide. I strenuously oppose this, as do most people of my acquaintance. If possible, I will certainly work with union leadership to prevent this.

But with the premature Hillary nomination, a lot of us have a lot to say about the less-than-democratic nature of union elections. Bernie Sanders speaks to us. He stands up for working people, and does not take money from corporations who suppress and silence us. He hits almost every bell, for me at least. I've donated to his campaign, and will do what I can for him. And I will not be silent on AFT, an organization to which I pay dues but have no vote.

The line I'm getting, as usual, is sit down and shut up. And that, frankly, is par for the course. You're opposing us, and the real enemy is Giuliani. You're opposing us, and the real enemy is Bloomberg. You're opposing us, and the real enemy is Cuomo. You're opposing us, and the real enemy is the Supreme Court.

There is, evidently, never a good time to oppose leadership. And there are mechanisms in place to ensure very few voices creep into heavily rigged processes and elections. On the ground, of course, there are hundreds of chapter leaders, most of whom have signed loyalty oaths to UFT Unity. Though their jobs ostensibly entail representing membership, they vote as they are told by leadership. For this, they are given duespayer-funded trips to NYSUT and AFT conventions. This ensures that 100% of UFT votes in NYSUT and AFT are controlled by leadership.

If you don't support Common Core, for example, not only do you get no representation in NYSUT or AFT, but also the UFT President wants to punch your face and push it in the dirt.

This is insidious. It goes further, as officer positions are at large, so that not only elementary school teachers, but also retirees help high school teachers select a VP. And like the Hillary nomination in which we had no choice and no voice, this is reflective of an absolute disregard for democracy. It's a fundamental problem, and it's no coincidence that over 80% of working teachers fail to find voting in union elections worth their time.

In fact, it is time to unite. It is time to unite against the Supreme Court decimating public sector union. I will help. I always support leadership when they're right. I oppose them when they fail to oppose Cuomo, say, at election time. It's disingenuous for them to say otherwise, and waiting until he was actually attacking us to speak up was a miscalculation by any standard. One of many, actually.

Who remembers the parade of candidates UFT endorsed, leading up to Bloomberg's first term in office? Who remembers their failure to oppose him, particularly when Thompson came within five points of preventing his third term, the one voters had twice affirmed no one should have? Who remembers their endorsement of Thompson four years too late, and after he told the Daily News editorial board NYC couldn't afford to give teachers the raise most other city unions got?

I am persona non grata in UFT, but that didn't stop them from calling me at least three times to make calls for Thompson. Given his history, and given de Blasio was surging at the time, it was pretty easy to refuse repeatedly.

Leadership is absolutely correct to fight for union, and I certainly hope they come up with a plan better than, say, a Twitter campaign in which they do not participate. 

But it's preposterous for them to tell us to shut up and sit down, that this is not the time to express ourselves. Randi Weingarten is not the union. Michael Mulgrew is not the union. We are the union, and if we don't like it when they shut us out, we need to let them know loudly, insistently, now and forever.

If you don't believe me, just look around at where all this sitting down and shutting up has gotten us.

 BREAKING--AFT poll turns out to actually be one of those famous 10-foot poles we've all heard so much about. We will keep you updated here at NYC Educator.

Update: AFT link states polling entailed telephone Town Halls and a web survey, a survey I never knew about or saw. They also mention surveys about which no detail whatsoever is provided. They then mention a "scientific poll" but give no evidence to support that. 

@DebraFedyna @rweingarten @AFTunion We polled over 1million members. http://t.co/lME6FH9bDD

— David Quolke (@CTU279) July 11, 2015

How on God's green earth did the AFT survey one million of its 1.6 million members and I don't know a single one who was asked a question?

@TeacherArthurG I think what they meant was that they polled Leo Casey 1,000,000 times

— brian s (@Sashammy) July 12, 2015

For anyone who hasn't heard it yet, the American Federation of Teachers has just endorsed Hillary Clinton for President. Randi Weingarten is tweeting about how they polled members and they prefer her a zillion to one (approximately). Did they ask you? No? Well, they didn't ask me either.

There's a lot of talk on Facebook about how Randi is expecting to be Secretary of Education. Personally, I doubt that will happen. Hillary seems awfully pragmatic to me, and will likely "triangulate," or whatever it is they call it when you don't actually take a position on issues. There is no way Hillary is going to make a national teacher union leader Secretary of Education, and she'd stab Randi in the back in a New York minute. That, IMHO, is as predictable as the AFT endorsement.

It's a great honor to pay dues to the AFT, of course, but it would really be kind of nice if we lowly teachers had a vote, or were asked our opinions in some meaningful way. Instead, the AFT is dominated by NYSUT, NYSUT is dominated by the UFT, and each and every representative of UFT in either body has signed an oath promising to support leadership. Despite this, Punchy Mike Mulgrew has no reservations whatsoever telling people who disagree with heavily orchestrated union endorsements that they don't believe in democracy.

A lot of people are shocked by this endorsement, but it was entirely predictable. Expect to hear it rationalized by things like, "Hillary said this," or, "Hillary said that." This, in fact, was how Obama's second term was rationalized by union leaders. Obama just said he opposed too much testing. Obama just said the world would be better if people were nicer. Or whatever.

Don't believe a word. Obama said when labor was in trouble, he'd find a pair of comfortable shoes and stand with us. Where the hell was Obama when Scott Walker decimated union in Wisconsin? What did he do during the recall vote? Was he looking for those shoes? And why didn't he get union card check as he promised,  one of the primary things he fooled me with the first time he ran?

When they say, "Hillary DID this," or, "Hillary DID that," we'll have something to discuss. What we know now is what Randi Weingarten DID. She endorsed a candidate without asking those of us who pay dues whether or not we thought it was a good idea.

We can do better.

Nothing like lack of transparency, being bullshitted & feeling like "fix was in" to energize the rank and file. https://t.co/utpksO93h5

— Sarah Littman (@realsaramerica) July 12, 2015

I was thinking of writing about this, but I'm gonna defer to a comment UFT Chapter Leader Mary Ahern left in response to James Eterno last night. You may or may not know that, when UFT leadership was confronted with a demand for a functional ATR chapter, they claimed it wasn't necessary. After all, ATR is temporary, having only been around for ten years. And UFT has been proactive, negotiating great benefits like second-tier due process and the ability to be fired for missing two interviews. And those zany madcap folks at Tweed are pretty good about sending interview commands out at the last minute. Eterno made one by the skin of his teeth. Here's Mary:

My nephew found out I had never read 1984, and gave it to me for my birthday. I started to read it just this week. I had it with me at Wednesday night's UFT Delegate Assembly, and finished it the next morning. I am simply gobstruck by the parallels in our union structure and Orwell's dystopian vision.


That resonates on many levels. First of all, look at the masses of us who don't even vote in union elections, over 80% in fact. Most of us have no voice in the union at all, and don't even think it's worth the time to write an X on a ballot. Those of us who do know how rigged the winner-take-all election is, how so many positions are "at large," and how high school teachers, in particular, have been prevented from selecting their own VP, simply because they once dared to choose one that wasn't Unity.

Then there is the rewriting of history, which takes place on a regular basis. Just the other night at the DA, Mulgrew was saying the new Cuomo APPR was better than the current system because "student achievement," AKA junk science, can trump principal judgment. Oddly, I heard the same thing at a citywide HS CL meeting, from a DR who was indignant that I dared question VAM. Conversely, Mulgrew says principal judgment can trump test scores, but forgets to mention that outside observers will now be a factor.

The rewriting of history is regular and predictable at the DA. I remember the UFT transfer plan, which got me out of a school in which I was punished for not throwing kids out of class. Mulgrew says Open Market is better because more transfers occur, but clearly doesn't consult with ATR teachers, for whom he's procured second tier due process and the right to be fired for missing two interviews.

Year one of APPR, the one where John King designed it for us, we won a great victory by getting all 22 components of Danielson. Bloomberg wanted only 7 but we held firm. Year two we won another great victory by winning 8. Whatever they do is a victory, and every year the new system is wonderful. Even next year's atrocity is a great victory.

Of course, Mulgrew is not a teacher and has not been one for years. He doesn't know the anxiety that faces those of us who actually do the work. He can stand there and say only this many people got poor ratings, but he doesn't actually have to face the people looking at job loss.

We are the proles, the proletariat. We are not members of the party, and have no access to the perks and privileges they have. At the lowest level, it means they ostensibly represent us in NYSUT and AFT. They do this, of course, by voting precisely as told and sign an oath to do exactly that. Anyone violating party rules is expelled, and has been ever since its inception, when Shanker bounced people for opposing the Vietnam War.

Some in the party get extra privileges, like jobs doing this or that, and then there is the mysterious Inner Party, where the actual decisions are made. Who actually makes the decisions in the party? Who knows? Mulgrew? Has he got the imagination to do that? And if he's so smart, why is he constantly telling the DA how smart his decisions are? Is it Weingarten? Honestly I have no idea. I just know that most of us have no voice whatsoever, and that's precisely why there is so much cynicism and apathy in the ranks.

There's no actual torture, but all the NYSUT delegates had sandwiches and things from their NYSUT meeting taking place at some other part of the building not open to us unconnected chapter leaders. I suppose that might be an incentive for some to join the Party. I once had a Unity chapter leader to whom sandwiches were very important. Me, I just got creeped out and ran to Chipotle's down the block.

They don't have actual Thought Police watching us proles who haven't signed the oath, and their arguments can't weather a whole lot of public scrutiny. Still, they've got their 80% of disconnected, disinterested teachers and their power looks assured no matter how we suffer at the bottom.

Related: Mr. A. Talk also finds the antics of Unity Orwellian.

I know I can't make resolutions for UFT-Unity.  But I do wonder if Unity could give us a great big gift in 2015, other than a cushy job with a double pension in its offices in exchange for unwavering loyalty, what might it be?  Some, I know, might wish for their COPE payments back.  Some might wish for their UFT dues.  Here, I differ.  I have a different vision:

1.  I wish Unity would send its representatives to find out what teachers really want--not just send its representatives to sell teachers near faits accomplis, such as seemingly sub-par contracts.  After all, shouldn't they be representing us?

2.  I wish Unity would allow all Union voting to take place in schools.  It would greatly increase voter turnout.  At present, less than twenty percent of working UFT members care to elect their representatives via snail mail.

3.  I wish Unity would scrap the Loyalty Oath and the attitudes that give rise to it.  I wish Unity would welcome opposing ideas, not as enemies, but as alternatives worthy of consideration.  Many of the people who put forth opposing ideas are die-hard unionists.

4.  I wish Unity would allow talented and highly committed individuals who love their Union to work in its offices without swearing an oath of allegiance, signing away their conscience or their right to represent a constituency.

5.  I wish Unity would mobilize its membership more.  We are a formidable force.  We are NYC.

6.  I wish Unity would wage war against junk science.

7.  I wish Unity would cease bargaining and selling.  I wish it would fight wars based more upon common sense and moral conscience.

8.  I wish every Unity member who stood as a placeholder for Unity bigwigs at the AFT convention had spoken his own mind first, free from fear or "sycophanticism."

9.  I wish Unity would stop selling membership measures based on fear.  Go to the back of the line, "#151."  "The cupboard is bare."  When your Union feeds you humble pie, it begs so many other questions.

10.  I wish Unity would stop compromising with people who would destroy us.  We, on the front lines, bear the brunt of battle.  We are not expendable, ATRs included.

11.   I wish Unity would let high schools vote for their representatives as in the past, rather than the current policy of making the position at large.

12.  I wish Unity would allow chapter leaders to once again elect district representatives.  It seems more democratic.

13.  I wish Unity would recognize that when less than twenty percent of its membership cares to vote in a time of crisis for public education, the very lifeblood of the union is endangered.

14.  I wish Unity would recognize that its recent successful bid to increase the weight of retiree ballots, solidifying its own victory, seems overtly sad and pathetic.

15.  I wish Unity would realize that in these important times, when the future of public education is at stake, the UFT has a very important role to play.  If it falls short or turns its back on its rank and file, history will not be forgiving.

I used to teach business letters, but I rarely do so anymore. In fact, I rarely even write them anymore, given the immediacy and availability of electronic communication. Nonetheless, one of the first things I taught was that your name goes at the bottom, as does your title. So it surprises me a little when I see a letter that opens like this (slide past the advertising to the right and enlarge to view):

My name is Martin Messner. I am a teacher and a NYSUT member who was elected as NYSUT’s Secretary/ Treasurer this past spring.

I have a few issues with this. One is that his name and title, of course, are included as a signature, and that this is redundant. You'd think with all the money we pay NYSUT they could find a high school grad to proofread. More to the point, Messner doesn't really work as a teacher. He’s full time at NYSUT these days, making 238K a year before benefits.

However, Messner and his Revive buds made sure they’d be able to keep their teaching gigs in case this whole NYSUT thing doesn’t work out. Thus, while they are out there in Albany doing whatever it is they do, they need not worry about being unemployed in case Mike Mulgrew decides they aren’t doing what he wishes. In fact, they managed to get legislation passed to ensure that. Sure, they couldn’t stop junk science ratings, tier 6, the GEA, the tax cap, and they couldn’t work for a pro-teacher candidate like Zephyr Teachout.

This was particularly important for them for several reasons. The primary reason is that the Revive NYSUT team is denying Lee Cutler, Messner’s predecessor, the severance pay that all the other leaders UFT Unity tossed out are receiving. Cutler, like Messner, had to leave his job before actually retiring. While Revive is willing to screw Cutler it’s important that they themselves be protected.

Messner is jumping for joy about potential savings for NYSUT members.  Not only do they save a few bucks by screwing Lee Cutler, but they also have fabulous insurance programs. Messner saved $375 by switching his home insurance, and another $190 by switching his car insurance. Ain’t that fabulous? This will certainly aid his bottom line, along with the double pension he and his buds negotiated for themselves.

Ironically, the only reason Messner was elected was because of UFT support. Lee Cutler is much-loved around the state, and basically kicked Revive’s ass outside of the city. Of course, UFT has 28% of the members, and 33% of the vote. This is because, in NYSUT’s peculiar vision of democracy, anyone who can’t afford to travel for a weekend at the NY Hilton doesn’t get a vote. I won’t belabor the fact that UFT is a rubber stamp for leadership, with a loyalty oath that makes sure all delegates vote as instructed.

The thing is, though, that MetLife can really suck if you’re a UFT member. For one thing, if you live around a flood area, like I do, and like UFT President Mike Mulgrew does, they won’t cover you at all. This has been the case for at least 20 years, because though I had insurance with them soon after I bought my home, they refused to cover me.

The other thing is that their rates for auto insurance in the metro are are simply awful. When I signed up with them, about 20 years ago, they were competitive, and I did indeed save money. But I trusted them to keep up, and in fact they did not. I bought a car last May, and the salesperson asked me who my insurance company was. When I told him, he said he was absolutely sure he could save me money.

I was a little wary. After all, this was a union-negotiated benefit, and they’re looking out for me. But having a teenage driver in my family, and now with three cars, my rate was pretty high—over $7,000. My wife was next to me, and she was pretty insistent. So I went into an office with a salesperson who saved us about $3,000 a year by switching me to Allstate.

Since it’s UFT that controls NYSUT, shouldn’t they choose an insurance company that offers competitive rates to not only Martin Messner, but also those of us who constitute the very largest local in the country? Shouldn’t Messner aggressively look for an insurance company that doesn’t redline those of us who were victims of Hurricane Sandy? Should Mike Mulgrew consider punching him in the face, rather than only Common Core oppenents, if he doesn’t look out for us?

Or is it the case that what’s good for Martin Messner is good for the entire state? Judging from NYSUT’s legislative record this year, which benefits Messner and his Revive BFFs rather than working teachers, that’s what they’ve concluded.

There aren't many UFT Unity bloggers. I know of only one chapter leader who bothered with a blog, and he was quietly instructed by his overlords to take it down. Of course he did, and now he's got a really cool gig at a UFT borough office. He also goes to conventions and votes however the hell Leroy Barr tells him to. In UFT Unity World, that's what's known as representing the membership. Being a chapter leader/ activist for UFT Unity entails doing as you're told. It's all neatly laid out in the oath.

The closest thing there is in UFT Unity World to a blogger is retired teacher/Unity bigshot Peter Goodman. Goodman tows the UFT Unity line very closely and clearly telegraphs the positions of leadership for them. While UFT President Michael Mulgrew makes it a point to tell the DA he doesn't read the blogs, because why the hell does he need to know what thinking teachers are actually thinking, I can only suppose Goodman is the exception to his rule that bloggers are purveyors of myth (read "liars").

The other day Goodman put up something I found fascinating, and you should too. Governor Cuomo and Merryl Tisch are raising a whole lot of Sturm und Drang about their APPR system. In their eyes, it's flawed because not enough teachers are getting adverse ratings. It's fairly simple in their eyes. Since they've set up a system in which 70% of our children are failing, shouldn't an equal number of teachers fail as well? I suspect they'd settle for 5 or 10% of teachers being arbitrarily dismissed to show how reasonable and flexible they are, but Tisch clearly wants anyone rated ineffective on junk science to be ineffective overall.

Here's what UFT Unity guru Peter Goodman has to say about that:

In my view, the major issues for NYSUT are not charter schools and the teacher evaluation law; the major issues are the 2% property tax cap and the Gap Elimination Adjustment.

That's an odd view for a UFT mouthpiece. Since these issues afflict our brother and sister NYSUT members more directly than us, we've heard little from UFT leadership about them. Basically Cuomo, who fancies himself a student lobbyist, continues to make draconian cuts in state aid while making it almost impossible for municipalities to make up the cuts in local budgets. It took 53% of the vote for Cuomo to win reelection, but it takes 60 if you want to raise your budget any more than 2% or rate of inflation, whichever is lower.

What this signals to bloggers like me and Perdido Street School is that leadership is likely to take a dive on APPR and charter schools. There's history supporting that--while Cuomo did his grand giveaway of mayoral control to Eva Moskowitz last year, Mulgrew didn't lift a finger to stop it. What will leadership do when Tisch and Cuomo pimp legislation to have an arbitrary percentage of teachers fired so as to appease Andy's wealthy contributor base? Tough to say.

Goodman offers us some other insights as well:

I mentioned to a teacher activist to expect “consequences” if the local endorsed Teachout. He thought Cuomo “would understand.”

Politics is a blood sport. When your guy/gal wins you expect them to support your issues and when your guy/gal loses you can expect the winner to seek retribution. A deeply embedded political aphorism: screw with me and I screw with you.

Maybe you didn’t learn this in your civics class and maybe you’re willing to take the heat and continue to battle and maybe you’re simply an idealist.

I have no idea which teacher activists Goodman speaks to, if indeed there are any.  Of course Revive NYSUT leadership endorsed no one at all, despite its explicit promise when running to oppose Cuomo (to which Goodman raised no objection whatsoever). I suppose we're now supposed to believe that it isn't Revive's fault the governor reneged on his promise to pass a bill exempting teachers from adverse Common Core-based ratings. This was touted as a great victory by our prescient leadership, but actually was not all that significant--it would clearly have affected a very small number of teachers, and it was temporary in any case.

What Goodman is trying to do here is blame those localities who failed to tow the Unity line and endorsed pro-teacher Zephyr Teachout or Howie Hawkins. If only they had sat down and shut up, the preferred mode of UFT Unity activism, everything would have been fine. We'd have our seat at the table and Andrew Cuomo would not have shown himself to be the lying weasel that he is.

You see, it's through quiet and highly diplomatic negotiations that UFT Unity has managed to usher in charter schools, mayoral control, school closings, junk science teacher ratings, two-tier due process, getting paid a full decade after everyone else, and the lowest pattern anyone has bargained in my living memory. Victories like that are a model for the entire state, and surely Revive NYSUT was propped up by UFT leadership so that this vision could be realized.

If Tisch and Cuomo manage to enact a toxic statewide APPR, every teacher in the state will feel the consequences of UFT Unity's unique negotiating tactics.

I've got a lot of disagreements with AFT President Randi Weingarten. But I very much respect that she engages people on Twitter and elsewhere, myself included. In contrast, I've sent UFT President Mike Mulgrew a few emails, and he's much too busy to respond, though I'm chapter leader of the largest school in Queens. Given that, when I've got something to say to the UFT President, I copy it to the blog so someone will actually see what I'm doing.

Sadly, Randi presides over a broken system, which I'll get to later. On Twitter, she's pushing the notion that we can decouple testing from Common Core. That's a great idea, but given the AFT and UFT-approved APPR, it's a high bar. Most Americans are not aware VAM is nonsensical junk science, and the papers, NY Times included, cry in unison that it's necessary. We'd extracted a promise that NY Governor Andrew Cuomo would delay Common Core-related junk science while rating teachers, and he simply broke it. Screw teachers, screw NYSUT, and screw Randi Weingarten, says Governor Andy.

So while we may, in fact, be able to reduce the number of tests, or the stakes they represent, we aren't addressing the central issue--that Common Core is baseless crap that ought to be abandoned and replaced by something that will help our children. There's always some reason from union leadership to put it off. Sure, you don't like junk science, but let's talk about this right now. Sure, Common Core is developmentally inappropriate, but if we have fewer tests it will be better. Sure the standards are based on NAEP standards that will fail 70% of our kids, but we'll fail them less often this way. It's never, "Let's take a cold hard look at this situation and face it head on."

When I complain about our support of Common Core, Randi points to the debate at the AFT Convention, notable for Mulgrew's offer to punch its opponents in the face. Whatever the strong points of this debate, its outcome was a foregone conclusion. 800 UFT loyalty oath signers know that they are the only ones Mulgrew can really threaten. If they vote against Common Core, it's exile from the Unity Caucus, no more trips to California on my dime, and no more part-time work at UFT HQ. Worst is the fact that the Holy Grail, a UFT gig that entails no work in those nasty old classrooms, will be forever out of their grasp.

Consider that the UFT dominates NYSUT. Though it holds 28% membership in the state union, it controls 33% of the vote. Last year UFT dumped NYSUT leadership, with the exception of reliable Andy Pallotta, and installed hand-picked, utterly reliable folks who know they serve at the pleasure of Michael Mulgrew. There will be no more inconvenient limits on how much money Andy Pallotta can spend on fundraisers for Andrew Cuomo. Consider that NYSUT is the largest group in the AFT, and there's not a whole lot of doubt how AFT debates will end. Honestly, does anyone think real teachers would tolerate Bill Gates as a keynote?

The key to total control, of course, is the UFT's insistence on a loyalty oath that has all 800 of our delegates voting lockstep. You'd think every UFT member adored Bill Gates. You'd think we were all jumping up and down screaming Common Core now, Common Core forever. You'd think we all loved school closings, charter colocations, junk science ratings and every reformy thing our leadership has enabled and stamped with its approval.

In fact, given the way UFT leadership has rigged elections, and given that it's deliberately shut out every independent voice from NYSUT and AFT, it's outrageous that we're compelled to pay dues to these organizations. This is the taxation without representation we were taught about as schoolchildren. Unless you sign a loyalty oath to UFT Unity leadership, neither you nor your school has any voice whatsoever in NYSUT or AFT.

Here's the kicker. If you do sign the loyalty oath, you still have no voice. You can only vote as told and your vote makes no difference whatsoever. This is the tail that wags the dog, and our union, the United Federation of Teachers, precludes democracy not only for all city teachers, but also for all state teachers, and for every member of the AFT.

It's quite a system. And it's quite durable. The Berlin Wall may have fallen, but Unity Caucus is still alive and kicking each and every one of us.

It makes me very sad to read pieces like this on the ICE blog or elsewhere. Evidently, UFT President Mike Mulgrew was busy calling bloggers liars, saying there would be no compromises on health care. Mulgrew later admitted whether or not that was the case would be up to arbitrators, told us the cupboard was bare, and the substandard contract was the best he could get.

In fairness, I believe it was the best he could get. After all, he was willing to stand up and tell us the cupboard was bare. We now know it was not.

And in that, we can blame Mulgrew for misleading us. We can blame him for not being cognizant of the facts. We can blame him for not doing sufficient research. We can blame him for being dead wrong, no matter what the cause. I certainly blame him for all of the above.

I blame UFT leadership for selling the contract on a logical fallacy, to wit, an appeal to fear. It was no coincidence that, at the DA where the contract was endorsed by a large crowd of loyalty-oath signers, the first question was something like, "Hey Mike, you're a rock star and we love you, but what happens if we don't accept this contract?"

The answer was something like, "Well, if we don't take this, we have to get in line behind 150 other unions." There were also statements like retro pay isn't a God-given right. What was really odd was that these statements did not come from the city, but rather our own leadership. You'd think the city would make these arguments so that we'd buy the lie that it was the best they could offer. In fact, several uniformed unions have already done marginally better, and they didn't have to accept two-tier due process in order to achieve it.

Mulgrew and his top-down leadership team did an awful job of negotiation. They sold out our brother and sister ATRs for virtually nothing, and Mulgrew publicly suggested ATRs could be fired for shouting in the halls a few times. He did abysmal research. Leadership treated us like fools, arguing that anyone who opposed the contract opposed teacher empowerment.

Mulgrew did a terrible job negotiating the only contract he negotiated. He has done a terrible job representing us, and in fact when he gets all bellicose over Common Core, he doesn't represent us at all. Certainly we'd have liked to see that kind of belligerence while we went six years without a contract, but it was nowhere to be found.

I can say plenty more about our disappointing President, but ultimately it isn't his fault. 75% of us voted for that contract. Mulgrew can say what he likes all day long, but it's up to us whether or not to accept it.

We bought it hook, line and sinker, and sentenced our brother and sister unions to the worst pattern in my living memory, even as the city is well in the black. We can blame Mike Mulgrew. We can blame Bill de Blasio, but in this case he is our adversary, and despite the nonsense in the tabloids, he in fact saved NYC a ton of cash by getting us to accede to this piece of crap. 

We can blame anyone and everyone. But it's on us. We bought it, and we are now stuck with it for two years after it expires. The balloon payments in 2019 and 2020 will discourage the next mayor from being reasonable with us or indeed our brother and sister unions.

Until and unless we wake up, this is our destiny.

It's a reformy world. All sorts of money seeks and follows demagogues like Michelle Rhee and Eva Moskowitz. They get in the media and spew their blather unchallenged about whatever they like. Always, the bottom line is unionized teachers as scapegoats. The only solution is more and more selective test prep factories. If they can pick the best kids and get rid of the undesirables, they can post better test scores, which in their world is the sole factor that determines whether or not a school merits existence.

But we won't shut up. Big voices like Diane Ravitch, Leonie Haimson and Carol Burris are out there, loudly proclaiming the truth. When Eva Moskowitz attempts to spout her nonsense in a fair forum, multiple voices of reason stop her dead in her tracks. There are more of us than there are of them, we love our children, and we will not give up no matter how much money they fight us with.

In our own schools we are dispirited by the junk science evaluation system, terrorized by the whims of imperious supervisors. Mulgrew, displaying no connection to what we feel, boasts of how few teachers are rated ineffective. Talk to one of those teachers, facing job loss, and you'll instantly see how little consolation it is. At the same time, Mulgrew boasts to the DA that John King finds our system among the best in the state because so many of us are rated developing and are on improvement plans. You see how that works? It's good because so few teachers have adverse ratings, but it's also good because so many teachers have adverse ratings. It must be a greatly comforting to reside in the Unity Caucus echo chamber.

Everywhere I go I see teachers afraid of their own shadows. They're terrified they'll get poor ratings for no reason. They're afraid their small-minded vindictive supervisors will target them. They won't sign grievances because they fear that will make them targets. Consequently the Contract means nothing. You want me to put up a bulletin board and include a rubric that parents will neither comprehend nor care about? Fine. You have no time for me to do it? That's fine too.

Mike Mulgrew still thinks the evaluation plan is the best thing since sliced bread, and it's likely as not because he's never tried artisan bread that you cut with your own knife. After all, he took part in the creation of the law. He's proud to have made junk science a factor in teacher evaluations. Though he, like just about everyone, doesn't understand the MOSL, he has people who do, and while none of us actually understand it, the formula somehow worked, spitting out only a tenth of NYC teachers as sub-par.

Of course the consequences for those teachers can be draconian. If your supervisor gave you decent ratings and you're on a humiliating "improvement plan" simply because of junk science, that can be incredibly demoralizing. Of course if you were rated ineffective, and face 3020a dismissal charges with the burden of proof on you rather than DOE, you're facing the loss of your very livelihood. And yes, junk science can be the deciding factor placing you there. Then you're at the tender mercies of some UFT member who saw fit to join the rat squad.

Mulgrew, unlike working teachers, has nothing to be afraid of except an election that's heavily rigged in his favor. He well knows that most teachers find it so ridiculous they throw their ballots in the trash.

That's where we are. But there's no advantage in being afraid, I'm afraid. If indeed your supervisor is a bully, tolerating abuse won't make him any less of one. I've seen people who have opted to keep quiet so as to avoid retaliation end up the subjects of retaliation anyway.  There's no upside to fear, be it justified or simply garden-variety paranoia.

Those of us who see the truth must speak it. Those of us who see what's right must preach it. We must prop up our brothers and sisters who are fearful and oppressed. We must point to others who say the truth. These are tough times and there are those who'd leave us for dead.

But we're far from it. And for our own sakes and for those of our children, we can't give up. The fight's not easy, and the fight's not fair. But we have the numbers and we will prevail. There is simply no other option.

I read with interest Principal Carol Burris' column on whether education groups are really listening to their members. It's interesting that the statewide PTA is deaf to the concerns of regional PTAs. When parents see their kids suffering from overtesting and preposterous high stakes, they tend to object. This is something Reformy John King learned when he actually went around the state and heard from people not contained in his particular cone of silence.

Unfortunately, the state PTA leaders appear to be precisely the sort of people Reformy John hangs with, the ones who tell him that everything is wonderful and he is unconditionally a prince. And while it's clear he believes that, I'm not at all certain readers of this blog will concur. So what do you do when you have a leadership that doesn't represent you? According to Carol Burris, you vote the bastards out.

That makes sense to me. Of course, for those of us in the UFT, it's another story. So few of us deem it worth our time to vote that it's very tough to compete with avid patronage recipients. To make things worse, more than half of all voting is done by retirees, who have limited skin in the game. But the very worst aspect of our voting is it's winner take all, and all dissenters, bar none, are shut out. Were that not the case, you certainly wouldn't have a UFT President not only supporting Common Core, but also publicly threatening to beat the crap out of anyone who doesn't.

And whenever it appears there's some slim chance opposition may break a little sunshine into the monopolistic one-sided regime, action is taken. When Mike Shulman won UFT HS VP, they waited until he was out of office and changed the rules so those meddlesome high school teachers couldn't elect anyone who actually represented them. Now the elementary and middle school teachers help us, which ensures a Unity VP even if we choose otherwise.

But that wasn't enough. Randi Weingarten reached out to Shulman's party, New Action, and struck a deal. If New Action would only endorse her, she'd let several seats on the UFT Executive Board go unopposed. At that time, when New Action members like James Eterno refused to buy into the deal, they formed ICE, contested the seats and won them. As opposition voices were completely unacceptable, Unity then cross-endorsed the New Action candidates and made sure that no one they didn't have a deal with got any voice whatsoever.

More recently upstart caucus MORE has gotten a little traction, and that apparently could not be tolerated. So Randi Weingarten met with a teacher who's now formed yet another caucus, a teacher who's already running a campaign for UFT President in 2016. So just in case MORE should catch on enough to threaten even the high school seats New Action now holds, Weingarten and this teacher have made it just that much more difficult. In my opinion, buying out New Action was one of the most effective steps our union has ever taken against democracy. Perhaps this new caucus will prove the second best.

Since absolutely everyone who represents us has either signed a loyalty oath or struck a deal with the UFT Unity Caucus, there is not one single person who represents us at a significant decision-making level. Sure, we can bring things up at the DA, but we're overwhelmed by people who need to vote as told at risk of being ejected from not only their patronage jobs, but also the glitzy free trips to conventions where they reliably say nothing and represent no one.

And then, of course, there is NYSUT and AFT, where we also have no representation whatsoever. I keep hearing ostensible leaders claim teachers support this and that, but they never ask me or anyone I represent. Their bad decision-making and short-sightedness threaten our very survival as union. We all hope our enemies won't kill tenure, but we have to know that whether or not that happens it's far from the end game.

Leadership, in the vain hope that appeasement will keep our enemies at bay, has given in to major reformy initiatives, including mayoral control (which apparently exists only for reformy mayors), charter schools, value-added junk science, and deterioration of seniority rights and due process. Evidently, this leadership is up for just about anything. Personally I don't know one single teacher who supports any of this stuff.

Carol Burris offers a great closing line:

I suppose it is always nice to have a seat at the table. It is important, however, to be sure that those you represent are not the main course.

The question remains--with leadership like we have, and a blatantly rigged election process, how do we go about changing it? How do we achieve a real representative union?

It was odd watching this new contract come along. First, the much-ballyhooed 300-member contract committee overwhelmingly approved it without even having seen the Memorandum of Agreement. This committee was, of course, top secret, so no one could ever say what the hell it was that they did. And in the end it didn't much matter. After all, what's the point of having a committee that will vote absolutely anything up sight unseen?

I guess it's good PR. Sure, we haven't got a contract, but we have this great committee. And to pretend the game isn't rigged we actually placed those from opposition on it, though in numbers so small they can't make any difference whatsoever.

Anyway, when details finally started coming out, whew, what a stench. The money everyone else got in 2010 doesn't come to us until 10 years later. Our ATR teachers get second-tier due process and the President of the union, taking a precious moment away from face punching, states that if ATR teachers get caught shouting in the halls of two different schools they ought to go up for expedited 3020a. He says it will be good because some teachers deemed the process too long. After all, it's certainly a nuisance to have to call witnesses to testify in your favor when you're fighting for your livelihood. Why not just get the thing over in one day and see if that Walmart place is still hiring?

My AP was a teacher until about a year ago. I don't know how much money she'd get if the city was giving, but so far its offer is zero. I have friends who were fired, and one of them was fired for no reason at all other than they could. Although the city allowed them to work, it's now refusing to pay them at the rate it negotiated. I guess that's a big money saver for the city, and if they're mad at the union, well, at least they won't get to vote in the UFT election for some rabblerouser who believes in democracy or any other such nonsense.

Actually, about the only good thing that could be said about the contract was that those who left before last July would get a big check with all that retro coming at once. Except now it appears they may not. It turns out that neither UFT nor DOE anticipated that if you offered a huge retirement incentive, a whole lot of people would retire.

So what does that mean? Is it a broken promise from DOE? How are they going to come up with the rest of that money? Will they pay a portion of it and make them wait until 2020 for the rest? Will they just take it out of what they promised us? Will they mortgage Manhattan Island?

Tough to say. But it's yet another broken promise, akin to the one that we will absolutely not have to pay into medical. Who knows whether or not that's true? Surely not the people who promised us otherwise. Why do you establish a finite dollar number when you don't know how much you will need to fulfill an agreement?

Only our crack negotiators know for sure.

We are not our union.  I haven't exactly figured out the relationship yet.  I know teachers need the UFT and the UFT needs teachers.  In defense of tenure, I feel the relationship is one of symbiosis, but at other times, as with the Common Core, teacher evaluation systems and treatment of ATRs, the parasitic relationship seems essentially harmful.

We pay our union dues, yet we are not our union.   On Long Island, PJSTA union leader, Beth Dimino, who spoke so passionately against the Core, actually teaches.  She is a veteran science teacher.  She is on the front lines every day.  She sees beyond theories that may look pretty when pushed along by millions of dollars.  She witnesses first hand the harmful effects of the Core.  She never forgets she represents teachers.  She never forgets she serves the kids.  And as such, she is a "mandated reporter" of child abuse--even if it's called the Common Core and its Sugar Daddy has millions to offer.

I realize the exigencies which make it preferable for our top UFT officers to be relieved from classroom duties.  Yet, this seems all the more reason why these same officers should encourage free thought.   This seems all the more reason why they should frequent the halls of schools not to sell contracts, but to pick up on the pulse.  Reps must come to see how membership can best be served and then they must start serving.

Chapter leaders are not our union.  Instead, Unity advises its members to toe the line.  Caucus members must cease and desist from any independent thought that might challenge official leadership positions.  They are advised to steer clear of anti Core positions.  The same Unity that holds the purse strings to lucrative double-pensions pulls the puppet strings of its own members.

Active members are certainly not our Union.   Only 17% of active UFT members bothered to vote in the last elections.  You might think the UFT would be actively concerned that this is a serious sign of illness.  Instead, Unity seems more focused on stymieing the voice of current members and guaranteeing its death grip on power by increasing retiree votes.  More than half of the recent votes in leadership elections came from retirees.

ATRs are not our union.  This one gets me worst of all.  We have let a class of people who worked in some of the hard-to-staff schools linger in limbo.  Many of these teachers are veterans, seasoned professionals, who deserve the best.  They are lumped together in a class repeatedly stereotyped by the media as derelicts.  When a resolution is presented to give ATRs their own chapter given their special interests and second-tier due process status, Leroy Barr has only to speak against it and all must follow.  The resolution is shot down.  Do you think Leroy Barr might feel differently if he walked in the shoes of an ATR?

NYC teachers must be the UFT.  But we are not.  Conditions are so bad today that many do not stick around for even five years.  As long as our dues keep coming, the UFT could pretty much survive without ever caring to ask what we want.  Sometimes it thinks it knows what we wants.  And, sometimes if does know.  But at other times, I'm pretty sure it doesn't care what we want.

Our union is separate from us.  We are besides the point.   I feel more kinship for the PJSTA than my UFT.  I pretty much want from the UFT what the PJSTA wants from NYSUT.  I want a union that is not separate from teachers.  I want a union of teachers, not a union controlling teachers.  And I believe it must start with veteran and career teachers and even some of the passionate recent retirees who understand life on the front lines.  If teachers want to win back education, it must  begin by winning back the UFT.

There is no one from my union leadership who represents my point of view. No one. My union leadership supported mayoral control at its inception. When it proved to be an unmitigated disaster, resulting in school closings and thousands of displaced teachers, when scores of my colleagues ended up wandering the city as subs, my leadership asked for minor changes. When they failed to get them, they supported it a second time. Frankly, it's hard for me to imagine that a large percentage of my colleagues agreed with them.

My union leadership went to Albany and negotiated a law that made sure teachers would be rated by junk science. I don't know a single teacher who thinks that's a good idea. Last year my school rated me highly effective, but when the junk science kicked in I got knocked down to effective. I discovered this while at a Queens chapter leader meeting. The same thing happened to the CL to my right. When I pointed out the ludicrous nature of this, not one person in the room raised a peep. Of course, the overwhelming majority of them had signed oaths not to.

We supported Barack Obama's second term, though it was pretty clear he was high on reforminess. His education secretary, Arne Duncan, thought that Katrina was the best thing to happen to education in New Orleans, where public school has been eradicated in favor of charters. Race to the Top forced us all to embrace not only junk science evaluation, but also Common Core, largely the brainchild of Bill Gates. At the AFT Convention, where no one from my union represented the point of view of anyone I know, the UFT President declared that anyone who tried to take this corporate monstrosity from us should be punched in the face and have their face kicked in the dirt.

When Bill de Blasio ran for mayor, while he was surging in the primary, union leadership supported Bill Thompson, who'd told the Daily News that the city could not afford to give teachers the raises all other city workers had received. When Cuomo and the legislature sold him out to Eva Moskowitz, mandating that the city pay her rent, union leadership raised not a peep.

Then I turn to Bridging Differences, once written by Diane Ravitch and right now written by former UFT VP Leo Casey instead, and I read this:

To honor their democratic decisionmaking processes, some parties and caucuses adopt an understanding that is known as cabinet rule in the British parliamentary system: Once a democratic decision has been made within the party or caucus, its members are obliged to not oppose it in Parliament.[2] If the matter in question is one of fundamental principle, one can always leave the party or caucus and oppose it. In my view, this understanding is essential for a caucus to function as a democratic body.

One reason this is nonsense is that it actually refers to only one caucus--the Unity Caucus. The elite Unity Caucus is open only by invitation. UFT elections are rigged so as to ensure that Unity Caucus has complete power. No other caucus has any voice whatsoever. In order to shut out all true opposition, Unity cross endorses New Action, gives them a small number of seats on the UFT Executive Board, and keeps opposition fractured.

When New Action was a real opposition, it managed to win the high school vice presidency. Unity demanded a recount and lost again. As soon as this vice president was gone, Unity changed the rules and made the high school vice presidency "at large," meaning high school members no longer got to choose their own vice president. More recently, chapter leaders were precluded from electing district representatives, and guess what? Now all district reps are Unity, and can recruit for and promote Unity Caucus.

Ballots are sent to members' homes rather than schools so as to keep participation low. As a result, fewer than 20% of working members vote. Retirees not only get to select who negotiates contracts for new members, but as a result of Unity's monopoly, now get a larger percentage of the vote than they used to. In the last election, retirees represented over 50% of the vote. Months before elections, there are television commercials telling everyone what a great job the union does. Coincidence that we fund these commercials at this time? I doubt it.

And then, of course, is the Ballot with a Million Names. I once tried to pick individual names and it took 45 minutes. I'm not doing that again. With UFT's winner-take-all system, opposition is completely shut out. It's most certainly designed that way, and it's no coincidence that 80% of membership sees voting as not worth their time.

It's positively Orwellian to contend that UFT elections are democratic. And UFT leadership reminds me of nothing more than Animal Farm. The quoted paragraph sounds like something written by Comrade Squealer.

I know we talk about this often, but it's important to understand that the fundamental nature of selecting our leadership is dishonest and designed to shut us up rather than elicit our participation. The million name ballot is a problem, of course, because almost no one knows who the hell is on it. Last time I voted, I checked a box for MORE, but I don't really know all of the people for whom I voted. I know and like some people from Unity, but I was voting against a machine, a philosophy.

Here's what that philosophy is--winner take all, no compromise whatsoever, and everyone else can go screw themselves. If you try to take Common Core from Mike Mulgrew he'll punch you in the face, he says, but the election is arranged precisely so no one can lay a hand on his beloved Common Core.

There are flaws in any democracy, of course. You notice when Jimmy Carter runs all over the world monitoring elections, he never establishes electoral colleges. So one point in favor of the UFT election is that the President is selected via majority voting. That's a good thing, particularly if you disregard the fact that most of the vote comes from retirees. Let's do that, for the moment. All working UFT members should and do get a vote on the President.

It's when we move down the ticket that things get confusing. There's a VP for Academic High Schools, for example. Wouldn't it make sense that high school teachers choose that person, who ostensibly represent their interests? Well, it doesn't make sense to UFT-Unity, who lost that office once. As soon as they got it back they changed the rules to make sure it never happened again. This position is now "at-large" and everyone gets to help us make that decision.

Should the entire UFT get to vote for our rep? Of course not. Each branch has different interests, and each branch ought to select the person who best represents those interests. But that's just the beginning. Actually, the overwhelming majority of positions in the UFT elections are at large.

It's entirely possible the Bronx may have different interests than Queens or Manhattan. For example, Queens gets less Title One funding than the Bronx and perhaps Queens reps could wish to fight for more. Perhaps your school has s disproportionate percentage of ELLs or special ed. students. Maybe the overcrowding in your school is worse than mine. Maybe the Eva Moskowitz school in your building is causing unique problems. Maybe it was not the best thing for your school when Cuomo gave carte blanche to Eva to do what she wished on our dime. There are countless possibilities, and our system insures the only issues raised are those that are pre-approved by leadership.

Can you imagine what the United States would be like if the entire country voted for every single political position? The entire country would choose your governor. They'd choose your mayor, your state senator, and your dog catcher.

It would actually make a lot more sense if, for example, the people chosen as chapter leaders in their local schools were delegates to NYSUT and AFT. These are the people we know and trust. But in the UFT, it's winner take all, and the only people who represent any of us have signed a loyalty oath to support whatever leadership tells them to support. That's why the President of the United Federation of Teachers can stand up at the AFT convention and say that if anyone took his Common Core he'd punch them in the face and rub their face in the dirt.

Who's gonna argue? Not the parents whose kids are suffering because of the ridiculous predetermined failure rate. Not the teachers, few to none of whom approve of the APPR Mulgrew boasted of. Not the 800 rubber stamps we spent two million dollars to send to LA.

Those of us who'd argue are excluded from participating. Those who were sent to LA are excluded from speaking unless instructed to. Rank and file is left with a huge tab for a convention that represents no one but leadership.

This is not democracy. It's a sham and it's unconscionable. This is no way to run an election, and it's no way to run a union.

Unless, of course, your goal is to just run it into the ground.

A lot of city teachers bellyache about how UFT leadership is inept. They say, "Oh, how come I have to wait until 2020 to get the money most city workers got five years ago?" And then they're all, "How come Mulgrew will punch you in the face and rub it in the dirt for Common Core, but doesn't get upset when there's no contract for six years?" And then, they're like, "How come I only get one day to defend my livelihood if I'm an ATR teacher?" Some of them are even, "How come I'm an ATR teacher instead of going somewhere I can actually work?

Lots of them these days are supporting this upstart caucus called MORE, which doesn't support that. Here's the thing, though. MORE may think that due process should apply to everyone. They may think Common Core doesn't merit any defense, let alone a violent one. They might advocate that, since we always took the city pattern when it was a piece of crap and had to give back to better it, that we shouldn't accept givebacks for a contract that's definitely inferior to the pattern.

But will they represent all six boroughs? Sure, there are MORE members in Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn, the Bronx, and Staten Island. But ask yourself this--how many MORE members are there in Florida? Can you name one? Neither can I. On the other hand, there are plenty of Unity Caucus members in Florida. Not only that, but there's also a UFT office in Florida.

So next time there's a union election, you'd better believe Michael Mulgrew will be there in Florida making sure everything is hunky-dory for the UFT retirees. Do you think there will be any MORE presence there? Think again. Everyone in MORE is probably working in a classroom or something. How the hell are they gonna get to the Sunshine State without getting fired? Despite what Campbell Brown may think, people who don't show up for work quite frequently find there is no more work to show up to.

So remember, for those of you who want all six boroughs represented, your only choice is Unity Caucus. Remember, retirees make up 52% of the vote. It's very important that retirees have a large voice in determining who gets to negotiate new contracts. It's particularly important when you understand that new contracts don't effect them at all.

That's why the Unity leadership was smart when negotiating the last contract. Screw the people who resign, or get fired, or move into administration. They can't vote anyway. The sixth borough is well-served, and those who move there will remember the people who got them that money ten years after they earned it.

Remember, if you vote for those upstarts in MORE, they might try to change things so that only working school personnel gets to vote on who negotiates for working school personnel. And honestly, how is that fair?

One of the biggest reasons we lowly teachers have no voice in the UFT is because many, many delegates are "at large." In fact, most of the million names on the UFT ballot are AFT and NYSUT delegates. These delegates are chapter leaders, delegates from the DA, or simply people leadership finds useful.

Delegates come from all kinds of schools, and a delegate from a school with 12 members has just as much of a vote as a delegate with 300 members. In fact, for all we know, the school with 12 members could have ten delegates while the school with 300 could have zero. Does that sound fair?

It doesn't really matter, since they are all bound to vote the same way.

Our union leadership loves "at large" voting. That means any potentially insurgent groups are drowned out by more predictable groups, like the retirees who make up 52% of our electorate. If UFT ran the country and didn't like the way New York voted, it would give Oklahoma and Texas votes to correct what it perceived as our misjudgment.

The only thing our NYSUT and AFT delegates have in common is that each and every one has signed a loyalty oath, and each and every one will either vote as instructed or face expulsion from the elite, invitation-only Unity Caucus. While it's true that the UFT could simply send one delegate with 800 votes and save us a ton of money (and why not since we all know in advance how UFT delegates will vote), that wouldn't look good. It looks better to send 800 people to LA and have them vote all the same. That gives a persuasive illusion of democracy and makes most of us think that all these folks somehow represent us.

They don't, of course.

When I first started teaching, I voted for New Action. I don't remember why. One year, a guy from New Action became Academic VP. The UFT contested his election and demanded a revote, in which the guy won by a larger margin. From all accounts, he did a terrible job and was not reelected. Nonetheless, UFT Unity did not care for this. It was unacceptable that high school teachers select their own representative. So they changed the rules, and rigged the election further.

Now the high school VP, and all VPs, are elected "at large." That means everyone votes for them. So we no longer get to choose our own rep. This is precisely because we committed the unspeakable crime of actually choosing our own rep, once. So now we must be punished and this must never happen again.

I've only been chapter leader for five years, but they tell me UFT District Reps used to be elected by the chapter leaders, perhaps even by closed ballot. The whole secret ballot thing does not exist in the "democratic" Delegate Assembly, so if you raise your hand the wrong way and you are Unity, you could be not Unity the next day. Anyway, several groups of chapter leaders had the temerity to elect District Reps who were not Unity. So guess what Unity did?

They changed the rules. Now, committees of Unity members select the District Reps, and guess what? There aren't any more non-Unity District Reps. I think Stalin said it's not who votes, it's who count the votes. But in this case, at least, it's most certainly who votes, and anyone who dares vote the wrong way will be overwhelmed and drowned out by someone more reliable.

What's next? Will Mike Mulgrew hand-pick chapter leaders? Will they pre-slug the ballots to save the expense of counting them? Will they do away with troublesome elections altogether?

Only time will tell.  

Thanks to AS for illustration!