If you're a Pennsylvania teacher, you can Make America Great Again by bringing your gun to school. After all, you're a role model, so why wouldn't you want to protect yourself and your students by packing heat? And hey, if you're the kind of teacher who thinks bringing guns into the classroom is the way to do it, who am I to question you? Besides, what with you having a gun and all, I wouldn't dream of questioning you.

And after all, what could go wrong? Cops carry guns all the time, and it's not like people get shot by cops. Okay, well actually there were 498 people, this year, and 963 the year before. Admittedly, cops have a very stressful job. They have to deal with difficult people who don't always do as they are asked. On the other hand, teachers, well, we kind of have to do the same thing.

Personally, I can't conceive of an instance in which I'd have wanted to shoot a student. On the other hand, neither can I conceive of an instance in which I'd have wanted to carry a gun. The thing is, I wonder if someone inclined to carry a gun might be more inclined to use it. Now sure, they say the people who carry guns to school will receive training. I don't know about you, but I get trained in some new and indispensable way to teach each and every year. It doesn't mean I'm gonna use it. I also sat in a defensive driving class with maybe thirty people a few weeks back. Does that mean no one will have an accident?

There are risks involved with having guns in your home. There are higher risks of homicide, suicide and accidents involved with their mere presence. Does anyone think these risks won't be transferred to school? Does anyone think everyone in a school building is immune to bouts of temper, or losing control? I mean, believe it or not, even administrators are human.

I used to teach writing Saturdays at a community college. Whenever I teach writing, the first thing I do is, you know, make everyone write. That way, I can see where they are and what they need. One day, a student wrote something like, "Everybody has a gun. I have a gun." I was working with a senior tenured professor that day, and I told him I did not want this student in my class. He said he would take him. For whatever reason, I never saw that student again in any class.

I didn't know this student at all. I had no reason to believe he was crazy or dangerous. His bad judgment in letting me know that could easily have been naivete. He seemed perfectly friendly and non-threatening. In fact, he may have been boasting just to show me how cool he was. I didn't care. The risk of having someone with a gun in my classroom was unacceptable.

Now I've been teaching for over thirty years, both high school and college,  It's entirely possible I faced students with guns.without having the remotest clue. But the fact is, on the single occasion when it appeared to be a possibility, the first thing I did was say it was unacceptable. I guess I was fortunate that the professor said what he did. Honestly, I questioned his judgment. Perhaps he didn't see the danger I did. On the other hand, perhaps he did something to ensure the student's absence the next week. I would certainly have walked from that job rather than teach a student I knew could be carrying.

Given all that, I find it completely unacceptable that PA schools allow such a thing. Politicians who enable it are a bunch of morons, indifferent to not only education, but also human life. They will say this will reduce the chances of some gunman coming into the school and going nuts. I doubt it. There are simple reasons why homes with guns have more accidents, homicides and suicides than homes without guns. I don't doubt there are responsible gun owners, but neither do I doubt there are irresponsible ones.

I don't doubt at all that allowing guns in school will cause unnecessary and fatal incidents, and that the chances of such incidents are much higher than those of in-school terrorism.

This brings stupid to a very high level, right on par with allowing Donald Trump to be President.

I wish everyone reading this blog a safe and joyous holiday. We call it the Fourth of July but it's really a day we celebrate liberation and independence. This is something we sorely need, what with a raving lunatic in charge of the country.

On this Independence Day, union is pretty much under assault. In Texas, already a "right to work" state, they're moving to stop payroll deductions for those who choose to remain in the union. Note that this is only for teachers, and not for police officers.

This mirrors actions in Wisconsin, where Governor Scott What's His Name eliminated collective bargaining, except for police and firefighters. He rationalized this with some nonsense about public safety being important, which clearly implies public education is not. It's more likely that he was concerned about being protected when the rabble came out with torches and pitchforks. You know, in North Korea a lot of people go hungry, but not the military.

And this is where we find ourselves on Independence Day 2017. Orange Man is attacking the press as fake news with clips from wrestling, a fake sport. This is what occupies our time and our news. It's nice that we have one day a year blowing up stuff, even though in doing so we drive our canine friends out of their minds. Likely, though, they'll get over it tomorrow.

We, on the other hand, are stuck in a more complicated and long-term mess. Our union is already fragile, and national leaders, having expertly stolen the Supreme Court, are poised to push it off a cliff. Our pensions are under attack from reformies nationally, many posing as Democrats. You can hardly tell whether they are fake Democrats or Democrats are real reformies. While I sadly lean toward the latter, it doesn't much matter because we find ourselves in exactly the same place.

The question becomes not only where do we go from here, but also how bad do things have to get before we rouse ourselves from our indifferent slumber? Take a look at Puerto Rico, just a little bit farther down the road than we are. Over there they face massive school closures, and they've just been told their pensions are no more.

Could that happen here? Absolutely. And how will we face it? Will we continue to put on a tie and ask for that seat at the table? Will we wear a few buttons that say we're Public School Proud? Or will we take to the streets and tell them no more?

Eventually we'll need to move toward the latter, and the sooner the better. A whole lot of Americans are no more awake than we are. 

For those who may not know, COPE is the political fund of the UFT and NYSUT. Contributions are strictly optional. 

I've been chapter leader for eight years now, and each and every one of those years I've received some package or other from UFT urging me to do a COPE drive. In fact, a few years back, I decided to take them up on it. So I invited a Queens rep over to a meeting, but the rep texted me after the meeting had begun asking me what time to show. I was left to largely improvise a meeting, but that was OK because, as usual, these were pretty lively times and we all had much to discuss.

I was interested in supporting leadership at that time because it was hanging tough against Cuomo's insistence we rate teachers on junk science. And when the rep showed up, he said, after we'd gone years with no contract, "Don't worry, Michael Mulgrew is very smart. You'll get your contract, because Bloomberg can't get evaluation without it." Despite that proclamation, virtually every sentient NY City teacher remembers ending up with an evaluation system devised by Reformy John King and no contract. My members still ask me to bring the rep back so they can throw stuff at him. And by the end of that meeting, only one UFT delegate and I had signed up for COPE.

I continued to pay because I felt it gave me marginal cred with leadership, which for reasons I can't fathom, criticized bloggers from time to time. But I didn't see the point in inviting anyone else until very recently, when I heard UFT Political Director Paul Egan speak of the NY constitutional convention vote, coming next November. You probably know that NY State, unlike New Jersey and Illinois, has to pay its share of pension contributions by law. You probably also know that the states I just mentioned, since they don't have to, tend not to pay their share.

This is problematic for those of us who envision a retirement in which we don't have to check prices of canned cat food before purchasing it for lunch. Of course, there are valid arguments against paying into COPE. For one, NYC high schools have absolutely no voice nor vote in NYSUT. For another, COPE has supported some questionable politicians, from Serphin Maltese, who broke two Catholic school unions, to George Pataki, who answered our support by vetoing improvements in the Taylor Law, to teacher-basher Andrew Cuomo, to the execrable Fernando Cabrera.

This notwithstanding, there are powerful forces looking to open a Constitutional Convention, and Egan is not exaggerating when he says they are after our pensions. Upstate teacher Maria May recently sent me this paper describing Reclaim NY, a group that claims to be impartial, but only meets that standard if you believe Fox News is "fair and balanced."

This group is headed by hedge fund manager Robert Mercer, who supports all sorts of right-wing causes, including Breitbart Media, Ted Cruz, and everybody's best buddy Donald Trump (or "the presidential election," as Unity leadership calls him).  Reclaim NY is the very definition of an astroturf group, being 100% financed by Mercer's Family Foundation.

Reclaim NY is very much against taxes, and is suing school districts to try to expose what it deems to be overspending. They seem to have a very reformy outlook, strongly supporting charter schools, religious schools, and our good pal Betsy DeVos. They support a national constitutional convention so it's not a big leap to assume they will support a state one as well. Imagine how much more money New York could devote to charter schools, religious schools, and tax breaks for zillionaires if it simply didn't pay the pensions it's promised NY State teachers.

This is a very real threat, and not just for senior teachers. Our pensions are already under attack by national reformies, and folks like Mercer would probably like nothing better than to do away with them utterly. Right now, the only solid entity I know that's fighting this is our union and AFL-CIO. That's why I went before my staff and made my own pitch for COPE this year, and that's why I signed up another 80-plus members.

I would not be able to sleep at night if I weren't doing my bit to fight Mercer and like-minded reformies. While some of my friends disagree, I will continue to push COPE for now. Hey, if we win in November, maybe we can reconsider. But a country controlled by Donald Trump and his thugs is a very dangerous place for working people. While I frequently disagree with union leadership, this is one area in which I don't want their hands tied.

To them, I say fight this vigorously. Too frequently I see UFT leadership fall down when no one pushes them. They can't afford to do that now. We need to not only support them in this, but also to monitor their actions and progress.

Commenter Sunny mentioned the other night that there is a change to health care deductibles. Aetna charges have risen considerably, though not being a subscriber, I can't say by how much. Cigna looks pretty high too, but maybe that's how it was before. Like most people I know, I'm on GHI-CBP, and if I read the chart correctly, it doesn't look like much for us.

That's not where I'm feeling the pinch. It's pretty inconvenient to pay 50 bucks to go to an urgent care, but it beats the hell out of waiting for hours to be seen in an understaffed, ill-equipped bargain care, or whatever they call those GHI-affiliated joints that will take you for free. Except in the Bronx, where it's tough luck, we got nothing. All I can say to my Bronx friends is you aren't missing anything.

The problem I have is that one by one, the doctors I see are dropping GHI. Last year an ENT doctor who I've been seeing for ten years told me he wasn't taking GHI anymore. This was pretty disappointing, as I'd actually followed him from a smaller practice the the ENT and Allergy Associates chain. This is a pretty good place as you're able to book online and can generally get in very quickly.

A few days ago I got a letter that the entire chain was dropping GHI, so now my daughter's allergist is now off the list as well. They kindly offered to see us out of network if we would just pay their fees, whatever they may be. Isn't that generous of them, to offer to take my money for performing a service?  In fairness, it may not be too bad, because the ENT doctor told me GHI pays a little better out of network. So once you pay a deductible of $200 for each family member, you might be OK with your $30 copay. Or maybe not, now that the whole chain is out. Who knows?

A worse problem, for me at least, is that my regular family MD is now dropping GHI. I've been seeing him for ten years and I don't feel like changing. On the other hand, holy crap why do I have health insurance if I can't use it where I need to? Is the next step to dump us all into bargain care? It's hard to say. All I know is that we need to begin negotiating a new contract next year, at a time when the city still owes all of us 75% of the back pay we didn't get ten years ago.

My wife found someone closer to home who takes our insurance, but I'm not sure. Maybe she'll be OK, but maybe the doctor will leave town, leave GHI, or possibly both. What I do know is that this system sucks. Part of the blame could go to the negotiators who upped the co-pays, I suppose, but I hope that had the effect of raising the compensation to doctors. Sometimes I hope against hope. It doesn't really matter, because despite higher co-pays, they're still dropping us.

As far as I can tell, the best solution is a move toward what the rest of the world seems to prefer--single payer. Here in the United States, the Electoral College has given us a President who lies outright about better coverage for more people. Instead, we've got a proposal to lower taxes on people who have more than enough money so we can dump tens of millions of Americans out of health care entirely.

There are a lot of reasons why Donald Trump is President. It could be Russian meddling. It could be the media's bias for noise above news. It could be any number of things. But we know Hillary Clinton's message, that we were never, ever going to get single payer, failed to draw enough voters to stop Trump.

I'm big on education, but I can't think of anything more fundamental than health. As long as the Democrats keep spouting wimpy nonsense like Hillary did, and as long as we can't even get single payer in allegedly progressive areas like California, it's gonna be an uphill battle.

UFT passed the 2014 contract before revealing the health care givebacks. After having given back, it's sorely disappointing to see our doctors dropping our plan. UFT leadership no longer has only to sell a contract. It will also have to sell union itself, having failed to elect wimpy Democrat Hillary Clinton. With that in mind, I hope they're not planning more concessions. It's not smart long-term, nor short-term. That's step one.

Step two is pushing for single payer for all. That's an environment in which union could flourish. It's all intertwined and I believe UFT officially supports it. Now if we could only start supporting candidates who support it too.

You can stop holding your breath. Al Sharpton has finally weighed in on the mayoral control issue, and he strongly supports it. (It is, incidentally, a done deal now, for two years.) You won't be surprised that some of his friends support it too. Mike Bloomberg was a big fan, and Arne Duncan has also supported it. Newt Gingrich has yet to weigh in because he's running around telling important lies about the GOP's most recent assault on health care.

Of course Sharpton trots out the standard line that scores have improved, ignoring the fact that this is a nationwide trend, mayoral control or no. Reverend Al further can't be bothered to notice New York's rich history of rampant test score manipulation. All the reformies jumped up and down when they improved under Al's pal Mike Bloomberg, and viciously ridiculed Diane Ravitch, who noticed the NAEP scores painted a vastly different picture. The following year, the New York Times and others noticed she was right, and Mike Bloomberg's draconian methods made no significant difference.

I particularly like this line:

There’s no disputing this fact: Mayoral control is the best way to run the largest public school system in the nation.

How could anyone argue with that, since there's no disputing it? But actually, there is. Diane Ravitch has been calling it a myth for years, and wrote in one of her books that it was a reformy shortcut to circumvent democracy. Bill Gates didn't spend $4 million promoting it just for fun,  Leonie Haimson calls it fundamentally undemocratic. I argued in the Daily News that it was destructive to public education. So there is, in fact, dispute, and I'd argue Sharpton has put forth another of those new and trendy "alternative facts" here.

I was particularly fond of this line:

First, public comment rules would change and the Board of Education would be able to meet in “executive session” — in other words, behind closed doors. The board could therefore make decisions without public comment.

I've been to many PEP meetings, as well as school closing hearings, and I've never seen Al Sharpton show his face. Had Sharpton bothered to show up, he'd have noticed that community residents do indeed get to speak, for two minutes each. He'd also have noticed that not only PEP members, but also school chancellors sat there playing around on their Blackberries blatantly ignoring what communities had to say. He'd also have noticed that decisions had already been made, and that the mayor's reps voted as told, regardless of community input. Liza Featherstone called the PEP a fake school board, and everything I've seen and heard supports that.

In fact, Mayor Michael Bloomberg fired three PEP members rather than allow them to vote against him. I'd argue, therefore, that NYC's form of mayoral control more closely resembles mayoral dictatorship. Sharpton can call previous forms of educational input corrupt and ineffective, but taking community control away is fundamentally anti-democratic. Furthermore, this is not an "either or" situation. In creating a better system, we could reform the old one if need be. Nonetheless, I'd rather see communities in control than a mayor.

It's particularly egregious that mayoral control is absolute only when we have a reformy mayor. Bill de Blasio openly opposed charter schools when he ran, yet NY State would not allow him to block Eva Moskowitz. Instead it instituted a law forcing the city to pay rent for charters whether it wanted them or not.

I have no idea why Reverend Al is suddenly an authority on education. I know his interest seemed to coincide with a $500,000 contrbution, and that he rapidly thereafter embraced reformies like Duncan, Bloomberg, and Newt. I know that none of them support working people or union, and I know the kids we serve will suffer for it. I know when push came to shove at Jamaica High School and elsewhere, Sharpton was nowhere to be found.

I see absolutely no reason to listen to his highly flawed arguments now.

Congratulations to all my colleagues who've earned a break today. We have a few months off, and we need it. So go take a trip. Or go to the beach. Or stay home and do whatever makes you happy. Lots of principals will say you do that to return refueled and recharged. In September they'll all say how excited they are to be back. Sometimes I believe them, but other times I don't.

But make no mistake, we are at war. Barack Obama and Arne Duncan degraded our profession by taking suitcases of money from reformies, and consequently pushing for teachers to be rated by junk science. They also insisted on the proliferation of charter schools, which are largely non-union workhouses for recent college grads (or not) who may put up with it a year or two. They paved the way for Trump and DeVos.

An issue with no union is you're on your own. This is a bad place to be when the supervisors and principals are thirty years old if you're lucky. If their main qualification is having hacked the miserable charter gig for a year longer than anyone else, it doesn't precisely speak to their leadership qualities.

There is absolutely no doubt that's the model Donald Trump, Betsy DeVos and the largely insane US Supreme Court wish to replicate. They've had it with all this career stuff. Pensions are outdated. Better to have a 401K, hope for the best, and find out what the most edible brand of cat food is for your golden years.

The only road ahead for us is paved with activism. I'm hoping to impress this on union leadership as well. So far, though, they're worried about offending people who like Donald Trump. The problem, though, is that people who like Donald Trump actually support this stuff. I don't know how, exactly. Last night I was at a retirement party talking to a retired teacher who supports Trump. He was telling me how wonderful retirement was, and how via this and that he actually brings in more money by not working than by working.

I pointed out that, whatever Fox News may have said on the subject, all of his heroes oppose his retirement. They oppose his health care. I'd argue they oppose his fundamental dignity, though we didn't get to that point. Oddly, he acknowledged all that, but didn't want to dwell on it. What he wanted to discuss was why I blocked him on Facebook.

I did that because, though I long tolerated and responded to his frequent use of ad hominem and strawman attacks on me and my beliefs, I found it beyond the pale when he used them on one of my Muslim colleagues. She's a mom who is fearful for her children since the advent of Trump. I understand that. I told Fox-following friend that she sent her kids to Muslim schools and worried for their safety. His wondered what they taught in those places. I wondered what they taught in all religious schools.

He says not all Trump supporters are racists. I'm sure that's true, though I'd argue that anyone who supported Orange Man is more tolerant of racism and bigotry than I am. I'd also argue, though, that all or most racists are Trump supporters, and that this is not remotely coincidental.

I'd say the hatred toward ethnic groups is one and the same with hatred toward union and good jobs.

We need to oppose all of it. We need to do so publicly and vocally. We need to wake up the sleeping giant that is our membership. Public School Proud is nice, but not remotely enough. If you don't think we're in crisis, you aren't paying attention.

A friend of mine says there are only two problems with the UFT--the membership and the leadership. Our challenge now is awakening and activating both, and we've got our work cut out for us.

This school year I went to UFT Executive Board twice a month. The only one I missed was the last one, as I'm told that was some catered affair with waiters and such, in which we celebrate our achievements. I was not in a particularly celebratory mood after a year of unnecessarily adversarial episodes.

There are seven of us who represent the high schools, and 95 who ostensibly represent everyone else. We are outvoted at every turn, so it can be discouraging. I can generally shrug it off, as I am not surprised when Unity fails to display capacity for growth or change. The only time I was really quite upset was the night I brought a substantive and detailed class size resolution and they voted it down based on nonsense. However, I got over it and I doubt they will be able to shock me again unless they suddenly turn supportive.

If you've been reading my notes, the thing that most stands out is that virtually nothing would happen if we were not there. They'd probably just eat their cardboard sandwiches and go home. Once or twice Unity tried to change that up, but the questions they had people ask were generally so stupid they'd have been better off keeping their mouths shut. Fortunately for Unity, its members are quite skilled at keeping their mouths shut. That's mostly what they are selected to do, since their loyalty oaths explicitly prohibit them from unapproved utterances.

Sure, sometimes they call the question if, perish forbid, we are discussing something the High School reps brought up. (Recently Secretary Howard Schoor praised a Unity member for calling a question after having said precisely nothing all year.) And sure they'll get up and speak against anything we bring up if they're told to do so. Will they make credible arguments? Probably not, but it doesn't really matter when we're outnumbered 14 to 1.

So now maybe you're asking why I even bother to go. There are a few reasons. For one thing, I've never seen leadership in the position of having to answer questions from lowly teachers before. How could we not take advantage? Because I take notes, I've gotten into the habit of preparing my questions word for word in advance. This way I need not record my own comments while others are speaking. Often the answer is something like, "We'll look into it." Sometimes they follow up and sometimes they don't. Sometimes they say, "We'll take it under advisement," and what I hear is, "We'll ignore it utterly."

But there's a good takeaway here. See if you notice a pattern:


In other areas we fared better. We asked questions about supporting immigrants and UFT actually held an immigration forum. There was an expansion of workshops for immigrants all over the city. There was much discussion over the Netflix documentary called 13. UFT eventually held a showing and discussions about it. No one knows how else they may have been influenced because outside meetings, when given a choice, Unity never talks to us about anything. When we asked who changed Trump's name when bemoaning racism to "the Presidential Election" the answer was "the leadership of this union," as though that should end all discussion. It did, but only because we then knew no one would personally own up to it.

We supported just about every initiative they brought up. We opposed their waffling on Trump and their support of a homophobe for city council. But when they're in campaign mode, they say we reflexively oppose everything they bring up. In fact, they are describing themselves, not us.

I'm glad to do this work and I don't regret a thing. There are people in leadership with whom I work eagerly, and there are times when we can work behind the scenes without worrying about caucus politics. My goal is to help improve things for working teachers, and I absolutely believe the MORE motto that our working conditions are student learning conditions. I'll support all efforts that move in that direction.

But it's sad to see UFT Unity as the reflexive Party of No. They can do better, and I hope at least some of them know it, Five decades of unfettered power have not had the effect of making them reflective or visionary. People hired by virtue of loyalty tend not to be our best advocates. Time after time I see them scrambling to justify leadership positions (and thus their part or full time jobs) regardless of actual ground conditions. We're under siege like never before and we need to do better. I'm ready to help, and I'm fairly certain all my fellow High School Executive Board members are too.

Today, after having given our Regents exams, after having finalized and turned in all our grades, NY City high school teachers will face our students. Well, that is, we will face the students who bother to show up. All the students know grades are in. This is an innovation created by Dennis "Waffles" Walcott, reformy extraordinaire.

Personally, I don't believe that grades are everything. I think there's more to education than passing tests. We have a lot of interactions that aren't recorded, and we do a lot of things that are not actually required by contract. Of course we get no credit for these things, not on the Danielson rubric, not on the junk science ratings, and our supervisors don't even know when we work things out for kids. But we're teachers and that's what we do.

Nonetheless, high school students are not coming in today expecting help with non-academic issues. They're not coming in expecting help with academic issues either. In fact, a whole lot of them are simply not coming in at all, and I don't blame them. I mean, it's nice to come and say hello to your teacher and friends. However, when I was a teenager, if you told me that the grades were all in and there were no consequences for my non-attendance, you'd probably find me at the beach.

I teach ESL, and a lot of my students will show up. I'll show up too, because, you know, it's my job and I get paid and stuff. But it's not a productive use of our time. If we all have to come in, and the grades are a fait acompli,  the reformies who devised this should have found a better way for us to spend our time. Maybe they could send us all to a baseball game or a play. Maybe we could visit a college. Maybe there is something we can do other than sit in a classroom when class time is effectively over.

Actually I know they'll never do that, so here's my real idea--why not just push the Regents exams forward one day, and have us teach one day before the Regents exams? Wouldn't a class day be more productive if the students thought it were actually worth showing up?  Now I realize I'm just a lowly teacher whose paycheck is a mere fraction of Dennis Walcott's. And I've never been to a Leadership Academy or even an administration school (though he hasn't either). But naturally, by virtue of his innate reforminess alone, his idea is much better than mine. Still, I have no idea why.

My kids are great, and I'm sure they will pose no problems for me or anyone. But what if they weren't? What if they really didn't want to show and their parents forced them? What if they know their grades cannot be lowered, they can't be suspended, and it's highly unlikely there will be any consequence for any actions that aren't specifically felonious?

Dennis Walcott wasn't worried about things like that, because he wasn't a teacher. Who cares if Johny commits an atrocity in Miss Grundy's class? It's not like the AC was gonna break down in Walcott's  office, or the window air conditioners in Bloomberg's SUV were threatened. It's not like he was gonna have to eat whatever was left over on the last day the school cafeteria was open. And this certainly was not gonna result in bad service at his gala luncheon at the Plaza.

So if you're sitting five periods in a classroom that looks like the one above, consider sending a thank you note to Dennis Walcott. The thing about reformies is they're all about wasting your time. They don't really care about the quality of education. They have their eye on opportunities. After all, Eva Moskowitz is barely pulling in 500K a year, and you can barely buy a house with that these days. There are more charters to be built, and cyber-charters that don't even have to technically exist to rake in the bucks.

If you and your kids have to spend your time sitting around doing nothing for no good reason, well, that's a small price to pay for all this progress.

It's old news that NY State tends to give Eva Moskowitz a blank check for whatever. First of all, she doesn't need to follow no stinking rules for pre-K. Reformies make a big thing out of talking about "public charter schools," but the only time they're really public is when they've got their hands in your pockets. Once they have your money, they do whatever they damn please.

There's a whole lot of talk about mayoral control, and why or why not Bill de Blasio deserves it. I don't support mayoral control, as it's been an unmitigated disaster for city students and teachers. For years I attended PEP meetings where entire communities spoke in defense of their schools. Bloomberg's stooges sat there and played with their Blackberries as we wasted our breath. Meanwhile, the shell game of shuffling kids from one building to another and closing the schools they entered continued unabated.

When de Blasio was elected, I thought maybe mayoral control wouldn't be so bad. After all, he ran opposing charter schools. But when he denied the Moskowitz Monster increased space, the reformies brought suitcases of cash to Albany and bought themselves a law that NYC would have to pay rent for charters if it denied them space. So basically, mayoral control was absolute with a reformy mayor but modified when anyone not frothing at the mouth took the office.

In short, who needs it? Why does de Blasio even want it? He and Cuomo can complain about how irresponsible it is to have more democracy in school boards, and UFT leadership can join them in that chorus. But teachers and students are certainly not better off with mayoral control. Without it we may not have seen so many comprehensive high schools dismantled rather than improved. In fact, we wouldn't have seen such a weakening in union as schools were staffed with newbies justifiably afraid to stand up.

Meanwhile, the charters needed to get something. So what does Eva need? Evidently, the way to put children first is to get rid of all those inconvenient teacher certification requirements. Why should Eva's teachers have to bother learning how to write lesson plans when they just have them handed to them and do any damn thing they're told? After all, you're lucky if they last an entire school year, and with the incredible churn this makes for uniformity. Better to have someone following a recipe than actually creating a lesson. That's what you want from a role model for your children, isn't it? As long as they pass the tests?

Here's a fact you won't be reading in any of the NY papers--anyone who can't get a job working for the DOE gets one in a charter. Discontinued? No problem. Suspended without pay from the DOE? We welcome you with open arms. Now I'm not saying that people who are in these circumstances necessarily merit them (having seen seen the DOE go after people for no good reason once or twice) . But isn't it ironic that you read all this crap from Eva's astroturf buddies, "Families for Excellent Schools," about how awful we are, and how the DOE needs more power to get rid of us--yet when they do get rid of us, they're the first ones to grab us up and put us to work?

There is an effort to marginalize our profession. That's why outfits like TFA are happy to grab up Ivy League do-gooders and have them educate the bootless and unhorsed for a few years before they get Real Jobs administering Daddy's hedge fund, or whatever. That's why reformy Belweather, under the guise of helping us, unashamedly attacks our pensions with false claims. And that's a good part of why Moskowitz and her BFFs want to hire less qualified teachers even as they claim to be saving the children from the scourge of unionized career teachers.

The other part, of course, is that they don't want to deal with people full of independent thought. Better to grab them right out of college before they develop a voice. And I guess that's good if we're raising children to be complacent Walmart employees.

I want something better for our children, not only now but also when they grow up. That's why I support union and oppose charter schools. Trump and Obama and Duncan and Gates and all the folks who run schools can talk all day about charters and "choice." But the only choice I want for our kids is the choice to send them to the same kinds of schools to which our leaders send their own kids. I want schools with small class sizes, with ample supplies and decent facilities. I want schools that educate the whole child rather than test prep.

It needs to be about what our kids need, not just whatever Eva wants.

A lot of us have no idea what ATRs go through. I speak to ATRs frequently, and I have a very good idea of how I'd feel as an ATR. Over at ATR Adventures, Bronx ATR tells it like it is, and pretty much like I thought it would be:

 Everything is taken away from you, except the pay check. 

Many ATR teachers tell me that the answer they get when they complain to UFT reps is that they still have a job. I'm glad for that. But as for me, a lot of my identity is wrapped up in what I do. If I were coming to work every day to teach Chinese, physics, trigonometry, or whatever, I would feel very differently than I do now about the prospect of coming to work every morning.

You will have no routine. You won't know the kids, teachers, administrators, building, or neighborhood. 

That's pretty depressing. We make little connections that make our lives meaningful. Our relationships with our students deepen and blossom over the year and we're eventually able to understand them fairly quickly. Of course, on the first days they're testing us to see what they can get away with. Thus the saying, "Don't smile until Christmas." If you're an ATR, Christmas never comes and every week could be the first week.

You will spend a lot of money in parking garages or on tickets. You will have a new cold every time you change schools, because of the different populations and stress. 

You sometimes need to get the hang of parking. At some schools, people rent driveways so they won't have to spend time looking around. That last part, about frequent colds,  was unexpected. But I do know several ATRs who have frequent colds and health issues. 

You will have to carry everything with you- coat, bag, food, etc.. You will start at 9 in one school, 7:35 at another.

School schedules are notoriously fickle. I think at our school this is the first time in a while it's stayed the same two years in a row. But imagine going from one school to another. Every time you make connections, it's time to leave. In our chronically overcroweded school there are places to hang coats. But bags and such, well, you'd have to be lucky.

And don't forget the rampant prejudice against ATR teachers, by both us and administration. Back when I used to write for Gotham School, where they subjected me to brutal editing, they gleefully posted a piece by a young teacher full of stereotypes about ATRs. I'm lucky that, in my school at least, admin seems to take them one at a time. There are four former ATR teachers permanently appointed in my department, though one is technically an English rather than ESL teacher.

Bronx ATR has some good advice for his ATR colleagues:

  Try to have a positive attitude. Try to exercise more, preferably before work. Watch yourself for depression and addictions ( shopping, overeating, gambling, and any of the more illicit ones). I have several friends who have become seriously ill and quit. Dress in layers - some schools are 90 degrees, others 40. Carry hand sanitizer and earplugs. (Yes, believe it or not, these rooms can get so loud your hearing will be in danger.) Carry some generic class work. Expect no help from the UFT and you won't be disappointed. Pick your battles, because you may win the battle and lose the war. Most importantly- don't lose your head.

I'm going to first say I understand having low expectations. But I'm also going to say that people in leadership do help ATR teachers. I learned this when Amy Arundell, who I did not know at all at the time, called me out of the blue and demanded that I help an ATR teacher get a job in my school. I was pretty happy to get a request like that. It was much better than previous requests, like, "You MUST support this thing/ candidate/ bad idea/ whatever." Those requests were easy to ward off, with, "What are you gonna do if I don't? Throw me out of Unity Caucus?" People who work for the union don't expect to hear that.

Anyway I managed to get this person an interview, my AP was impressed, and this person was temporarily hired. Alas, the principal was not impressed, and this person was gone at year's end. But a year or two later we got a new principal who actually liked what he saw, and now this person is permanently appointed. I was very proud to be part of a loose group of people who found common cause and made this happen.

Of course low expectations mean never being disappointed. I make it a point to enter certain enterprises with very low expectations. The rest of the advice is on point, and I've seen bad things happen to those who don't take it. I'd add that blogger Chaz has a very healthy attitude about being an ATR, and that's worth emulating too.  He strives to find the humor in his situation, and manages to overcome the worries that bother so many ATR teachers.

Be kind to ATR teachers you meet. They're usually in that situation for the crime of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Show them around and introduce them to people. Try to make them as comfortable as you can. Always remember, there but for the grace of God go you, or indeed me.

The highlight of the educational season, of course, is the Class Size Matters Skinny Awards. Leonie Haimson organizes them and finds a whole lot of cool stuff happening in education. In fact, I won one year. People are always coming up to me and saying, "Hey, aren't you that guy who won the Skinny award?" I get all "Aw shucks," before coming around and saying, "Yeah, that's me."

The restaurant was okay, and we got a coupon for a free drink. However, they didn't have tap beer so Norm Scott and I ran down the block and found some. Norm picked up the tab, and I'm thankful, but three years ago we drank fourteen-dollar beers at the NY Hilton and I paid. I'm still waiting for someone to buy me a fourteen-dollar beer. But you can hardly find them anywhere. 

This year there were multiple people and things that bore celebrating. First, of course, were the lawyers who gave their time to Class Size Matters. There were up and down stories, but I was very happy to hear of a victory against one of my least favorite humans, Andrew Cuomo. Though Cuomo claims to be a "student lobbyist," he lobbies for less money for schools that most need it. Wendy Lecker and David Sciarra put an end to that plan.

Another victory was rendering School Leadership Team meetings public, and that was led by Arthur Schwartz and Laura Barbieri. When this first happened, I wondered why it was so important. At my school, SLT meetings are not particularly eventful, and I always kind of thought if anyone wanted to watch, well, go ahead. In fact sometimes people did ask and that's exactly what we told them. But things are different elsewhere, and I'll get back to that.

It was amazing and inspiring to see two student journalists from Townsend Harris. Brian Sweeney, their faculty advisor, had nothing but praise for Mehrose Ahmad and Sumaita Hasan, and it was great to see students honored in a forum that usually recognizes adults.

These particular students worked to expose their then-principal, Rosemarie Jahoda, and I don't suppose she'll be sending them a Christmas card. There is, nonetheless, a never-ending supply of shortsighted Leadership Academy principals with little teaching experience and even less regard for either students or faculty. It's really hard for me to understand why the DOE looks at an administrator who's presided over other disasters and says, "Hey, let's give that person a promotion."

A great moment for me was when the CPE 1 parents were honored. Their determination and dedication is an example for us all. I've watched them for months as they showed up everywhere and anywhere to tell their story to everyone and anyone. They broke into song as they were honored. They represent what can be if we are fearless and determined. They are a model, and given Orange Man's plan to make the USA Right to Work, we're gonna need a good model. They attended not only their SLT meetings, but also the 3020a hearings of the chapter leader, like the UFT delegate, facing charges for no reason whatsoever, according to the arbitrators.

Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa was there. Diane Ravitch was there. Representing the UFT as far as I could see, other than Norm and yours truly, were Katie Lapham, Jonathan Halabi, Gary Rubinstein, and Aixa Rodriguez. UFT leadership sent exactly no one to celebrate these achievements. At the Executive Board and the Delegate Assembly they spoke of what a good job they did at Harris and CPE 1, but it appears beyond the pale for them to either celebrate with or give any sliver of credit to spontaneous and independent education activism. 

I don't doubt that leadership helped with both of these situations, but these things don't happen in isolation. The key factor in both these situations was the actors themselves, to wit, the people being honored at the Skinnies. Leadership's role was one of support. To praise itself while ignoring the incredible bravery of the kids at Harris, or the community at CPE 1, is folly, to say the very least.

Therefore, UFT leadership's absence on Tuesday night was beyond disappointing. Come Right to Work America we're gonna need all the help we can get. Activism will no longer be optional, and we will need to not only celebrate it, but also replicate it wherever possible. If we're too timid and cautious to ally ourselves with those who support progressive education, we're gonna find ourselves out on a limb and all alone. It's sorely disappointing that not one UFT official could show, or even assign someone else to show.

I sincerely hope that leadership can be just a little more forward thinking, beginning right now, and I hope to see someone next year representing the union at large. I'm sure there will be similar events before next year, and in case they want ideas, they know where to find me. As for the Skinnies, if they can't scrape up the money to buy a couple of tickets next year, it's on me. Just let me know.

Little things can mean a lot.

You'd think so, if you read this article in the Daily News, written by folks in reformy Bellwether Education Partners. Personally, I'm suspicious when reformies start looking out for us. Why are the same people who brought us junk science ratings, charters, and all sorts of other nonsense suddenly so interested in our welfare?

The argument is, essentially, that most teachers don't stay long enough to get vested, and that even those who do, may not make it:  

Even if a New York teacher does stay for 10 years, qualifying for some pension does not guarantee it will be a good pension. In New York, a young teacher must stay 24 years before her pension will finally be worth at least her own contributions into the plan plus interest.

I don't suppose anyone thinks ten years equals a good pension, so I'm not sure why that's a revelation. A problem with the second sentence is that is it's simply not true. Teachers can get their contributions back plus interest even if they aren't vested. Once people make assertions that are blatantly untrue, I find it hard to trust them at all. But that's just me.

A better argument is that they lose out on employer contributions. You retain them only if you stay longer, and you could argue that's inequitable. You could also argue, however, that healthy people pay too much for health insurance because they fail to get sick. That's what the Trumpies seem to be saying. In fact, you could make similar arguments against Social Security. Not everyone receives it, and in fact you DON'T get contributions back if you're unwise enough to say, die before you're eligible for payment.I suppose that could become a Trumpie argument for privatization.

On the other hand, you could argue that this system is designed to reward longevity. Is that a bad thing? It's hard for me to see why. You would hope that, with time, teachers acquire wisdom. You would also hope that, with said wisdom, teachers could enrich the lives of our children. Or you could ignore longevity altogether and worry more about how much money someone who quickly gives up teaching takes to the next gig.

The article seems to prefer defined contribution plans, like 401K, to defined benefit plans, like ours. Of course, even the inventor of the 401K plan says it was not designed to replace pensions. Companies favor them because they're off the hook for long-term benefits. But clearly people who receive defined benefits are better off than those who do not. You'll forgive me if I worry more about such people than, say, the Walmart family.

The superiority of defined benefits  applies even to recipients of Tier 6, which sucks compared to Tier 4. Do we want to encourage a gig economy, where people wake up, clean up after horses, drive for Uber, drop off their passengers, and then go to barista jobs to make mochachino for people who work for Bellwether? Do we want to rely on TFAs just passing through on their way to real careers? Or do we want dedicated educators teaching our kids?

In fact, if new teachers want to save more money, they have the option of contributing to TDA. Right now there's a fixed option that would give them 7%. That's 7% more of a guarantee than they'd get with a 401K, under which they could actually lose money. If they want to take more risk, there are a variety of funds they could choose.

Many new teachers do not give a second thought to saving money. I'd argue that forcing them to put away 6% of their pay, as they do in Tier 6, is doing them a service. Young people tend not to be focused on the long-term. In September I had to pretty much bully a young teacher into signing up for health benefits by persuading her she was not, in fact, Supergirl. The only reason I'm in TDA is because a former chapter leader urged me to start at 5%. He told me I wouldn't notice the difference. I didn't, and upped my contributions as I could afford them. I'm grateful for that. 

I'm pretty tired of reading idiotic studies suggesting that teachers don't improve after two years, implying we should therefore replace experienced teachers with newbies. I'm also tired of business owners trying to give the lowest common denominator to working people. I started this job working for $14,000 a year, and that year I turned down an offer of a higher paying job driving a FedEx truck. The first day I taught, a grizzled old vet told me to get out while I could and get a job in Long Island. I decided right then and there that I never wanted to be like that guy, and I'm happy to say that over thirty years later I'm not.

I love this job. I love the kids I teach and it's my honor and privilege to serve them. I could retire tomorrow if that weren't true, and the day that it isn't, I will do just that. But hell, I'm thankful I have a defined benefit plan. I'm very happy that if something were to happen to me after I retired, I can make sure my wife is taken care of. I do have money in TFA, and I've saved as much as I could. But I'm glad I don't have to depend on it.

As for Bellwether, if they're so concerned about teachers, I suggest they take a stand against the junk science ratings that freak us out on such a regular basis. I suggest they take a position against private and charter schools that undermine public education. I suggest, since they're so concerned about quality education, that they push to emulate Finland, where all teachers are unionized and the rich people have to send their kids to public schools just as the poor people do.

And I respectfully suggest, when that happens, education will improve. You'll see better teaching conditions for teachers, and therefore better learning conditions for students. As a direct result, the number of short-term teachers will decrease significantly. Then Bellwether won't need to worry so much about those who don't make pension.

I'm always available for consultation, if they're interested. 

I agree with Mulgrew that the state ought to keep out of NYC business. While Mulgrew spoke of this in terms of mayoral control, I'd argue it extends to a few other areas. I recall when our good buddy Senator Flanagan was pushing the Bloomberg dream bill that would kill seniority rights for NYC teachers only. It was amazing this guy had the audacity to back this bill, which wouldn't have affected his district at all.

Another example of the state pushing its unwelcome nose into NYC issues was when it insisted that NYC pay for charter rent whether or not it wanted said charters. Back when reformy Mike Bloomberg was mayor, he could do any damn thing he wanted, When NYC chose a leader who openly opposed charters, the state needed to supersede the voters. School choice, actually, means you choose to support and enrich the reformies. When you choose otherwise, screw you and the horse-carriage you rode around Central Park in.

I don't, however, support mayoral control. I agree with Mulgrew that the current form is awful, but I have not been altogether impressed with the central DOE. I'd like to see a form of governance that had community voice beyond the ability to get up at PEP and be ignored by all. James Eterno suggests, without mayoral control, we might see that. For my money, mayoral control has been a disaster, resulting in the breakup of many community schools and a weakening of union citywide. I have no idea what it's good for, other than weakening community. Diane Ravitch wrote Gates and other reformies love it, because they don't have to go through all that messy democracy stuff. Patrick Sullivan would shed no tears for its demise.

Of course I'm not happy with the ATR severance package. I'd like to see ATR teachers be, you know, teachers, rather than individuals condemned to wander the DOE desert. I know that if my school were closed it would be very tough for me to find a job, and my observation reports are not bad at all. Yet I'm at top salary, and I'm confident my principal would offer little protest if I were to refer to myself as a pain in the ass. We have known for decades that it was tough for seasoned teachers to transfer into higher-paying Long Island districts. The 2005 contract made it just as difficult for us to move within our own district.

There was quite an interesting comment from an elementary chapter leader who's been excessed after 16 years. Her principal had been told to max out the classes and get rid of everyone she no longer needed. She asked about class size reduction, which would save her job. Mulgrew said UFT was on the case, and I hope he's right. However, at an Executive Board meeting where we pushed class size as a priority, we were told the union sacrificed to place class size in the contract. It wasn't mentioned that it happened 50 years ago, and judging from the excessed chapter leader, it has worked in a less than optimal fashion. Mulgrew, who generally pops in to say a few words and leaves, wasn't even there. Class size needs to be much more of a priority than it is now. There are multiple reasons for this, but if we want to be selfish and look only at how it benefits teachers, that chapter leader is a case in point.

Jonathan Halabi got up and objected to the endorsement of Fernando Cabrera. Cabrera's beliefs, according to this piece, and the included video, are less than praiseworthy, to me at least.

"Godly people are in government," Mr. Cabrera said, referring to Uganda's leadership. "Gay marriage is not accepted in this country. Even when the United States of America has put pressure and has told Uganda, 'We’re not going to fund you anymore unless you allow gay marriage.' And they have stood in their place. Why? Because the Christians have assumed the place of decision-making for the nation."

Mr. Cabrera goes on to praise the nation's socially conservative positions for an alleged rapid decline in the country’s AIDS rate, and says the infusion of religion into government has helped the country's financial outlook.

I can only suppose that I'm not Mr. Cabrera's kind of people. I'd certainly hope that UFT leadership weren't either. A Unity member got up and asserted that what Jonathan said wasn't true, with no evidence as to why not. It's pretty clear to me that Jonathan was absolutely right, and that Cabrera's ties to the so-called alt-right indicate he's not to be trusted.

Peter Lamphere got up and asked for support for FMPR. I went to the Dark Horse pub afterward and listened to FMPR President Mercedes Martinez. I left completely assured she is a badass advocate for Puerto Rican teachers, students and people, willing to go the extra mile for them. They did, however, disaffiliate themselves from AFT at some point, and there's a lot of bad blood. I'd argue FMPR, in its current form, is kind of a union opposition caucus on steroids. Of course, I think there is a need for such organizations.

A big hanging question mark is Janus. I had hoped Mulgrew would elaborate on what the state might do to counter it. Instead I heard that it will depend on what the specific ruling is, and I can't argue with that. It's funny to be a chapter leader, contemplating what to do with people who choose not to pay union dues. It's pretty sad that we live in a country so ignorant of what union means for working people.

Maybe we should move to make the American union movement a bigger part of what we teach in history classes. When I was in high school, I heard not one single word about it. I hear it gets covered somewhat, but I think its importance is not well understood, even within our union. I have issues with UFT leadership, and I may have referred to them here or there on this little blog. But I know exactly where we stand without union, and it's no place I want to be. It's no place I want for my kid or my students either.

Saturday night I attended a Bronx forum with Federacion de Maestros de Puerto Rico leadership. It was organized by tireless UFT activist Aixa Rodriguez. MORE's Jia Lee and New Action's Jonathan Halabi were also in attendance.

If you've been following the news about Puerto Rico, even a little bit, you know it's in an economic mess. They're 72 billion dollars in debt, and controlled by a board that pretty much doesn't give a crap about the people who live there. Pensions have been eliminated for most public workers. Though teachers have somehow avoided that particular fate, funding for them should disappear sometime next year. This is a dire issue, as Puerto Rican teachers neither pay nor receive social security.

I'm fascinated by the saga of union in Puerto Rico. FMPR was formed in 1966 as an alternative to AMPR, which they call a company union. FMPR leadership says AMPR views teachers as professionals, whereas they view us as working people. This is an interesting distinction, because UFT often calls iteself a union of professionals. Does being a "professional" somehow preclude being a working person?

Another thing that makes things a little cloudy is that AMPR represents administrators. I've always thought it odd that administration had a union at all, but being in the same union with them would be awkward indeed. As a chapter leader, I'm generally careful about how I speak with and treat UFT members. I'm a little more direct with administrators. I'm not sure how I'd do my job if I were uneasy about being directly adversarial with administration when necessary.

FMPR is upset because AMPR leadership didn't oppose school closings. Does that remind you of anyone? Under today's AMPR leadership, 45,000 teachers somehow became 32,000 teachers. This is similar to (although considerably worse than) what happened under Bloomberg in NYC as he failed to replace retirees. I can't be the only one who's noticed that 34 students in a class has become more the norm than the max these days.

In 1999, public employee strikes were prohibited by law in Puerto Rico. That's the same year FMPR became the exclusive bargaining agent for Puerto Rican teachers. In 2008, FMPR led a 10-day strike. While they won a raise for teachers, they also incurred the wrath of the government, which decertified them as a bargaining agent. That year, Puerto Rican teachers were given a choice to affiliate with AMPR. AMPR was the only name on the ballot, and managed to lose anyway. (Can you imagine one of those countries who gets a "democratic" yes or no vote on the dictator in which the dictator loses?)

A few years later, again given the choice of AMPR or nothing, Puerto Rican teachers chose AMPR. I suppose they believe AMPR is better than nothing. Now personally, I don't see, "Better Than Nothing" as the optimal campaign slogan. I guess if you have no opponent, though, it'll do well enough.

In 2005, FMPR disaffiliated itself from AFT. This is undoubtedly why we had trouble getting them support at the UFT Executive Board and Delegate Assembly. FMPR did not feel AFT was doing enough for them. On Saturday night they labeled AFT as unresponsive and corporate. I can understand that. I pay dues to AFT, but I have no vote in it, and no one UFT sends represents my point of view or that of my caucus. And it's not just me. 20,000 NYC high school teachers selected MORE/ New Action to represent them, yet not only AFT, but also NYSUT and NEA have only UFT Unity loyalty oath signers voting.

The AFT disaffiliation had other unintended consequences for FMPR. Because their formal name labeled themselves part of AFT, the government was able to follow up the decertification with a 2010 ruling that they were not a "bonafide" organization. I found that incredible. It was as though the government had declared they didn't exist, and expected them to simply disappear as a result. Somehow, despite having been decertified, they were still collecting union dues. That ended in 2010.

However, 4500 Puerto Rican teachers choose to remain with this activist group, and though their salaries run from only 21-40K per year, they choose to pay dues to two groups. FMPR leaders were fired from their teaching jobs, but they persevered, working multiple jobs to get by. These people never give up no matter what the government does to them.

FMPR is still quite active, supporting one-day strikes and various events. I was happy to hear they greeted Arne Duncan with a one-day strike in 2011. When students strike they support them by showing up and bringing them food and encouragement. So far they've been able to sidestep charter schools and privatization, but that may not last, as recent government dictates allow for it.

Activism is a tricky thing. If things are not that bad, activism is often dormant. Puerto Rico hasn't got that problem, because unfortunately things are dire over there. They don't bother paying substitute teachers these days, and just send kids home when teachers are sick. In the face of school closings even worse than those of rabid Rahm Emanuel in Chicago, students may not even be able to get to school. And who will fight for transportation for those stranded kids? FMPR, of course.

I went to the UFT Mayday rally. I saw maybe 20 people from Unity, and about the same number from MORE/ New Action. In Puerto Rico, 60,000 people took to the streets. They're tired of paying debts incurred by banks, debts they had nothing to do with. They're tired of being on austerity because the crooks in the government mismanaged finances and took no responsibility whatsoever.

Take a look at the Orange Man in DC and ask yourself how hard it would be for that to happen here. There but for the grace of God go us. I'm impressed by the passion and determination of FMPR leadership. It's something we need not only to support, but also emulate.

AFT is now excited about the possibility of affiliating itself with AMPR and gaining a boost in membership. I guess, as we face the specter of Right to Work America, that's a smart move. A smarter move, though, would be to foster and replicate FMPR-style activism.

Alternatively, we can sit on our hands, wait until things get as bad here as they are in Puerto Rico now, and continue hoping for the best.

I’ve been getting feedback of late about end-year pension consults.  I can’t do much about it, not only because have I nothing to do with them, but also because I'm far from an expert on pension. Numbers are not really my forte. But three people who attended a UFT  pension workshop together just reported about their consultations, and all three seemed to wonder over different things. One had a particularly tough experience.

My friend couldn’t get an appointment at UFT Queens for a retirement consult, so she went to Manhattan. She found a coupon, paid $35 for parking and a little more for a roundtrip EZ pass fee. When she got to her destination, the UFT rep went on the computer, and it took her at least five minutes to figure out what my friend would make if she retired in 2020. That’s unusual, since it’s an average, and then a multiple of 2% per year. I don’t like to brag, but I'm a high school graduate and could have figured that pretty quickly.

She then asked how much she’d make if she were to retire now. The woman took another five minutes, and then came up with a figure that clashed with the one my friend had calculated at the UFT retirement workshop. My friend, as instructed, asked the UFT employee to check her W2s. The pension person requested her 2017 returns. This is unusual, as few people I know do their tax returns before the year actually ends. (Maybe Donald Trump, but everyone knows rules don't apply to kings.)

It then took the woman another five minutes to flip through the returns and determine that 2017 was not, in fact, a year for which my friend would have one. Instead of looking through five years of returns, as my friend was asked in a letter, the rep looked only at the 2016 returns and came up with a figure that way. This was problematic because my friend could have made more money other years. In fact, my friend says 2013, 14, and 15 were her best years.

When my friend asked about medical expenses, the woman told her they would be exactly the same. This is unusual, because retirees no longer get prescriptions via UFT Welfare Fund. They to tend to, therefore, incur higher costs. Perhaps the UFT employee didn’t know that. Oddly, I do.

My friend then told the rep that she had gone for a workshop at Queens UFT, attended by 150 people, and that the information she was giving contradicted what she had heard at the workshop. The rep contended the information at the workshop was incorrect. My friend then asked if there was any more information she could give, and the rep said no. The rep claimed said she was correct, and that someone in Queens told 150 people the wrong thing.

My friend then stood up, and said, “Thank you. This consultation is now over.” The rep said, “Look at you. You’re standing up. You have an attitude.” My friend then went outside. The rep followed her and gave her version of the meeting to everyone who happened to be in the waiting room, making certain all present knew about my friend's attitude.

My friend asked the rep to please stop announcing the results of this meeting to everyone in the room, and requested a supervisor. Eventually she got a name. At the appointed floor, someone came out and said a person, not the supervisor, was expecting her. The rep had evidently given her a heads-up. My friend got to give her version of the story to this person. The person apologized for the inconvenience and offered a consultation with someone she described as the top person. My friend asked if they would cover her parking the next time and was told they don't do that.

I'm sorry she has to go again. But I don't blame her for having an attitude. Everyone has an attitude. The best thing to do, as far as I'm concerned, is to adjust it to suit the situation. 

Announcements

Mulgrew welcomes us to final DA school year. Discusses PD survey and large response. Says 61% have curriculum. 67% aligned with PD. Little support for ESL teachers. Special education marginally better. Insufficient CTLE PD. 72% have PD committee, up from 50. PD committee, 66% has meaningful input. 12% say superintendent determines PD.

President’s Report

speaks of VA shooting. Says we cannot accept hate at any time, as rationale for violence.

National—believes Senate will pass a version of health care. Says we will not have an issue in NY because we have great Senators, but perhaps they will pass something as they leave for July 4th holiday. Negotiations at night in secrecy. Says person occupying White House now calls House bill mean, but says Senate bill is full of heart and passion.

Betsy DeVos—says he thinks she should be on TV every day. Let her talk. This would be a great campaign. Let people see what Sec. of Ed. stands for. Once again, she keeps saying it’s up to state whether they want to recognize civil rights. It’s actually illegal, and he hopes people recognize.

Janus fast tracked. We assume US will become Right to Work country, and we think it may happen early 2018.

State—Mayoral control—introduced bill for charter accountability and transparency. Press only wants to talk about mayoral control. Mulgrew would trade nothing for mayoral control. Says he doesn’t support this version of mayoral control, but supports mayoral control. Says 40 school boards preclude great education and proper funding.

Heastie says every year there are “self-governing” issues all over the state. They are all passed by Assembly, which supports local control of local governments. When they ask what we are doing Mulgrew said this is a bunch of crap, because we’re the only county that doesn’t get our local control issues. Rest of state works by different set of rules, has to pay price for what it wants. No longer about mayoral control, but rather precedent that NYC has to pay for its local control issues.

Speaker has said he is now not passing any other local issues. If mayoral control sunsets, next May it will go back to school boards. This will be big fight. Doesn’t matter what version of mayoral control because it appears nothing will get done. If they don’t respect NYC autonomy, Assembly won’t respect other local autonomy. If we don’t get something done there will be 40 school board elections and charters will also be active.

Our position is NYC should be treated as all other municipalities.

Regents—We will go from three to two days of testing in grades 3-8. Consultants lost. Pushed back on standards. Board of Regents directs education, and wants work done on ELLs, preK, and special ed. It is a lot of work, due to our advocacy.

City

CTLE—will be summer training. DOE now approved vendor, but not doing it yet. We’re doing a summer training, will increase number of instructors. Also for paras.

One more day to enroll for catastrophic insurance. Over 8,000 enrolled. Recommended by Welfare Fund.

DOE diversity plan—happy it’s recognized, but plan will not be very helpful. We will have further discussion.

ATR severance package—we have contractual provision, we are always trying to negotiate and have got it done. Have sent out to ATRs. Believe it should be quite helpful. 900 eligible of 1100. Not easy, DOE didn’t want to do it. Believes there will be significant changes in this pool by this time next year. Severance is not pensionable, but if you retire you still get retro.

Mulgrew suggests we all have a party with beer. Is greeted with great enthusiasm, but no one follows up.

Decided not to focus on pursuing skirmishes school to school, and rather to look at systemwide improvements.  We will continue individual fights but we want to picket superintendents. We agree with the mayor that schools should strive for supportive, respectful and safe environments. We need to hold supes responsible for doing jobs with principals. City not doing job.

We have anecdotal evidence but at this time of year we have data, had conversations with field staff. Picked one superintendency in Brooklyn. Supe contracted UFT borough rep, had horrible meeting. Lack of info between supe and team. At next meeting borough rep got everything she asked for. Supe acted differently as chancellor was in room. Data was irrefutable. Created team with chapter leaders to meet as advisory committee.

Tenure decisions come this year. What is criteria? Is it about whether supe likes principal or not? Have said there was evidence of that and will move forward. Said supe behavior has clearly been modified and we have ways of fixing things if they move back. We can always picket again, but we want to first implement agreement. High schools there no longer mandated to use balanced literacy.

We had data and an irrefutable case. This gave us ability to make change. We used DOE data. They denied it and we told them it was their own. We hope to move everything this way next year.

Year Roundup—Says it started election day. Was a wake up. Doesn’t know if we would’ve accomplished our goals but election day showed we are now at forefront of fighting for public ed. Not perceived but real threat. Says it’s time to get over depression. Everyone here figured it out and started moving. Participated in women’s march. We then got introduced to Betsy DeVos, made inroads in her hearing. Most well-known Sec. of Ed. in US. We will continue to battle with her.

DeVos budget horrendous. Showed at state level what we were facing. We brought in folks from Michigan, who presented to legislature of NYS. Budget showed protection of public ed. NYS said this is what you do with public ed.

We introduced chapter advocacy program, and pushed paperwork process. We had 313 complaints. 93% were resolved in our favor. Whoever used it knows no principal wants supe to know what happens in their school. Those resolved centrally were not good for those below. Thanks Debbie Poulos.

APPR complaints successful.
Teachers got 4.5% increase in May.

Constitutional Convention vote coming next year.

City Council budget—presented to them on teacher’s choice. Asked for 20 million, and got 20.1 million.  Number should be in excess of $200 per person.

Community learning schools—results are off the charts. We got 2 mil from state and 1.5 from City Council. Proves solving poverty means coming to UFT.

15 PLC schools. Changed culture, trained everyone. Custodians, cafe staff, everyone comes. Changing culture reduces suspensions.

Next year Constitutional Convention, Janus. Will see what comes from feds. Student achievement and grad rate higher than ever.  We want city and state to protect us and allow us to thrive, and we have achieved our goals. We will still have fights. We will still have to modify behavior of those in middle management.


Staff Director’s Report—LeRoy Barr—

Endorses beer idea. Thanks counselors. Eid recognized, schools closed June 26. Reminds us to set up committees, complete SBOs. Mentions catastrophic insurance. Mentions Hometown Heroes, collaborative event to commemorate educators. Asks for nominations. Says you can nominate principal if you have great working relationship. Wishes happy summer to all.

Mulgrew—Says MLC had to figure out health care savings. Says there was a lot of debate here. Says things we utilize most will drop in price. Says we are only work force that doesn’t pay for health care and we have officially reached our requirement. 5:28


Questions—

CL—Just got excessed with four others there for over 16 years. Last year, principal said was drop in enrollment. Has dropped by half. Had thought they were safe. Excessed because of salary increase from raises, said principal. Says her budget office told her she had to max out every classroom and everyone else had to go. At some point in future, can we achieve goal of lowering class size? Can we put lowering class size back on table?

Mulgrew—already on table. We want and tell NYC we have to lower class sizes. That principal told you that means I have to hear from superintendent what she thinks of that. We will look at budget and find things that need to be cut.  Class size piece always front and center. We have this some places because of gentrification. We have to deal with this. Lots of teachers are embracing mobility. If we are going to have drastic changes, major drop in population, we may need a different system for mobility. Other districts exploding. May have to look at more flexible transfers.

CL—Praises Mulgrew. Summative conferences happening, but many teachers haven’t gotten all observations. What is recourse if principal didn’t do job and rating not good?

Mulgrew—Have to document. Next year is first year of matrix. Matrix is our friend. Waiting to see results. If you haven’t had required number of observations, you have to document it. This is why committees are mandated. 60% of schools in one superintendency didn’t do required applications. CL should report to DRs.

CL—If Janus goes as we expect, what happens to benefits, grievances, will I check list when people ask for help?

Mulgrew—Depends a lot on decisions. What you get in benefits from Welfare Fund is more than you get in dues. What if benefits are withheld? Will depend on SCOTUS.

Q—Many staff members receiving D, not happy. What is their right, what is UFT doing to help?

Mulgrew—District 3 has precious superintendent. We are pulling data. Want to see what else is going on in school, in this district. One member has developing because he couldn’t service ELL kids in his care, but his class had so many different levels it would meet educational neglect level. Asking principal and supe what they are doing.


Motions

James Eterno—Resolution for vote on ATR agreement, meetings and votes for ATRs. Reads, cannot motivate as it is for this month.

Voted down.

Endorsements—Paul Egan—various city council candidates.

Passes.

Jonathan Halabi—New Action—Given what happened in November, people have been strategizing on preventing Trump agenda. We need to be at forefront locally. One candidate, Fernando Cabrera, doesn’t share our values on hate. Key funding from far right orgs. They know who’s most open to those suggestions. On charters, not clear, open to funding things we’d oppose. Open to funding private schools. Boasts he is social conservative, and district is conservative. Worst is he is a homophobe. Believes, preaches, and came back from Uganda, praised jailing gays and lesbians. Not good enough when we know what is in his heart. We know there is real danger of hate, not because he voted wrong, but because he is not with us.

Marjorie Stamberg—When endorsements come up, we have to stop thinking in terms of individuals and think in terms of class. Democrats can’t fight Trump. We need union movement.

Eliu Lara—Disagrees with Jonathan, says he’s not homophobe. Says he spent 18 years as counselor. Says he approves.

Halabi—Point of order—asks for separate vote on Cabrera.

Mulgrew—denies.

Questions called.

Resolution passed.

Contingency Resolution—Paul Egan—Asks for Exec. Board to endorse during summer.

Passed.

Solidarity with AMPR—Evelyn de Jesus—Puerto Rico suffering. Hedge funds want money. Board wants to get paid first, worry about island later. Says AMPR, sole bargaining unit, has reached out for support. Asks for support.

Peter Lamphere—Moves to amend—asks to insert FMPR. Evelyn correct AMPR bargaining agent. Is more than one agent. FMPR led strike, and is reason PR doesn’t have charters. Entire leadership was fired. DA voted in solidarity with them, would like to extend this solidarity.

LeRoy Barr—Rises in support of resolution, against amendment. Says we support all workers. PR under devastation, and all need our support. We have only endorsed this group because they came to us via AFT. National level comes via AFT. This group worked with AFT and disaffiliated. Group does not have right to bargain for PR teachers right now. We’re gonna fight on behalf of injustice. Asking we do not allow res to be amended by something that violates our own process. Let them go back to AFT and get approval.

Question called.

Amendment fails.

Resolution passes.