This email came into me into this afternoon.
Dear Steering -
The
two of us would like to request that steering implement some form of
sanction on Peter Zucker for publishing the Contract Strategy document
that was sent to the email list.
We
requested specifically that the proposal not be republished on the
blogs, and we feel that the publication is direct violation of our trust
and a violation of our norms ("Speak for yourself unless you have permission to speak for others.").
Our
caucus should have the right to decide when and how to publish its
strategies for the union membership and leadership to see.
We
should implement some guidelines for bloggers and academics. XXXXX X.
has shared some model guidelines from Teachers Unite that might be
useful.
Thank you,
XXXXX XXXXXXX and X. XXXXX
Let's examine this.
MORE is f****** losing it's mind.
Not only was this "document" created in secret, but some of the signatories were not truly aware of what they were adding their names to. Secondly, this was voted on and passed at the last general meeting. Why the secrecy still? Don't think for a moment that others at the meeting have shared this either verbally or by email. Plus, no one had a problem when I posted this back on March 29. But why this time, with this "document"?
Where I come from you put your name to something, you believe in something, you stand by that. If you don't then you have a problem with what you put your name to or what you signed. It's called being a man. To man up to something. Not slithering away like a snake.
I was inundated with email, demanding that I take the blog post down immediately. One signatory was beside themselves and didn't wish to have their name attached to such a document (even though I redacted all names).
So what rule(s) did I break?
"Speak for yourself unless you have permission to speak for others."
The blog post of April 29 I was speaking for myself. I did not criticize nor endorse the "document." But if one looks at the bylaws, this is what falls under "Norms."
Article III-Norms
a. Assume good intentions.
b. Our time together is valuable. Remember to speak with purpose and WAIT (ask
yourself: “Why Am I Talking?”). Please make sure your comments and questions are
concise, address the issue at hand, and add something new to the discussion.
c. Listen actively when others are speaking.
d. Raise questions, disagreements and problems directly and as soon as possible.
Speak to the issue, not the person.
e. Speak for yourself unless you have permission to speak for others. Be clear when
representing a position on behalf of an individual or a group.
f. When representing MORE publicly, be clear as to whether or not you are representing
yourself as a member of MORE or MORE as a group. If representing MORE as a
group, make sure you have the authority to do so, and respect our collective
agreements.
g. Respect all viewpoints, perspectives and social identities.
h. If there are conflicts regarding adherence to these norms, individuals should inform the
chair during the meeting or the Steering Committee immediately afterwards for
follow-up.
Now if a reasonable person were to be reading Article III one can reasonably assume that the above mentioned "Norms" pertain to MORE general and steering meetings. If not, then what MORE is doing is not just what happens inside of MORE, but speech outside of MORE as well.
As for the "sanctions" that have been suggested against me, chances are it will be a one month punishment of suspension from the Steering Committee as wells as suspension from the Steering ListServ where Barry and Tony have been exiled to. Though I would prefer either a) The car taken away from me for a month, b) that when I come home from school I must not leave my room, or c) no dessert after dinner.
Sadly, this is what MORE is turning into. No dissent, no disagreements, no thinking for yourself. Rules are not made to be broken, but rather rules are created at the whim of a few, who see what they want to see when they want to see it.
What would those in MORE do if a principal or the DOE, or even the UFT behaved in such a way as MORE has done of late. No freedom. No free speech. Rules thrown created from on high at a whim? This is Union Thugism at its worst!
The rank and file is beginning to become a speck in the rear view of MORE. Up ahead though the road will become quite barren and lonely.
There is a Silent Majority in MORE that is not happy and will become more docile and afraid as more purges occur. MORE is ceasing being a Caucus. It's turning into something much, much darker.
What's next for MORE? Loyalty Oaths? Will that be to the Caucus or to a person?
FREE THE MORE DUO (SOON TO BECOME TRIO!!!)
