Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

NY Times: Other Unions Pissed At Mulgrew, UFT Over Teacher Contract Details

The NY Times has an interesting report on what's holding up the contract announcement between the UFT and the city - the other unions:

Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York’s main teachers’ union are on the verge of announcing a deal to settle a nearly five-year labor dispute in which the union has sought more than $3 billion in back pay from the city.

The agreement would include retroactive pay equivalent to roughly 8 percent of salaries, annual raises of up to 2 percent a year and substantial savings for the city on health coverage, according to one official involved in the talks.

Three officials who insisted on anonymity because the deal had not been made final or announced said it could be disclosed at City Hall on Thursday; one official said the two sides would announce a nine-year contract.

...

 But officials warned that there could be last-minute snags because other municipal unions were weighing in with complaints that the raises given the teachers — which will probably set a pattern for the other unions — were too small and should be higher. Those pressures could cause some changes of the terms of the teachers’ deal.

...
 
Officials involved in the talks said the deal would address several major educational issues long in dispute, including the use of student test results in evaluating teachers’ performance, the length of the school day and the often-criticized pool of about 1,000 teachers who are still being paid even though their jobs have been eliminated because of school closings or for other reasons.

The officials said the teachers’ union had agreed to significant savings on health coverage that would not be made with cuts in programs or offerings and would not require an increase in premiums paid by city workers.

There could be difficulty, one official said, getting the city’s Municipal Labor Committee, the umbrella group of city unions, to approve the proposed health care savings, which generally must apply to city unions uniformly.


I'll reserve comment for now until we get more details about what's going on.

But let's just say, I wouldn't be surprised to hear the other unions are pissed off at Mulgrew and the UFT for screwing up the pattern.

3 comments:

  1. Screwing up the pattern and screwing the members.

    Did you see the NYSUT new member benefits shopping program? Slick, shiny promotion for this new benefit courtesy of our new slick, shiny NYSUT. This is what NYSUT has to offer its' members, no advocacy for real educational and labor policy, trying to recycle true advocacy into consumerism. Meant to distract and appease with sparkle and glitter products as the membership is decimated.

    ReplyDelete
  2. TeachmyclassMrMayor(andyoutooMrMulgrew)May 1, 2014 at 4:26 AM

    Gee, this is a shocker. No one could have predicted this. Practicing my squeal.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are no more labor leaders.Unions are no different than corporations. They could care less about the members

    ReplyDelete