Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Friday, May 2, 2014

UFT Contract Open Thread

Pretty negative reaction to the contract news at my school.

The feeling I get is, quite a few people are angry enough to vote no.

What were you hearing out there?

76 comments:

  1. Everyone needs to tell at least 3 people working in the public schools how crappy this contract is and why we need to vote NO. Then those 3 people need to pass the information on.... Knowledge is power. The news media, UFT and DOE are singing the wrong song. We need to change the station. We need to VOTE NO! We need to mobilize everyone who can vote to VOTE NO!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I already waited long enough for 4% and 4% - I shouldn't have to wait till May 2015 just to start getting a measly 12.5% back. I have to hang in there till 2020 to get all the retro I am entitled or I will forfeit the money!!! What kind of union brings this to it's members after waiting close to 6 years for a contract? Mike Mulgrew you can't blame this one on Bloomberg. I bet you will. SHOW ME THE MONEY!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It will be interesting to see what happens w/ the PBA. See, they already got their 8% from 2009/2010, so the crap that Mulgrew got after that doesn't look so good to them. Frankly, the 8% doesn't look so good to me either since it's coming in 2015-2018.

      Delete
    2. I know. I was counting on that money. We haven't had a raise in so many years, but everything else has been going up. It's not right to ask us to go longer without the retro AND the 8% raise for even longer.

      Delete
  3. Was greeted by a number of peers who were NOT in the know until I handed them a copy of your blog (they were like who is this guy?) Anyway, by mid day all of the ones I spoke to were very angry and stated they would vote No on the issue. Word gets around quickly. You might even be receiving some new traffic your way with some new readers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think this will be an evolving process for many people - the shock was the delayed 8% from the 2009/2010 pattern. People were expecting that money NOW, but since it's delayed, it really does have people thinking, is this the best the freaking UFT could do? 2% for me next year?

      But here's the thing - when the UFT comes down with the salary schedule in a little bit, they'll be pointing out to people what they'll be making in those final years and that still may sell some people on it.

      The UFT managed to sell the '05 abomination - they'll probably find a way to sell this one too.

      Delete
  4. Newbie teachers at my school are loving the "One thousand dollar bonus". I had to fill them in with the reality of how crappy this contract really is and what it will mean to them in a few years down the line. We will look back on this contract the same way we did in 2005. It is all smoke and mirrors. The worst part (beyond the fake retro pay, which is really just a raise), is that it will set a precedent in 2019 and later on when another contract has to be negotiated. 2% or 3% raises might be the pattern that NYC will seek for all unions. I honestly believe that this contract will be a MAJOR deterrent for teachers thinking of becoming a teacher in NYC. Why deal with the crappy pay and shitty conditions here when there are better deals in Westchester and on Long Island. If the UFT is willing to let 10% of our union schools forgo union protections it seems to me they are predicting a future where there will be no need for the UFT. The Unity dudes are gonna cash in now and retire and let the whole union go to Hell in a handbag.

    ReplyDelete
  5. People want to know why they have not received the memorandum yet..... where is it?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree - where is something on paper from the UFT other than the email Mulgrew sent?

      Delete
    2. I got another email from Mulgrew a few hours ago. With a link to a chart that shows when all the increases/retro kicks in. Do you want me to post it?

      Delete
  6. At my high school, the contract went over well. People just want a raise and some security towards 2018 and hopefully beyond. An ATR was at our school today and he was in the hall right outside the classroom door if the class he was covering. He was on his cell phone and the students were pretty loud inside doing anything they wanted. No one said anything until the AP caught wind of it. He approached the ATR who could've cared less. He actually told another staff member on his lunch that he couldn't believe he's been making his salary for doing this babysitting and he'd use his cell phone during a class, anytime he wished. It was later on in the day when everyone had basically had it with the ATR's. The contract will be ratified. No one will be defending the 2% ATR group out of the entire UFT. It's the truth. People have had it with these ATR's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen some very good ATRs in recent years. They were maligned, and "expensive," and principals wouldn't hire them,. Just remember, anyone... ANYONE can find themselves in the ATR pool.

      Delete
    2. Question: I read somewhere that the DOE is going to pick up the tab if a principal hires and ATR. Does this mean the "fair student funding" rule is history? Does that mean that veteran teachers actually have a shot at transferring? Any info would be appreciated!

      Delete
    3. I know one very good ATR who helped out at my school for a few weeks when a teacher was injured. He got a full-time gig somewhere else, but my AP was ready to hire him full-time when another teacher suddenly announced she was leaving at the end of last semester.

      I am waiting to see some writing from the UFT on the contract details. I'm not sure that the fair funding is the only issue when it comes to hiring ATR's - administrators tend to like to hire newbies - but it certainly would help circumstances if it were the case that the DOE would pick up the part or all of the tab for an ATR hire.

      Also, I want to see how the whole ATR placement process happens and what protections (if any) ATR's will have through it.

      Much more information is needed from the UFT on this, but so far, outside of a celebratory email and Facebook post, haven't heard much from them.

      Delete
    4. How can you become an ATR easily? This administration is not closing any schools. An influx of $$$ is coming in to maintain each schools as it becomes "district" again. No one is really going to get excessed. So if no one is getting excessed and no more schools are closing moving forward as DeBlasio said, how can you "easily" become an ATR? Other than schools closing next month and next year, people just will not become ATR's anymore. That wave is dead.

      Delete
    5. I believe the state can still close schools. "Priority" schools" "Focus schools" this school closing thing ain't over. Especially with charter-friendly Cuomo in charge.

      Delete
    6. Ny state has never closed a school

      Delete
    7. What are "turnaround schools"?

      Delete
    8. Two things to say about school closings - neither the Obama administration nor the Cuomo administration have the political juice to push large-scale closures through at this point. Turnaround or SIG school directives came from Obama and while I know Cuomo called for the "death penalty" for so-called failing schools, it remains to be seen that he has the political wherewithal to push that in Albany, He's got his own problems right now, with Preet Bhrarara taking over Moreland, Bridgegate investigators beginning to look at his role in the GWB closures, and a GOP opponent aggressively challenging him for November.

      I would worry less about the feds or the state at this point and more about the mayor who comes after de Blasio. Might be in just three years actually if de Blasio continues to have problems running things. That would be the bigger concern to me.

      Delete
  7. RBE thanks for all your information. Most of the newbies at my school seem to think this is the best they're going to get and say they will vote yes. I have a question: Is the fair student formula a contract issue or a DOE issue? Seems to me that restoring it would help some veteran ATRs get hired and would help thin the ranks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that funding ATR salaries out of general DOE dollars over individual school budgets would help circumstances. But as I wrote above, there still needs to be some protections for them so that they're not forced to take any old posting, then if it doesn't work out, they have a mark against them (with two marks leading to a termination proceeding.)

      Delete
  8. Let me get this straight. I am able to retire in Jan of 2018 as I will finally reach age 55. However, with this contract I will have to continue working till either May or October 2018 for the 3 % raise. I won't be entitled to the 25% retro for 2019 or 2020 if I retire in 2018. If that is true that totally sucks. I would love to retire now but I am only 51! In Sept I will be teaching 30 years. This contract totally sucks! It reeks of back doors deals. I wonder how much money Mike made on this.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The last raise comes in May 2018 (it's a big one 3% + 2% "retro" for a total of 5%.) Yeah, you probably have to still be around to get that step bump. But I think you're still eligible for the 25% retro even if you retire in January or May of 2018. Here's what James Eterno wrote at ICEUFT blog on that:

      "Anyone who retires July 1, 2015 or after will get the deferred payments the same way as active personnel and will be waiting until 2020 to be made 'whole'".

      So you'll wait for the cash like the rest of us (unlike those who retire before June 2015), but you'll get it.

      LINK: http://iceuftblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/new-contract-retro-delayed-retro-denied.html

      Delete
  9. Anon 5:24 - you are really off track. The "ATR" thing is over. No more schools are closing. Besides that, you think this administration is going to tolerate teachers becoming ATR's? There will be no more ATR's. If you have a job, you're good for life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You make a good point about closures - at least for now. But who knows what happens in the next few years? Political attacks could turn BdB into a school closer. Or he could be gone term mayor (as I suspect he will be) and the next mayor could be the Second Coming Of Bloomberg (or the First Coming Of Eva Moskowitz.) That's the scary thing about this. But again, I want to see the language from the UFT, which so far, I haven't.

      Delete
    2. Plenty of schools still in the process of closing so many of us will be added to the ATR list in the next couple of years.

      Delete
    3. I agree with you r-be. Nobody would have imagined the number of schools Klein was planning to close when the 2005 contract was first approved. I voted no but to most people the loss of seniority transfers didn't seem like a big deal. We cannot let our guard down again because while I don't believe the deBlasio administration will ever become the Bloomberg Administration, nobody knows what the future holds. We must have a contract that protects all of us.
      Mary

      Delete
    4. Please look at that clause about 200 schools who are able vote out parts of the contract. We do not exactly know how they will do this but this means that they are planning to turn DOE schools into charter schools. This will happen as we have seen, they plant the seeds now and it comes to fruition in about 5 to 6 years. By then the union rules will be a long lost memory. Schools will be a most sad place to work.

      Delete
    5. You make a good point about the schools still closing, James. Any idea how many that is? Or how many teachers that affects?

      Last anon, it seems schools have to have an SBO vote to opt out of parts of the contract - must pass by 65%. Dunno about your school, but an SBO vote to opt out of the contract, extend school day, etc., wouldn't fly at my school.

      Delete
  10. TeachmyclassMrGovernor(andyoutooMrMulgrew)May 2, 2014 at 6:37 PM

    This contract sucks. Sells out ATRs, has all kinds of provisions in it for us to pay for everything while city makes money off of the money they are not giving us. They would NEVER, EVER treat the cops and firemen this way, nor would the public nor would Murdoch & friends. More importantly, leadership of those unions would have laughed right in the mayor's face and walked out of the room. Mike Mulgrew (and for that matter Randi Weingarten), you should be embarrassed to even show your face in public for what you have done. Hey, but you and Randi get your seat at the table, so yeah!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But they are treating the cops this way, which is why the PBA just declared an impasse in negotiations with the city.

      I don't think it's personal for de Blasio the way it was with Bloomberg. He simply has to negotiate 152 contracts at once thanks to Bloomberg and he's looking to get the best deal possible. Which he got.

      Delete
  11. They have Mulgrew either by the balls or with cash. The oligarchs own him. Why not have a class action suit regarding the Gates money? What about taking Gates money is not an egregious unethical betrayal of UFT meembers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He certainly seems to be doing the bidding of the oligarchs, that's for sure.

      Delete
  12. Let's say that 3 or 4 years down the road, NYC is in dire fiscal straits. Can there be a freeze on municipal salaries so that we don't see the increases or retro pay that are supposed to kick in during those years?

    And how dare they call this a "Contract for Education" when they've taking the extended day time away from children. It's a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's something I thought of too. I think it would be hard once this becomes a signed contractual agreement, but it wouldn't be totally impossible for a future mayor (or the current one) to say, circumstances changed, we cannot afford what we thought we could afford back in 2014. It's been done elsewhere, though I think NY courts might be less favorable for that sort of thing.

      Delete
  13. Please delete my comment above so I can resubmit it without typos. Thanks.
    Mary

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, you can now delete my comment asking you to delete my comment and you can then delete this comment as well. I'm no OCD, just want to keep your blog as tidy as possible. lol

      Delete
  14. I have an idea. Why don't they offer a choice? Teachers can either choose the retroactive pay over the ridiculously long period OR they can opt for no retro but an immediate 8% salary bump.. along with the other increases for the 2011-2018 period? This way, those teachers who are planning to retire in say 2017 or so, will have three years at the 8-10% higher salary. Can someone help do the math? Maybe use $100k salary with a retirement date of 7/1/2017 and figure out what their 60% pension would be with the UFT proposed salary increases versus the one I'm proposing. Thanks.
    Mary

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. City says they need to book the raises over the course of a few years for budget reasons, given all the other contracts they have to settle. That's the "official" reason for why the contract is the way it is. Dunno if that's true or not, but that's what I read at Cap NY about it...

      Delete
    2. Well I understand that's why they have to space out the retroactive, but if people opted for the immediate salary bump instead of the retro the City would save money yet the person retiring in 3 to 4 year would actually have a higher pension so they'd be happy as well. (Thanks for deleting my duplicate post.)

      Mary

      Delete
    3. I think the pension thing might be another reason why the city wouldn't want to do it. But yes, I see what you're saying and it does make some sense.

      Delete
  15. You ingrates need to get with the program--Diane Ravitch says it's a terrific contract, a "triumphant return to professionalism."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe you should start doing some independent thinking Tim. How many days has Diane spent in the trenches?

      Delete
    2. I was being sarcastic. I'm not a teacher, I'm a DOE parent, but I found Ravitch's assessment of the contract to be, uh, off.

      The big head-scratcher for me is the end of extended day, which is one of the few things that principals, teachers, and families unanimously find useful, at least in the schools I'm familiar with. The ATR situation stinks, too, although I think I saw a blurb on James Eterno's blog that said Tweed eats the ATR's salary--if that is the same thing as providing a permanent subsidy, I'd feel better about it.

      Delete
    3. I am 10:33. There is hope for you Tim!

      Delete
    4. Tim, I agree - taking time from classes for PD is dumb. PD is mostly useless. Time with students is what we're there for.

      Delete
  16. It is a great contract indeed, especially in these insecure times throughout the nation. I really feel for the ATR's who are competent, which are about 1 for every 5. 80% of the ATR's I met this year are really unprofessional, undesirable, and have no skills in the classroom with instruction and management. If you're not in that catagory, I hope you land a job. Truth be told, the 80% figure is accurate and teachers throughout the city are just sick n tired of watching these individuals collect a salary for doing zero. If you think this contract is not going to be ratified, you are delusional and living in a fantasy world. This contract will pass easily.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It probably will pass easily. Mulgrew got re-elected easily too. But that doesn't speak so much for the quality of the work Mr. Mulgrew has done for us any more than this contract passing easily speaks to the quality of the contract.

      Delete
  17. Tim,

    I happen to love Diane Ravitch. I also like deBlasio, Farina and Mulgrew. That said, it doesn't mean I don't I think they could do much better than this. Yes I'm happy that the UFT, City and DOE could sit down and come up with something without the hostility of the Bloomberg Era and I'm not a greedy person but this pay scheme is just so convoluted and drawn out that it's ridiculous. I also agree with a previous poster who pointed out that if it is indeed about the students, then why eliminate the extended day for our neediest ones? Makes no sense. If I have to stay I'd much rather be with the kids than attend boring PD. Also, I don't like the idea of Master Teacher, etc. it seems like it will foster a lot of animosity among staff members. I thought this was the time for collaboration not competition between teachers.

    Mary

    ReplyDelete
  18. As far as I know, from a labor attorney (not ours, Francesco ForEducation Portelos), a collective bargaining agreement takes precedence over any federal or state law, meaning if the CBA is ratified, then THAT becomes the determining document, and not the state or federal labor law. I found this out when a friend of mine told me that she couldn't get FMLA leave for having a baby and that she only had 6wk disability. Turned out her CBA from her school district (Clarkstown) opted out of FMLA, so no teachers there were entitled to it. Sucks. If this pig is ratified, we are all screwed.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "How can you become an ATR?" That is what people in 2005 said - before they started closing schools, partly due to the freedom from having to place people by seniority. It took 3 years for reality to start hitting people as they closed school after school and opened charter after charter. Imagine this -- de Blasio loses the next election to an ed deform slug - say even Eva runs. Now they go after a hundred schools to close and suddenly you have thousands of ATRs again -- it could be anyone. History does repeat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it most certainly will and there will be ATR's again. There are high schools shrinking because they collocated another school in them and as they grow, the other school shrinks. Programs are being closed- music, art, libraries go first and then departments. There will b e ATR's. We never thought they would rotate and they did. And it goes on. No one said they would stop.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I agree - I am most concerned about what comes after BdB. Could be seven years down the road or just three. But that's what's most concerning about the ATR thing.

      Delete
  20. The union just mailed out a breakdown of the time line with bubbles for each payment and raise. I don't see anywhere where we are getting retro for the future raises that we will get for the 8%, but should have received earlier. It appears they're trying to slickly avoid paying a large portion of what we should be getting back. Unless they just forgot to clearly show it. Many people are clueless as to what's going on so they can't even ask these questions. Someone needs to work out every penny we will get to 2020 under the proposal and through what we should really get.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the whole thing is so complicated, you need to be an accountant to figure it out. But I'll take a closer look before the vote, believe me.

      Delete
  21. I guess the union is just not answering the per session retro question. It's been asked and no one if providing a real answer. If it goes from $41.98 to $46 ish, that's a $4 increase per hour. If you did 1000 hours in the 5 year frame, that's $4,000.00 in per session retro alone. Who can answer this question?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Per session will not go up to $46. If I remember correctly, it just went up $1 an hour last time - I bet it's something similar this time.

      Delete
  22. I think besides campaigning to vote NO for this contract-we as a community need to begin the process of campaigning to get Michael Mulgrew out of office. I don't want this man representing my voice, needs, or welfare anymore. I am ashamed to be associated with this man who calls himself first an educator and a union member. When you don't protect your weakest members you don't protect any of your members. He is not helping the ATRs, the children of the city and certainly not the working teachers! VOTE NO FOR THE CONTRACT and VOTE MULGREW OUT OF OFFICE in 2016!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the best thing we can do - vote Mulgrew out.

      Delete
  23. People are missing the fact that there should be new retro between now and 2018. If you were at top salary in 09 you would be making about $110, 000 now or soon. Yet you will only be getting 2% next year. So you'll be making $102 when you should be making $110. This continues every year in smaller and smaller numbers. There should be a pay back of this money figured into the retro schedule, but the retro schedule is only for the past years that already happened. We're talking about a serious amount of money that they're keeping from us, but pretending we're getting. We're paying for most of the retro with what they are keeping. Someone needs to get this out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup. Lots of pretending in this contract, I agree.

      Delete
  24. This contract is the NYC version of the modern fairy tale of "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" I just haven't decided if Mike is the Emperor or the tailor?

    ReplyDelete
  25. My husband is a police officer. He mentioned last night that his union has mentioned to all members to not even consider the teacher contract as they will not accept anything close to it. We were the laughing stock over the past few days at all precincts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure. PBA went with an impasse instead. Mulgrew took their deal. I wish I had PBA negotiating for me, not UFT.

      Delete
  26. The 2015 forward period actually goes back to 09pay levels and then slowly creeps up. We never get money for the 8% after 2015 until each years raise. They should owe us money for 2015-2018 because they are pretending we received an 8% raise, but in reality we only get that raise from 09-current and then it drops back to what you were making 5 years ago. Raises starting now would actually have given us more money than retro and delayed raises. They're playing a game to make it look like we're getting retro and a raise, but we're getting much less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also turns out if you leave any time before October 2020 for any reason other than retirement, you lose out on some "retro". You have to be in it to win, as the lottery motto used to go - turns out it's the UFT/DOE motto as well.

      Delete
  27. Per session will be increased by the 8% figure which is about $3.40 per hour. It should be about $45.38 an hour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the update. Where did you see that? I would be interested to see the timeline on that.

      Delete
  28. I read this on Chaz's blog and I truly feel that this should be discussed with the DR when she/he comes peddling the "Victory Contract".

    "As far as I know, from a labor attorney (not ours, Francesco ForEducation Portelos), a collective bargaining agreement takes precedence over any federal or state law, meaning if the CBA is ratified, then THAT becomes the determining document, and not the state or federal labor law. I found this out when a friend of mine told me that she couldn't get FMLA leave for having a baby and that she only had 6wk disability. Turned out her CBA from her school district (Clarkstown) opted out of FMLA, so no teachers there were entitled to it. Sucks. If this pig is ratified, we are all screwed."

    I would hate to see any ATR go through an expedited termination of position within one week. There are still too many graduates of the Leadersh*t Academy and their mentality is not to work with teachers/ATRs but to find ways to terminate them.

    So when the DR comes to your school, ask if the UFT's "special 3020a" will be the determining document to follow instead of the NYSED ed law 3020a?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Everyone needs to like "vote no to uft contract" page on Facebook!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, how the ATR's get handled is a big concern for me in this contract agreement.

      Delete
  30. What if I turn down the severance as an ATR, then get fired anyway in December?

    ReplyDelete