Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Sunday, May 4, 2014

UFT Contract - What Will The Rank And File Do?

Most of the bloggers in the New York City education blogosphere have been critical or outright contemptuous of the contract proposal between the UFT and the city that was announced on Thursday.

Once it became apparent that no more than 2% compensation would hit the salary step ladder this calendar year if the contract is passed, initial comments on the UFT Facebook page and on the Internet were pretty negative over the deal.

It's been less than 72 hours since the contract agreement was announced and I'm already seeing some shifting feelings from commenters on the contract agreement - even here at Perdido Street School blog.

Once some of the anger over the delayed compensation and "retro" has subsided, it seems some rank-and-filers are looking at what they're making when the final 5% of the contract increases and "retro" pay gets added to the step ladder in May 2018, noting that its 18% more than they're making now, and getting ready to hold their noses over the 2% increase for next year and vote for the contract.

The odious '05 contract passed 63%-37%, though if I remember correctly, that one was front-loaded with money to make the concessions they were making us swallow go down easier.

This contract agreement back-ends the money and that's going to be the toughest part of the sell for the UFT leadership.

What are you hearing and seeing out there?

Is the anger over the contract, the delayed "retro" and backended salary increases, the ATR provisions and other work rule changes, still as palpable as it was on Friday morning?

Or is the shift from anger to resignation over the contract that the UFT leadership is counting on already starting to happen for many rank-and-file members?

33 comments:

  1. From what I am hearing, its the delayed 'retro' waiting 5 years for the money, keeping all the information in secret and not seeing anything in writing, the 'merit pay' issue, 200 schools not under contractual obligations and the ATR part.

    Other than that, I think that most people can live with the rest because the rest was not all so bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What was the impasse arbitrator's recommendation for a fair contract?

      Delete
  2. What I'm hearing and reading is that teachers are happy to get any type of contract. Small percentages with a thousand dollar bonus leading to close to 20% increases in pay (compounded so it's beyond 18%) are enough for the majority of employees. Health care givebacks which are vague don't include higher co payments or anything like that, so that's no big deal. The ATR thing basically effects the people who read this blog and Chaz' blog, a mere couple of hundred if that. The overwhelming 98% of teachers are sick of ATR's making a salary while they teach and get rated. So that's out. What were the other givebacks? Not much at all. So you work with a thousand dollar bonus plus small increments then look forward a few years from now to a 20% raise with no real givebacks and no healthcare rise in co payments. You think this won't pass compared to the last several years under Bloomberg? This contract is not fantastic, but for the times we are living in, it's a big big win that most other states/cuties wish they could get from their mayor. I'm going along with another poster who wrote 80-20 pass. I feel it's about that, maybe 75-25.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That pretty much sums it up.

      Delete
    2. TeachmyclassMrMayor(andyoutooMrMulgrew)May 4, 2014 at 2:08 PM

      Sick of ATRs, are you kidding? They have a horrible job. The only thing that they get is relief from paperwork, but EVERYONE I have talked to, and I admittedly go out of my way to make sure I try to help any of them as much as possible, hate being an ATR. Almost as much as they hate being in the hell hole that they have walked into. This contract blows. It sets us up to lose 20-40k we will never see again, and there folks is the money the city is using for "health care savings". Kid yourselves not, this is ANOTHER UNITY SELLOUT. Crap, we don't get half the retro money until the contract expires. You people who think this is OKAY, you are either delusional or a UNITY hack. Why should a person who worked one of the past five years not get the money they earned because they quit to take a better job? Or was brought up on phony fake charges because they did not have tenure. They still did the work.

      There was a line in movie that stated:
      "Wake up and smell what you're shovelling".
      This absolutely applies here. This contract might pass, but if you do not think that we are getting screwed, then I am afraid for the kids you teach (if you are a teacher) because you have lost touch with reality.

      Delete
    3. What were the impasse arbitrator's recommendations for a fair contract?

      Delete
  3. I am voting NO to this contract. Even though I am an A TR all in service members are getting screwed with the delayed retro. Almost all of the municipal unions received the 4 and 4 which is in their salary schedule. Our way of getting these increases should be the same. This double standard is what the members should be angry about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What were the impasse arbitrator's recommendations for a fair contract?

      Delete
  4. I'm going to call BS on "Anonymous 12:25".

    "What I'm hearing and reading is that teachers are happy to get any kind of contract" - Where are you reading this, most blogs show critical comments of this proposed contract.


    "98% of teachers are sick of ATR's"? - We sympathize with them and realize it could be anyone of us in the future."

    "It's not fantastic...but a big, big win"? Which is it?

    "it's what most other states/cities wish they could get" - That sounds like the old UFT/Unity "it's the best we could do" line.

    A "75-25" pass - Yes, let's predetermine what the vote will be. Reminds me of pre-determining Bill Thompson's loss in 2009, allowing Bloomberg to grab his horrible 3rd term.

    Something's fishy "12:25.

    P.S. That pretty sums that up, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if it that is a Unity UFT rep in that comment.. I never thought of that until now.

      Delete
    2. What were the impasse arbitrator's recommendations for a fair contract?

      Delete
  5. I guess the poster above who,praised this contract isn't bothered by 10 % of public schools basically converted to charters overnight? This is a MAJOR give back! It may not get u now...but it will surely get U down the road-even if you're a newbie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What was the impasse arbitrator's recommendation for a fair contract?

      Delete
  6. I got the feeling it would be close. Everyone in my school was really ticked off by this new contract. I think it has a chance of not passing but more information and understanding has to get out. Sorry to say this but teachers are only going to see 1,000 dollars. Sadly we are not the most informed!

    ReplyDelete
  7. There's disappointment over the deferred payment/backloading, but not a whole lot of anger (outside of the blogs). I'm getting a whole lot of questions about exactly what money gets paid when, and when salaries move. (2/3rds of the reaction I've encountered has been here)

    I've had very few questions about the other contract language changes, at least so far. (one question on parent teacher conferences, one on ATRs, out of scores of questions)

    There is a lot of concern about what makes up the health care savings. (about 1/3rd of the questions I've encountered, and these questions have come with deepest concern).

    I'm not yet certain how I will vote Monday.

    Jonathan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jonathan,

      What were the impasse arbitrator's recommendations for a contract resolution?

      Delete
    2. The recommendations were never issued. The sides asked him to hold off since they were making progress. And then the chief arbitrator (or whatever he's called) agreed to act as a mediator instead of an arbitrator.

      I never learned if anyone knew what was in the report, or if the report was actually even ready.

      The City's most noxious, Bloomberg-era demands were probably mostly going to be rejected, but even one or two of them would have been disastrous. But BdB probably had no interest in continuing most of those demands anyway.

      Wish I knew more.

      Jonathan

      Delete
  8. Quite frankly, disgusting. I will VOTE NO. The money alone makes it a NO, then add in the ATR provision...

    ReplyDelete
  9. we can't judge by comments as the Unity machine is beginning to send out its trolls. But these things have a life of its own. Unity will send someone to every school to push the contract and unless there is a strong voice to counter theirs, they prevail. From what I'm hearing from the strong MORE people is that their schools are NOs. Some independents are emailing that they are putting out leaflets on their own and changing people's minds. But this is probably going on in relatively small of schools. There are some anecdotals of Unity CLs pushing the contract and getting pushback.
    The voting will be by AA mailed ballot I hear (not in the schools) like it was in 2005. I believe we get to observe the count if we want. - like in '05.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We need to reach out to other schools. Especially elementary and middle schools to enlighten them about this insulting proposed contract.

      Delete
  10. What I'm seeing is basically the same blank faces that I always see. Most teacher is my school will probably vote yes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We need to reach out to other schools to enlighten them about this insulting contract proposal.

      Delete
  11. What was the impasse arbitrator's recommendation for a fair contract? We are entitled to be given his statement in writing.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Many of my co-workers are ready to vote no. Unfortunately, we have a couple of loud mouths in my building who think screaming "the backloaded spread out retro is good so we won't get killed in taxes" is persuasive. And I am concerned about those that thing $1000 in drinking money is a swell idea.

    But we all know the drill. Everybody says they voted it down, yet it still gets ratified. I'm worried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell them to use the extra money to fully Fund their TDA or start a NYC 457 plan.

      Delete
  13. Someone keeps mentioning that co pays won't go up. Mulgrew's letter said SHOULD NOT go up. Should not does not mean will not.
    Murky details to suck you in.
    You work during a time period that is covered by retro, you should get paid for the time worked even if you leave the job. How many teachers will lose their job between now and 2020, when the contract will have run its course?
    ATRs were never protected by Unity. Do not grasp the expedited termination process that will overide state law and supposed due process.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm just relieved there is no extra time added to the day or the year. That was my biggest fear.

    ReplyDelete
  15. No one is mentioning the slut principal in the Victoria's Secret outfit in today's NY Post. Whatta trampy little ho who was running a school. So many unqualified administrators in place. I wonder if she was doing the school agents while they were in uniform? What a skank. Bet there's plenty more hookers posing as principals.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The overwhelming majority who I discussed this at my school (I'd say about 20 teachers out of 200) were very disappointed in terms of the raises being back loaded. Most said they would vote no - again this happened Friday and some of their anger may have resided. I've seen a ton of traffic on Facebook and hopefully some of the truth is spreading via social media. Talked to my sister today and she said, "Of course Im going to vote yes." She of course knows very little of the ATR situation, didn't really understand the back pay situation and knows nothing in terms of the other highlights of the tentative agreement. Im sure she represents countless thousands who will vote yes without really educating themselves - and that is what PISSES ME OFF. Not that she votes opposite of myself but that she and others will vote without really understanding what they are voting on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We're voting on a contract that is safe, taking us to 2018. In other states they have begun to deny pay step increases based on ratings. It's very bad out there. Why are you not getting it?! This takes us to 2018 and when DeBlasio wins again, a new contract for us (after backing him in 2017) will mean taking us to around 2023 or so. It's about buying time. It's about staying alive. The only ones who do not understand this mentality are ATR's. You got it all wrong anon 7:15. You are still living as if Al Shanker was at the negotiating table. You're still waiting for the cheese to drop in the same place. It's time to go find the cheese. You read the book right? Unbelievable.

      Delete
    2. How does accepting this insulting contract make us anything more than dish rags to be discarded at the pleasure of bullying mayors?

      Delete
  17. This contract incentivizes bad faith negotiating. Accepting this contract will encourage bullying by arrogant imperious mayors.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Keep in mind that all other city union will make ten of thousands more than us over the next 4 years because they will be making 8% more than us in 2015, 6% more in 2016, 4% more in 2017, and 2% more in 2018 until we finally become equal to them. We never see that money with this contract. On top of that they've been using that money for the last 4-5 years to invest, pay bills, put in the bank, while we won't even get that retro fully until 2020. This is insulting because we aren't even equal to the other unions that we supposedly follow pattern bargaining with.

    ReplyDelete