Wall Street Journal: Mulgrew's "Victory" Claim Made Cuomo Come Down Harder On Teachers

From Mike Vilensky in the Wall Street Journal:

Although Mr. Cuomo and legislative leaders on Sunday said they had reached a deal, interviews with lawmakers, aides and other Albany players revealed that it unraveled almost immediately, damaged by a war of words between the governor and the teachers union that affected the language of the education bill.

...

In a statement announcing the budget deal late Sunday, Mr. Cuomo said it represented “a complete overhaul of the entrenched education bureaucracy.” Mr. Mulgrew issued a competing statement, saying that legislators had stomped Mr. Cuomo’s “corporate” initiatives.

Mr. Mulgrew’s comments rankled the governor, said people familiar with the matter, and “there were changes made in response,” Mr. Benedetto said. From Sunday to Tuesday, “there was a reaction to it, which delayed the process terribly, and modified the final education wording,” he said.

Details of the bill that emerged after Sunday caught Democratic Assembly members off-guard and upset them, several of them said.

A Cuomo spokesman denied that any changes were made in response to Mr. Mulgrew’s comments. Cuomo administration officials said negotiations continued after Sunday, but the substance of the bills remained the same.

Isn't it time we send UFT President Mulgrew packing?

Now you see why the conflict between NYSUT and the UFT emerged in public, with NYSUT urging legislators to vote no on the education bill and the UFT telling legislators it would not be held against them.

They were pissed off at Mulgrew's bufoonery that seemingly made things worse in the end.

I'm skeptical that much changed from Sunday to Tuesday in the bill, but it's possible some of the more odious (and unexpected) stuff that's in the bill got there during the time frame.

It's just as likely that legislators are trying to pin the blame for having to take a tough vote on the budget bill on Mulgrew than anything else.

Still, it's an interesting story, that we have Mulgrew to blame for an even worse budget bill.

Perhaps we have Mike Mulgrew to thank for the loss of permanent certification and the inclusion of the "Moral Character Review" provision.

Cuomo Wins A Complete And Utter Rout

So here's some of what's in the Cuomo Deform Budget:

Permanent certification is gone - teachers with permanent certification have to "register" with NYSED every five years showing they have done 100 hundred hours of "rigorous" PD.

Tenure is gone - two "ineffective" ratings and a district may have a teacher fired in 90 days.  Three "ineffective" ratings in a row and a district must move to have the teacher fired in 30 days.

The same geniuses who brought you the mess that was the Common Core roll-out and gave a liar named "Dr" Ted J. Morris Jr. MA, Ph.D, MSW a charter school are now in charge of creating a new evaluation system that links tests scores and observations, including one from an "outside evaluator," by June.

Teachers who teach subjects and/or courses that do not end in state tests will be evaluated by "Student Learning Objectives" that will be developed by NYSED.

If a teacher comes up "ineffective" on the test-based component, they may opt to have students take another test approved by the state, but no funding will be provided for the test:

The budget describes the following as eligible options for the second test: “state tests or assessments developed or designed by the state education department, or that the state education department purchased or acquired from another state; an institution of higher education; or a commercial or not-for-profit entity.”

The optional "second test" idea is in the evaluation system in order to put the onus of overtesting onto teachers according to a Cuomo official.

Education aid increases are tied to the new evaluation systems being in place in individual districts by November.

“No school district shall be eligible for an apportionment of general support for public schools from the funds appropriated for the 2015-2016 school year and any year thereafter in excess of the amount apportioned to such school district in the respective base year unless such school district has submitted documentation that has been approved by the commissioner by November fifteenth, two thousand fifteen,” the bill says.

Students may not be instructed two years running by "ineffective" teachers.

There's more - and it's all bad.

You can see the rest of the mess here at this Capital NY rundown by Jessica Bakeman.

This is what UFT President Mike Mulgrew called "victory."

This is what Assembly Dems passed with "heavy hearts" last night.

If it wasn't clear to you before this that teachers have been abandoned by their union leadership and the politicians we support both financially and politically, it should be now.

Mulgrew, UFT Tell Lawmakers It's Okay To Vote For Cuomo Reform Budget

Ken Lovett in the Daily News:

ALBANY — State lawmakers raced to finish work on New York’s budget Tuesday amid simmering resentment over Gov. Cuomo’s education reforms - which opened up an unusual rift between the city and state teachers’ unions.

...

 City teacher union president Michael Mulgrew angered NYSUT President Karen Magee and her team after he put out a statement Sunday night - before the education bill was even in print- claiming victory in beating back some of Cuomo's more strident proposals, sources said.

While Magee urged lawmakers to reject the education measures, city lawmakers said they were told by Mulgrew's team that voting for the package would not be held against them.

"They just weren't on the same page," said one legislator of the two unions. "The issue between them was whether to strike the best deal they could or whether to oppose it outright."

That'll keep them from voting for the odious budget, Mikey.

The UFT MUST Endorse Andrew Cuomo For Governor

I am calling for the UFT to enthusiastically and vocally endorse Governor Andrew M. Cuomo for re-election this November.

Sure Cuomo has shown himself to be anti-union, anti-teacher and anti-traditional public schools during his tenure as governor.

And sure it makes no sense that a teachers union would continue to support a politician who hates unions, teachers and traditional public schools, as the UFT does with Andrew Cuomo (and the AFT and NEA do with Barack Obama.)

And really, another four years of Andrew Cuomo will probably be the final nail in the coffin of traditional public schools in NYC, since Cuomo has already forced into law a provision that forces the NYCDOE to take money and resources from traditional public schools and give them to charter school entrepreneurs like Eva Moskowitz and David Levin.

So you may be wondering, why am I calling for the UFT to endorse Andrew M. Cuomo for governor?

Well, it's quite simple really.

As I posted earlier this morning, pretty much every candidate the UFT endorses loses - the latest being Adriano Espaillat, the state senator who conceded to Representative Charles Rangel after losing a second close primary race for Congress.

Quite frankly, one of the better things that can happen if you're opposed to Andrew M Cuomo and corporate education reform in New York State is for the UFT to enthusiastically and vocally support Andrew M. Cuomo for re-election.

While the UFT's endorsement may not be the "kiss of death" for Cuomo, it surely means a lot less in real political terms than the UFT leadership would have the members and the public believe.

So go ahead, Mikey and Company - do the right thing and endorse Cuomo for governor.

And then we can hope for the kind of political results you got in the Espaillat/Rangel race, or the Thompson 2013 run or the backing of the Holy Triumvirate of Hevesi, Ferrer and Green in 2001...

Pro-Reform Propaganda Juggernaut And More Court Cases To Follow California Teacher Tenure Ruling

Get ready for millions of dollars in propaganda in the wake of a judge ruling teacher tenure laws in California unconstitutional:

A court ruling on Tuesday striking down job protections for teachers in California deals a sharp blow to unions — and will likely fuel political movements across the nation to eliminate teacher tenure.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu found five California laws governing the hiring and firing of teachers unconstitutional.

...

Reformers plan to take the fight to other states, hoping the strong language of the ruling will prompt Democrats elsewhere to reconsider ties to teachers unions. They’re considering similar lawsuits in Connecticut, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and elsewhere. And they plan a relentless public relations campaign, backed by millions of dollars from reform-minded philanthropists, to bring moms, dads and voters of both parties to their side.

A propaganda juggernaut, paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.

And after that, dozens more court cases, also paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.

And it's part of the civil rights movement, don'tcha know!

Because it is every child's basic civil right to have teachers with the same job protections as Walmart associates.

It would be great if we had a union leadership ready to fight what is now amounting to a battle to the death for the teaching profession.

But alas, we don't - they're still issuing boiler plate jive that is going to do little to win the public debate or the legal challenges.

I guess they think they'll still be able to collect dues even after teacher tenure laws are dismantled all over the country.

But after that happens, what's the point of having the unions around?

The UFT Sold You Out To Cuomo

The next time you hear any jive out of the UFT or AFT leaderships about holding Andrew Cuomo accountable for his policies, remember that the unions helped to engineer the Working Families Party endorsement of Andrew Cuomo by threatening the party with financial "collapse" if Cuomo wasn't given the nod.

The UFT wasn't the only union to pull the strings for Cuomo - other unions that threatened the WFP with destruction over the Cuomo endorsement included 1199 SEIU, HTC, the laborers, RWDSU, the Teamsters and TWU, the union that Cuomo just "negotiated" a contract agreement for.

And what did the unions get back in return for trying to ensure Cuomo doesn't have a third party candidate on his left calling him Republican-Lite all throughout the campaign and taking double digits in support from him come Election Day?

Empty promises, that's what:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Working Families Party’s leadership have reached a tentative agreement that could give the incumbent Democrat the labor-backed organization’s ballot line, according to sources familiar with the agreement.

Under the terms of the agreement, Cuomo would support local control for a minimum wage increase — a proposal he has previously opposed — as well as back a full Democratic takeover of the state Senate.

An additional source on Friday evening added that the situation remains fluid, and Cuomo must convince the WFP’s state committee he is firmly behind a variety of issues, including fully funding the Campaign of Fiscal Equity agreement as well as other measures such as decriminalizing certain amounts of marijuana and backing the women’s agenda, a package of bills the governor first introduced in 2013.

Keep in mind Cuomo has wanted a Republican Senate throughout his tenure so he could push through his Wall Street-friendly policies, and while he may promise to back a full Democratic takeover of the state Senate as part of this deal, his priorities of having the Senate stay the place where he can push his Wall Street-friendly policies remain.

Don't be surprised if he doesn't work all that hard to knock off Republican State Senators or push the Independent Democratic Caucus Dems back into the full Democratic fold.

And if the Senate doesn't turn, then the rest of that agenda he promised to push goes nowhere and Cuomo blames it on the State Senate he didn't do much to push toward full Democratic control.

In short, the unions and WFP got nothing politically out of this deal with Cuomo, though I would expect each of the unions involved will get something contractually out of Cuomo as payback.

For teachers, that means some lame change to APPR that will be in the end meaningless because Cuomo doesn't really want to make any changes to the system and still intends to run for president in 2016 or 2020 touting his education record and his APPR teacher evaluation system.

The union leadership sold you out, folks, and they sold out the Working Families Party as well and exposed their true priorities in the deal - maintaining their own power, privilege and access.

There will be some talk from Weingrew later on about how they refused to have their unions endorse Cuomo and in that way showed how they were standing up to Cuomo over his education policies.

That talk will be a snow job because the real sellout was done this week when the UFT leadership (with the total okay of the AFT leadership, to be sure) helped to engineer the WFP endorsement of one Wall Street-friendly Andrew M. Cuomo for a second term as governor.

All I can say is, let's see if we can get the Howie Hawkins/Brian Jones ticket into double digits this November.

And in two years, let's mount a challenge to Michael Mulgrew and the UFT leadership and try and put in some people who have the interests of their members at heart and not their own power, privilege and access.

Cuomo, WFP Reach Deal Over Ballot Line

Brokered by Bill de Blasio, of all people:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Working Families Party’s leadership have reached an agreement that could give the incumbent Democrat the labor-backed organization’s ballot line, according to sources familiar with the agreement.

Under the terms of the agreement, Cuomo would support local control for a minimum wage increase — a proposal he has previously opposed — as well as back a full Democratic takeover of the state Senate.

Whether Cuomo can and will deliver on these items given his working relationship with Republicans in the state Senate remains to be seen.

The agreement comes as WFP activists appeared close to coalescing around the candidacy of Zephyr Teachout, a Fordham University law professor. The WFP plans to holds its own nominating convention on Saturday outside of Albany.

But negotiations between the WFP and Cuomo’s camp behind the scenes stretched throughout the day, with New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio playing a large role in the talks.

De Blasio, a liberal Democrat, had publicly and privately advocated on Cuomo’s behalf for the WFP to grant him the ballot line.

One source described de Blasio’s efforts as “super helpful.”

Is de Blasio suffering from Stockholm Syndrome or did he get something in return for mediating negotiations between Cuomo and WFP?

If you remember, it was just a short while ago that Cuomo took every opportunity to stick it to de Blasio over not just charter schools but issue after issue.

Anthony Weiner even noted how putzy Cuomo was to de Blasio in a DN piece.

Now de Blasio helps save the day for Sheriff Andy.

My guess is, seconds after the election is over, Cuomo starts sticking it to de Blasio and the unions again.

Hard to know if this is Stockholm Syndrome, stupidity or a sell-out, but whatever the hell it is, it sucks.

But again, not unexpected.

UFT, Other Union Leaders Threaten Working Families Party Over Cuomo Endorsement

You knew the union leaders wouldn't allow for Working Families Party to endorse anybody over Sheriff Andy Cuomo.

With the WFP convention this weekend and many rank-and-file calling for the party to endorse Fordham law professor Zephyr Teachout over Andrew Cuomo, the union leaders made their move today and threatened the party with dissolution:

When Working Families Party state committee members gather at their convention tomorrow, far more than the endorsement for governor will be at stake.

The very future of the labor-backed party will be on the line, and according to one labor source, the damage done by the disagreement over whether or not to back Gov. Andrew Cuomo again may very well be irreparable.

“Regardless of what happens now, the way the party has conducted itself has done lasting damage to relationships with key (union) affiliates,” the source said. “It’s unclear if the party will ever be the same.”

Union leaders were burning up the phone lines this morning, discussing whether the time had finally come to pull their support of the party they helped create and have financially sustained since 1998.

According to another labor source involved in these talks, a number of the largest and most significant unions – including 1199 SEIU, HTC, the laborers, RWDSU, and the UFT – were prepared to call it quits with the WFP, knowing that their withdrawal could very well lead to the party’s “collapse.”

The Teamsters and TWU were also involved in these discussions, which were far enough along to warrant talk of drafting of a joint statement, although one was never actually released.

Just another example of union leadership looking to negotiate the terms of exploitation with the powers that be.

I'm surprised by none of this - these union leaders are all crooks and corporate cronies, and while they sometimes talk a good game for their members, mostly they care about maintaining their own power and privilege.

That means doing business with corporatists like Andrew M. Cuomo no matter the cost for the working people of New York State.

Will The UFT Leadership Publicly Debate The Contract Proposal?

NYC Educator posted the following this morning:

On Friday I decided it would be a good idea to have a forum in which both sides of the contract proposal are examined. I asked my friend Julie Cavanagh if she would be interested in presenting the con side, and she agreed. I went to my principal and asked if we could use the school auditorium. He said if we got a permit and did so after school hours it was fine.

I then happened to be speaking to Geoff Decker from Chalkbeat NY, and he offered to moderate if we could find a time to fit his schedule. We envisioned either that a panel of him, me and someone pro-contract to select questions from the audience. We wanted to do something balanced. I asked my district rep, who said this would have to go before a UFT officer. So I wrote the following email to Janella Hinds, UFT VP for Academic High Schools:

Hi Janella,

We are trying to organize a forum on the contract, and are thinking about doing it next Thursday afternoon at FLHS. My committee would get a permit, and anyone who wished to co-sponsor could help pay. We think it will be between 100-300, depending on how large a room we use, with auditorium at 300.

We envision a pro and con speaker, equal opening and closing statements, and questions from the crowd taken by a committee consisting of one pro, one con, and one non-partisan, perhaps Geoff Decker of Chalkbeat NY. We envision giving each speaker equal time to answer each question.

Do you think UFT would be interested in participating in such a forum?

Arthur

NYC Educator reports that thus far, there has been no response from the UFT leadership.

Now to be fair, the email went out on Friday and chances are, many of the UFT leadership were already well into their weekend cups and unavailable for response.

But I for one would like to hear the UFT leadership agree to the public debate of the contract proposal - and if the UFT leadership are so sure this proposal "scrapes the skies" it's so good, they ought to come to the public debate and demonstrate it to the rest of us.

As NYC Educator wrote:

If they have such great faith they've made a good decision, it behooves them to subject it to the sunlight of reasonable scrutiny.

If it's such a great deal, why wouldn't they jump at the opportunity? If we bloggers and opponents are spouting myths, as UFT President Mike Mulgrew repeatedly told the DA last Wednesday, why doesn't he grab this, a golden opportunity to demonstrate it?

Indeed.

Here's hoping the UFT leadership takes the opportunity to publicly debate the pros and cons of the contract proposal.

But I won't hold my breath waiting for this to happen.

A union leadership as top-down autocratic and Stalinst as this one isn't big on submitting to public scrutiny or debates they cannot control.

Here's How You Know The UFT Contract Deal Is A Bad One - The NY Post Likes It

One of the measures of any UFT contract deal is what the neo-liberals at the Daily News and Times and the neo-cons at the Post think about it.

If these editorial boards, who never saw a merit pay proposal they didn't like, a teacher they didn't want to fire or a traditional public school they didn't want to turn into a non-unionized charter school, like the new UFT contract deal, then you know there's are serious problems with it.

The NY Post came down squarely on liking the merit pay and de-contractulaizing 10% of city schools in the tentative UFT contract agreement:

Now that Mayor de Blasio has reached a deal with the United Federation of Teachers, most of the attention is on the $3.2 billion in retroactive pay. That’s understandable, given it’s the largest number in the deal and the mayor’s predecessor has said the city can’t afford it.

But we’re intrigued by some of the items we didn’t expect. One provision, for example, will allow exemptions from some Department of Education regulations and union rules in 200 schools — permitting them to change curricula, reconfigure the length of their school year, provide for more parental involvement and modify seniority rules for work assignments.

Used correctly, that would give traditional schools some of the flexibility that helps make charters successful.

Ditto for merit pay. Again, it will depend on how it’s implemented. Paying a good teacher $5,000 extra to keep her in a challenged school is an excellent investment, but if it means paying $5,000 to keep every teacher there, you haven’t fixed anything.

Perhaps most important is the $1 billion in savings the mayor says he and the UFT will seek in health care. We have few specifics, though the mayor mentioned sensible possibilities such as auditing benefits to remove those not entitled. If the mayor makes good on the promised savings, it would be a huge step forward.

Yeah, they love the merit pay and the charterizing of 10% of the city's schools without actually making them into charters (i.e., they won't be under the UFT contract rules, but teachers there WILL pay UFT dues.)

That's how you know this is a bad deal for teachers - the Posties like it and see it as a blueprint for eventually de-contractualizing all of the city schools down the road.

Will UFT Members Approve This Teachers Contract With So Much Delayed Compensation?

James Eterno at ICEUFT has all the details of the tentative UFT contract and you should go over to ICEUFT blog and get the scoop.

Yesterday I focused on two parts of the tentative agreement I find very troubling - the termination proceedings ATR's will face if they don't find permanent placement after two "trials" in schools and allowing the city to run 10% of NYCDOE schools outside of the contractual rules of the UFT contract.

Today I want to look at the money.

The news media is reporting that teachers are getting an 18% raise, including the 8% that was owed from the 2009/2010 pattern + full retroactive pay for the years since, but the reality is much more complicated than that.

Here's how James Eterno at ICEUFT blog describes the compensation schedule:

For the seven years from 2011 to 2018, where the UFT will set the pattern for raises that other city unions will now follow, we will be getting a total of 10% in raises for seven years plus a $1,000 signing bonus.  That works out to less than 1.5% per year.

Specifically, this is how the CFO crunched the numbers:

2009-2010 = 4% raise
2010-2011 = 4% raise
2011-2012 = 0% raise but we will get a $1,000 signing bonus if we ratify the contract.
Nov 2012- April 2013 = 0% raise
May 1, 2013 = 1% raise
May 1, 2014 = 1% raise
May 1, 2015 = 1% raise
May 1, 2016 = 1% raise
May 1, 2017 = 2.5% raise
May 1, 2018 = 3.0% raise
Total: 18% (compounded it will be a little more)

But there's a catch on when the 4% + 4% from the 2009/2010 pattern gets paid out - it doesn't get added to salary schedules now but gets gradually added in from 2015 on:

May 1, 2015 = 2%
May 1, 2016 = 2%
May 1, 2017 = 2%
May 1, 2018 = 2%

The news media is reporting that teachers are getting full retro for the 2009/2010 pattern, but that's a much more complicated story too.  Here's how that gets paid out:

October 1, 2015- 12.5% lump sum
October 1, 2016 - Nothing
October 1, 2017 - 12.5% lump sum
October 1, 2018 - 25% lump sum
October 1, 2019 - 25% lump sum
October 1, 2020 - 25% lump sum

My wife was over on the UFT Facebook page when the tentative contract agreement was first announced and noticed that a lot of comments were positive on the deal.

But as the night wore on and news started to spread that the 8% from the 2009/2010 pattern was going to be delayed for years and we were really only getting a 2% raise in the near future, some of the comments started turning negative.

People weren't too happy to hear that the 2009/2010 raises weren't going to be fully paid until 2018.

I think that's what's going to happen in general as people get the news of this contract.

At first, when they hear 18% raise and full retro, they're going to say "That sounds great!", but then as the understanding spreads that much of this compensation won't be in their pockets for years, there is going to be dismay and a little anger at the UFT leadership.

I've been around for three contract votes - 2002, 2005, 2007.

Not a one of those votes has ever been close and while I know from my older colleagues of a contract that was voted down during the Giuliani Years, I have a hard time seeing this one getting voted down.

In the end, I think this contract will be passed by the UFT membership, but I don't think there are going to be too many happy campers out there today as they learn that most of the money the media is reporting they're getting isn't actually going to arrive in their checks for years and the retro is so delayed that this 9 year contract will actually be expired by two years before its finally (and fully) paid out.

There is a reason the other union leaders are so pissed at the UFT leadership over this contract agreement.

Given the concessions the UFT agreed to - essentially throwing the ATR's under the bus, de-linking 10% of city schools from the contract, merit pay, unstated health care concessions - and given the piss-poor salary increases the leadership got, about 1.4% a year for 7 years (after the 8% from the old pattern), the UFT membership ought to be pissed at the UFT leadership too.

This is a terrible contract that was negotiated and while the UFT shills will tell you it scrapes the skies because they got you full retro, the reality is, they gave up a whole lot to get money that you're not going to see for years.

Raises In UFT Contract Delayed For Years

Perhaps you've been hearing in the news that teachers are receiving an 18% raise over the course of a nine year contract, with teachers receiving the 8% they are owed from the 2009/2010 pattern that every other city union got.

Well, guess what, folks - those raises from 2009/2010 are actually delayed for YEARS - not just the retro owed on those raises from 2009-2014, but also the changes to your salary steps.

Now perhaps you're like me and you figure, well, if they give out raises of 4% for 2009 and 4% for 2010, that money will be added to your salary step ladder right after the vote (or at least soon after) so that when you return to work in September, you will be making 8% more than you were when you left in June.

But silly you (and me!), the UFT and Bill de Blasio have a much more convoluted plan to finagle the step ladder and work those salary increases in over the course of the contract:

The proposed contract includes a total package of 18% in raises, including all retroactive pay, plus a $1,000 cash bonus.

For the current round, the annual percentages are:

1%-1% – ($1,000 cash)-1%-1.5%-2.5%-3%

Teachers can expect the $1,000 cash bonus as soon as the contract is ratified and a 2% increase later this year.  Other annual raises will be paid in May of each year.

The retroactive payments for the 4% and 4% that UFT members missed from the previous round—and the associated annual rate increases — will be phased in beginning in 2015 and ending in 2020.

The details are still a bit fuzzy at this moment, there's no new salary step ladder yet, but the basic gist is, you won't see 2009/2010 raises added to your step ladder until 2015-2020.

So those of you who thought, gee, this is a shit contract but at least I'll get the 8% for 2009-2010 and the 1% for 2013 and another 1% for 2014 so that I'm making 10% more, well, you're not even getting half of that for quite some time.

Details are still forthcoming and I'm sure the Unity shills will be out in full force to sell this garbage, but the truth is, not only did the UFT gut contractual protections for 10% of the city schools, throw the ATR's under the bus, and screw every other city union by setting a shitty pattern, they did it all for deferred raises that are so far down the pike that you can't even see the toll booth.

Truly a horrendous contract.

I'm not sure even the Unity shills are going to be able to sell how this contract "scrapes the skies" considering most of the alleged raises are years off - some so far off, this nine year contract will have expired already and we'll either be in the second de Blasio administration by then or (more likely) the first Moskowitz administration.

At First Glance, A Disastrous Contract Deal Made By Michael Mulgrew, UFT

A few years of zeroes, they threw the ATR's under the bus, they just enshrined merit pay and they are set to allow 200 schools to operate without UFT contractual rules, allowing for longer schools days/years and other "innovations":

The new contract would begin, retroactively, on November 1, 2009, and provide retroactive four percent pay raises for 2009 and 2010–comparable to the increases granted to many of the city’s other workers under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Teachers will then receive a 10 percent raise over seven years, plus a $1,000 bonus, beginning in May 2013 and extending through October 31, 2018, with workers receiving an added 1 percent in 2013, 2014 and 2015, 1.5 percent in 2016, 2.5 percent in May 2017 and 3 percent in 2018. The terms must still be approved by the union’s full membership.

The retroactive portion of the raises will amount to at least $3.4 billion, including pension costs, according to Doug Turetsky of the city’s nonpartisan Independent Budget Office.

In exchange, the union has agreed to more than $1 billion in health care savings, according to the administration. The savings would be achieved not through increased contributions, however, but through measures including an audit to make sure only those eligible are receiving benefits and centralized drug purchases. If the same reforms were extended across the workforce, the city claims they would yield $3.4 billion in savings–”effectively bending the curve of rising healthcare costs for the first time.”

The deal also includes reforms to various rules, including changes to the “Absent Teacher Reserve pool,” where teachers are sent if they can’t find work in city classrooms. The new contract will include rules that allow the city to permanently fire teachers if, for instance, they are twice returning to the pool for poor performance by principals. The rules also expand the definition of sexual misconduct, which will make it easier for the city to fire teachers for actions like inappropriate touching or texting, officials said.

The new rules also pave the way for merit pay for high quality teachers, creating new categories of “Ambassador” ” Model” and “Master” teachers, who will earn between $7,000 and $20,000 more a year. A new “Hard to Staff School Differential” would also pay teachers at the city’s 150 toughest schools an extra $5,000 a year.

As part of the deal, the UFT has also agreed to allow 200 schools to operate outside of existing DOE regulations and union rules, allowing the city to experiment with a longer school year and school day, among other changes.

The deal also requires twice as many parent-teacher conferences each year, and changes to teacher evaluations.

I don't see much to like here - who gets to be the "innovative" schools with the longer school days/years?

Is there more pay for that gig?

We know many principals want nothing to do with veteran ATR's, certainly because they cost more, but also because they're not as easy to control as younger teachers.

By giving ATR's two shots at a permanent gig or subjecting them to termination, they have essentially thrown most of them under the bus.

And what exactly will this merit pay proposal be based on, the one that pays up to $20K for being a "Master"?

Will this be based on the current evaluation system, which is a @#$%ing mess?

No wonder the other unions were reported to be pissed about Mulgrew's dealings - the UFT took zeroes after the old pattern (which is the 8% for 2009 and 2010) and didn't get another salary increase until May 2013.

That means little retro for the other unions, since most of the years they went without a contract will become zeroes in the pattern set by the UFT.

Wow - I will look some more at this deal, but what I see in the details so far is an absolute disaster.

No wonder the PBA declared an impasse with the city today - they didn't want to take the same shit deal Mulgrew is hailing.

Alas, it seems the UFT will set the pattern and all the other unions will get shit deals too.

I often say if you're a betting person, it pays to bet the worst possible outcome when Mulgarten and the Unity crew are handling things.

It looks like even with a fairly friendly mayor on the other side of the negotiation table, Mulgarten and the Unity crew screwed us - and the other unions in the city too.

That's why other union leaders are distancing themselves from this deal:

“I was surprised at how well the administration’s negotiators did considering the hand they were dealt,” said one labor source, who said the city had won “an incredible amount of leverage to win work rule reform, more healthcare givebacks, a change in pension payments, whatever’s on their agenda” with other unions.

And some were already trying to distance themselves by pushing against a one-size-fits-all approach.

“Every union’s members have different needs,” said Al O’Leary, a spokesman for police union chief Patrick Lynch, asserting that a deal “that satisfies one union’s needs may not satisfy the needs of other unions.”

I'm thinking it's time for a new UFT slogan:

UFT: NOT JUST SCREWING TEACHERS ANYMORE

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.

UFT/Unity Shill Comes By To Say "Take What The Union Gets And Like It!"

Here's a response from some anonymous Unity/UFT shill to my post this morning entitled "Message To UFT Leadership - Raises, Not Bonuses" that has to be seen to be believed:

Isn't funny that the very people that call the UFT a dues collecting agency, are the very purple that reap the benefits from the UFT negotiations team when it comes to our prescriptions, dental, hearing, and vision. Our retirement pensions and TDA also play into this, but they do nothing to contribute towards this! Why be party of UFT if you're not happy? You do have a choice even if you still have to pay an Agency Fee under the law. There just won't be all the great benefits that the rest of us get! So when you want to complain about bonuses vs retroactive, think about what is it exactly that you have done to help with negotiations? And yet you judge?There's a word mother called people like that!

Yeah, help out with the negotiations by keeping mum with any thoughts of your own and hail whatever crap the UFT leadership gets for you as scraping the skies it's so good even when it's far, far from that.

That's the Unity caucus hackery I know and love.

Everybody I talked to about this yesterday and today said bonuses replacing raises is unacceptable, no matter what gloss Mulgrew and Company put on it.

We have gone five years without a raise and have seen our quality of work decrease exponentially as the teacher evaluation system and Common Core have been implemented.

That's what I heard from people yesterday and today when I broached this subject.

But now that a Unity hack has come around to tell us all that we have to take whatever they feel like giving us and STFU, my faith in the rightness of the universe has been restored.

Unity will sell us out and tell us it's our problem if we don't like it.

And they're right - until we get rid of these destructive sell-outs, it is our problem.

Democracy UFT Style

I called this Thompson endorsement by the UFT leadership a long time ago.

It wasn't difficult to see that this was the candidate they would eventually endorse.

John Liu is tarred by scandal, so he wasn't going to get the nod.

Bill de Blasio was seen as too lefty (as noted by one of the Unity slugs in a comment at Gotham Charter Schools a few weeks back), so he was out.

Quinn, had she still been polling strong, might have been their pick because the most important objective the UFT leadership wanted from this endorsement was to pick a winner.

But Quinn has fallen in every poll taken since February and is no longer the presumptive frontrunner in this race, so the UFT leadership could take a chance and go with somebody other than Quinn.

That somebody was Al D'amato's, Merryl Tisch's and Randi Weingarten's favorite candidate, Bill Thompson.

The sham of all of this is that the decision was made weeks ago, but the UFT made believe like they were going through some "democratic process" to come to the endorsement decision.

But as with every other decision the UFT makes, from the sellout on the Common Core to the sellout on APPR, the fix was in and the decision was made by the union elites and handed down to the rank and file.

That's why they had Thompson ready to go yesterday right after the endorsement announcement, that's why they had the posters already printed up.

The good news in all of this is, as I noted yesterday, winning the UFT endorsement doesn't give Bill Thompson much juice other than a day of headlines and some extra cash for the campaign.

Mulgrew can preen in the papers about the vaunted UFT GOTV machine, but the truth is, this is a paper tiger union with most of its power base residing on the golf courses in Florida.

Most members I spoke with yesterday, both in my school and at Regents grading after school, said if Mikey Mulgrew wanted them to vote for Bill Thompson, then there must be something wrong with Bill Thompson.

I think that's EXACTLY right.

Any candidate who enjoys the support of Al D'amato, the hedge fund/charter school contingent, Merry Tisch, Randi Weingarten and the UFT is a candidate who should not be trusted.

Just like the "democracy" the UFT engaged in to anoint Bill Thompson their candidate.

Mulgrew's Explanation On The Thompson Endorsement Is Just Lame

Here it is - the rationale for the UFT's endorsement of Bill Thompson for mayor:

Mulgrew said that “If you look at most of the candidates, their policies on education are quite similar.”

But he said Thompson was “clear in saying, ‘The city is going in the wrong direction.’”

You'd think if all the candidates were offering similar education policies to Thompson, then the UFT would have gone with a candidate who has talked about making sure teachers get a fair contract, including the money they got screwed out of when Bloomberg broke the last pattern.

That candidate would have been John Liu.

But that's not what the UFT leadership, such as it is, decided to do (and let's dispense with the myth that this was some "democratic process" the UFT went through in choosing Thompson - there's is nothing "democratic" that the UFT engages in ever.)

Nope, the UFT leadership instead went with the candidate who said Bloomberg did the right thing by screwing teachers out of the 8% pattern.

Uh huh - you heard right.

The UFT leadership endorsed the candidate who said "I'm glad Bloomberg @#$%ed the teachers!"

You can bet that a candidate who once said "I'm glad Bloomberg @#$%ed the teachers!" will say it something similar the next time contract negotiations come around and he is running them.

Now I dunno about you, but if all things were equal in how the candidates approached education policy (a position which I dispute, in any case), I wouldn't have gone with the guy who was happy to see Bloomberg screw teachers out of their 8% raise.

I would have gone with the candidate saying that teachers should receive a fair contract, including the money they got screwed out of last time around.

As I wrote last night, this Thompson endorsement is just the latest ed deform collaborationist sell-out from the UFT/AFT.

You can be sure if Thompson is elected, he will turn his back on teachers and pursue the ed deform policies his co-chair, Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch, and his DFER/charter buddies want him to pursue.

Another UFT/AFT-devised disaster in the making.

Heckuva job, Mike. 

Heckuva job, Randi.

Daily News: Weingarten Behind The Thompson/UFT Endorsement

From the Daily News politics blog:

Sources in the labor movement told the Daily News that former UFT President Randi Weingarten, now head of the UFT’s national parent, the American Federation of Teachers, was a deciding factor in the union’s selection.

Weingarten had personally endorsed Thompson and pressed Mulgrew, her hand-picked successor at the UFT, to support Thompson as well, the sources said.

Not a surprise.

Weingarten still runs this union.

She makes all the big calls, from teacher evaluations to contract negotiations to sell-outs on the Common Core to mayoral endorsements.

Nothing has changed since she left.

We're getting the same ed deform collaborationist sell-outs we got when she was officially running this union local.

The Thompson endorsement is just the latest ed deform collaborationist sell-out.

The Bad News Is, The UFT Endorsed Bill Thompson...

...the good news is, the UFT-endorsed candidate in a mayoral race hasn't won since 1989.

Given the abysmal turnout in the UFT elections, given that the UFT power base (the retirees) mostly resides in Florida and can't vote in a NYC election, and given that many teachers in the UFT couldn't care a whit who Mikey Mulgrew wants them to vote for in September, I don't think this endorsement helps Thompson all that much outside of the extra cash the UFT brings.

That's my initial take - what's yours?

BTW, I was between Liu and de Blasio.

I know Liu, hammered by the campaign finance scandal that was ginned up by Bloomberg's US attorney pal, couldn't actually win the race.

But like Chaz, I thought he would be the best.

But I could have lived with de Blasio too.

Thompson?

Not so much.

I just can't suport a guy who is supported by Al D'amato, Merryl Tisch, and Randi Weingarten.

A Way Forward For NYC Teachers

From a commenter:

The efforts of those who justly oppose the UFT leadership must begin at once. The disastrous results of this agreement will become quite evident by June 2014 and the wheels will come off in June 2015. The only chance to oust the Mulgrew caucus will be to win enough delegates to remove retirees from the election process. There is a chance for a removal ala Chicago if enough teachers are affected by this agreement and they will be.

It will only take a year for many of the rank-and-file - even, perhaps some of the Educators4Excellence - to realize how badly rigged this system is against teachers.

The question is, what will the rank-and-file do after that realization.

At my school, there is already a big contingent of anti-Unity/anti-Mulgrew people ready to hang this albatross around the leadership's neck.

The CL used to be an apolitical guy when it came to caucus politics, but over the last year he has grown increasingly politicized by the lack of help he has gotten from 52 Broadway with a swath of "u" ratings.

After a year of APPR, I would bet John King's 90's goatee a lot more people join the anti-Unity/anti-Mulgrew contingent and I don't see the CL waving Mulgrew pom-poms any time soon.

The more schools this can happen at, the better the chance that we can take this union away from the crooks and the hacks in Unity/New Action.

It's a tough road but it's better than sitting still and silent with this catastrophe.