Sunday, June 01, 2014

The Winners And Losers Of The Proposed Teachers Contract.



























The proposed teachers contract with the City will probably be ratified this week and that's a shame since this contract has some "winners and losers".  No union should ever have agreed to a contract that treats their members differently but our union did.

The winners:

Retiring Teachers:
Teachers retiring by June 30th.  These retiring teachers will get their full retroactive pay and have it included in their pension checks.  No worries about Danielson, junk science, or abusive administrators.

Recently retired teachers:
They will get their full retroactive pay and a pension bump to reflect the retroactive pay.

Teachers who retire after 2018:
These teachers will receive all the raises which are back loaded to the end of the contract, if they can last that long.

The losers:

Teachers who resign, terminated, or die:
Teachers who leave the DOE before they reach retirement age, or are terminated, and who die will not get one penny of their retroactive raises or lump sum payments even if they worked in the 2009-11 school years. This includes untenured teachers who were discontinued.

Teachers on unpaid leave:
Teachers who are on unpaid leave on the date of the contract ratification will not receive the $1,000 bribe bonus.  This group includes teachers on maternity leave, family medical leave, and taking time off to care for a loved one.

Absent Teacher Reserve:
The ATRs will have diminished "due process rights" and have no say in placements.  Moreover, for middle and elementary school ATRs, will now be forced to take positions outside their Districts in their Borough.  Moreover, for ATRs who won their 3020-a termination hearings or took a stipulation, the DOE will not offer them interviews and keep them in rotation.

Teachers Who Retire After June 30th:
Unlike the recent retirees, this group of retirees will get their retroactive pay in drips and drabs like active members will.  Furthermore, their pension bumps will also be gradual and reflect the deferred payout scheme for the retroactive raises and payments.  Of course, if they retire before May of 2018 they will not receive the back-loaded raises.

Its a pity that our union allowed the City and the DOE to target a group of teachers to different rules and didn't significantly change the termination process for alleged "ineffective teachers".  Moreover, no union should agree to a contract that has "winners" and "losers".  That's not union solidarity.


29 comments:

Philip Nobile said...

Chaz,
You are probably right when you say that "the DOE will not offer [ATRs who beat the DOE in termination hearings] interviews and keep them in rotation." But the language of the MOA does not say that exactly. Instead the MOA mentions that the DOE has the "discretion" to send wretches like us on interviews.

Bronx ATR (not Spock) said...

I can't retire until 2016, when I'll be 55. By stipulating no back loaded raises, if you go before 2018, the union and city is inadvertently causing people to work (who would under logical circumstances retire). Not very smart. The more you look at this contract the worse it gets. There's also no way DeBlasio is getting another term. One would think Mulgrew would have attempted to get a great contract before Mayor Eva Moskowitz goes into office in 4 years. I can understand, not justify, those who are retiring in June voting yes to this contract- but for anyone else you are getting played as a total fool.

Anonymous said...

The UFT says that if you retire after June 30, 2014 your pension will be calculated at the time of your retirement including the two 4% increases. That is to say it won't be be bumped up in drips and drabs.

Anonymous said...

Eric...

Once again, you prevail in bringing updated / accurate / immediate info to us.

WJ Pierro

Anonymous said...

Mulgrew negotiated the most polarizing contract in the history of the UFT. Mulgrew needs to step down for his incompetence and outright dishonesty. I have no confidence in this union and hope there is a move towards decertification. I still believe there is a chance this contract proposal will go down. At least there will be a very high NO vote which may cause embarrassment for the union leadership and setup their downfall in 2016.

Chaz said...

Anon 10:16

I did not read that in the MOA or from TRS. Do you really want me to believe the union's word on that when its not stated anywhere?

Philip:

The DOE wouldn't have inserted the language in the contract if they intend to place ATRs who won their 3020-a hearings.

Peter Parker said...

I voted no as I believe many high school teachers did. I'm 40 now with 15 years in. I think this contract will pass because young teachers who don't know ant better and retirees who hear full retro will vote for it. Anyone with a lot of time left should vote now. The payout system alone is ridiculous.

P

Anonymous said...

What about accused teachers who prevailed on all charges (in other words, no fines, no courses, no suspensions, no nothing) and all charges were dismissed? I know this is a very very rare thing.

William Richardson said...

Chaz, my district rep said that anyone retiring will receive the raises due to them calculated in their pension at the time of retirement. She said that this was agree to after the fact. She said that TRS was instructed to make this calculation. Is there any way of verifying this?

Anonymous said...

The firefighter and police officers' unions would never agree tp something like this with backloaded pay.

Anonymous said...

senfelefsicoggyf

Anonymous said...

I happened to be at 52 Broadway recently and actually stopped and looked at the glass cases which hold some pretty heavy documents. Al Shanker must have been some kinda guy. I didn't know him and he passed on before I became a teacher. I saw the letter written to him from Dr. Martin Luther King, which was certainly amazing to read. It even had a PS hand written note at the bottom from Dr. King to "Brother" Shanker as the letter is introduced. Amazing! Chaz, can you imagine what Shanker would say to viewing this contract? I'm young, but smart enough to know that Al Shanker can never be duplicated, nor Mulgrew or any future president of the UFT, will never stand up and fight like he would've. I wish he was my president!

Chaz said...

Al Shanker would roll over in his grave to see the union has to agreed to different rules for different groups.

Pissed Off said...

I am a big winner and still urged people to vote no.

Chaz said...

Let's see, your DR tells you that TRS is going to give later retirees all of their retroactive payments in the pension. Yet its not written anywhere.

Put me down as skeptical.

Anonymous said...

Somebody needs to clarify this pension rate for retirees in the next few years.,I was told by the pension office that there pension pay would include the retro pay. NOT as you say in dribs and drabs. The union needs to get to work and put together various pay schedules so people can make informed decisions.

Mr. Talk said...

Chaz, the UFT did put it in writing that those who retire after June 30 will get their 8% bump upon retirement. http://www.accountabletalk.com/2014/05/retirement-disincentive-part-ii.html

The retro will be the same as in service members, but pensions will be calculated as if the money had been paid in 2009-2014.

Chaz said...

Mr Talk:


Can you tell me where it is written?

Anonymous said...

Final average salary for pensions will be calculated using the higher salaries from this contract. So, yes, the two 4% raises increases annual salaries thus your pension will be higher.

Anonymous said...

FAS will be calculated as if you earned the money no matter when you retire.

This is right from The Teacher Retirement Board members. As a pension consultant I would ask that you do not put pension information out there as some people might actually believe you.

Anonymous said...

I for one will leave the uft if this contract becomes ratified. I've been teaching for 20 years, and I've seen nothing but corruption and incompetence by this so called union. Perhaps i may only get back a portion in the difference of paying agency fees, but at least the UFT will not be using it to stab us in the backs.

retired teacher said...

TO 7:50 PM. As retiree you will receive all back monies owed to you. I know because I retired when there was no contract. A year later, with a new contract, I got a check from the Board of Ed.

Remember that TRS and the City have to abide by state laws. The TRS Board, Mayor or UFT just cannot, capriciously, decide that retirees will not get money owed to them.

Incidentally, it is important to get UFT trustees elected to the TRS governing board. The UFT has control. Giuliani (America's Mayor -ha ha) tried unsuccessfully to change the structure of TRS so that the city (meaning Rudy) could control the money. Fortunately, TRS is governed by NY state law and there was a state assembly hostile to Rudy (can't imagine why.)

OneMoreYearToGo said...

The police and firefighters unions have already said they won't accept the "wives" contract agreement with the city...backhanded slap against the 25% to 30% male teachers in our system...and rightfully so.

Chaz said...

Anon 10:18

Show me where it is written down? Until I see it in print I will not assume its true.

Too bad the UFT does not clearly state what you claim,

Anonymous said...

retired teacher, where is it written down? As a retired teacher you are a winner and that's why your protecting those union slugs.

Anonymous said...

That's original.

Robert Friedman said...

You are right in some respects, but I disagree on one point. Winners & losers. You contend that there should be no losers. I disagree. Negotiating always leads to some kind of compromise. We win on some points, and other times, the DOE wins. It's just not fair for one side to get it all. It's the same with a large group, like the 80,000 teachers in the city. It would be unrealistic to have them all be "winners."

Anonymous said...

Chaz you state that "the DOE will not offer ATRs who beat the DOE in termination hearings] interviews and keep them in rotation" I know of 2 teachers who were hit with fines from there 3020A, but managed to find jobs through the open market. Therefore I'm wondering if its a case by case situation.

FEDUPWITHUFT said...

I am considering retiring in August because of my severe osteo and I have been trying to get some answers concerning the calculation of my FAS. I will be 62 in July so I'm not worried about the age too much. I only have 24 years 2 months and 8 days as of 6/30/16. According to the UFT website the two 4% retro increases for 2009 to 2011 will be calculated into the FAS as if you already received them back in 2009 to 2011, but that's not the case. The UFT should post the truth about this contract. New retirees and the people that retired on 7/1/14 are getting their pensions recalculated a little at a time. Supposedly every time the retro 2% increase for 2009 to 2011 kicks in a person's pension is supposed to be recalculated, but according to TRS they do that when they get salary info from the DOE. MY question is. why would the DOE give salary info to the TRS if a person is retired. I guess the City set it up this way and the UFT went along with it thinking that by the time a pension has to be recalculated the retiree might not be around any more.

I called the UFT and spoke to a pension consultant and asked a question about the 2% retro which kicks in on May 1, 2017 and the 2% retro which kicks in on May 1. 2018. I told him that according to the UFT website that it would be included in my FAS and he said "You're not retiring in 2018 so how can it be included?" I would have to work until 2018 to have it included in my FAS? Am I going to lose out on those two 2% retro increases if I retire now? Am I going to have to call TRS on May 1, 2017 to make sure that they recalculate my pension to include that 2% which I am entitled too sine I worked back in 2009 to 2011? I also called TRS and I was told the same thing. My FAS is calculated according to salary info given to TRS by the DOE. Only increases that you already received are included when they calculate the FAS.

The only people that benefited from this contract were the ones that were able to retire before 6/30/14. I also sent an email to Mulgrew about this and I still haven't received a response.

I don't know of anyone that retired on 7/1/14 or later to get some answers. I was scheduled for a final consultation at the UFT and I ended up cancelling it because I feel that they don't know what they are talking about.

I've gone on the TRS website and I think that the estimate that they give of my FAS is wrong. I'm a secretary and in 2014 my salary was 60,640. In 2015 my salary was 62,461.00. In 2016 my salary as of May 1st is 68,805. Will my salary from 2016 be included when they calculate my FAS if I retire as of 8/1/16? According to TRS my FAS as of March 2016 is 59,775.00. How did they come up with that as an estimate? Are they using the salary from 2013, 2014 and 2015?

Thanks for any info you can give me.