Chalkbeat published the entire Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) contract between the City and the UFT. Based on the MOU. Here are the highlights.
- Raises (2% per year) less than the inflation rate (2.8%).
- No change in DOE hiring policy that discriminates against veteran teachers
- No decrease in class sizes limits
- Charlotte Danielson still used.
- ATRs permanently hired will not count on a school budget for the length of the contract. Then what?
- Still two or three lists of ATRs.and the Scarlet Letter will remain.
- On the first day of school. ATRs will be forced placed in vacancies
- No "newbies" can be hired once the school year starts.
- Paras get teacher "due process" and an increase in longevity raises.
- Chapter Leaders can see a student's OORS report.
- Expedited grievances pertaining to oversized classes.
- Less observations for effective or highly effective teachers.
A searchable version of the MOU can be found Here.
15 comments:
Besides healthcare savings the City will save a lot of money on teachers hired after September 2019. The UFT agreed to make getting the MA+30 differential a lot harder to achieve. A teacher hired in 2017 needs 6 A+ credits, but any teacher hired after 9/2019 who wants the differential has to achieve a minimum of 18 A+ credits. How many years will that take to achieve 18 A+ credits? This looks like a salary savings for the City. Less teachers applying for the differential.
Awful contract!!!! Am I surprised? Not in the least. Mulgrew is a rube. Good luck to all the ATR's (and those soon to be) reading this. You will definitely need it. The contract doesn't even break even with the cost of living adjustment...
This is my eight year as an ATR and I must say that during the eight years I have been hoodwinked into thinking that the atr pool would end just soon enough. When we got a new chancellor to replace Klein in 2010 or so, Dennis Walcott I thought to myself well surely the new chancellor will end this stupid atr pool which is a waste of everything to everybody.
But no. Dennis Walcott was a puppet for Bloomberg and the atr pool never had a chance to end with Walcott as he was only a puppet for Bloomberg who created the atr pool. As a matter of fact it got worse with rotations going haywire from weekly to monthly to yearly.....Then, we elected a new Mayor! Mayor diblasio who was a good friend to the UFT and teacher friendly. I thought to myself well surely the atr pool will be ending now that Bloomberg is finally gone and we have a new friendly mayor. No, diblasio did not get rid of the atr pool he kept it. Then, diblasio hired Carmen Farina, a life long educator who knows about teaching and is not some neophyte to the system. I thought to myself, well Farina will no longer keep the ridiculous atr pool. Farina will end the misery I am sure. No, she did not.
So then we elected diblasio again and diblasio hires a new chancelor! I thought to myself well now we will end the atr pool misery as surely the new chancellor will say what the heck are you guys doing wasting all that money and wasting all that talent! The new chancellor has kept the atr pool in tact. The atr pool still exists. Eight years have passed by.
Today I came to grips with the notion that for whatever reason, the atr pool in the nycdoe is a permanent fixture and anyone can become an atr at any time. In one of the most amazing fascinating labor models you can ever find, the atr pool which was created by mike bloomberg and his chancellor klein remains in effect and unfortunately the dysfunctional nycdoe is just unable to get the teachers into the classrooms instead opting for no nothing 20 year olds teaching some of the most difficult students the world has ever known. So, today I come to grips with the fact that my career will end as an atr and the nycdoe is the culprit who have destroyed their own system for reasons unknown to us all.
I attended an ATR meeting yesterday. The presenter said that the city is against forced placement and would rather spend the money on the ATRs than to place them. Also, according to the new contract, ATRs will no longer be figured into a school's average salary if the principal decides to hire him or her. This supposedly will make hiring ATRs more attractive, but the average salary will still be lowered if the principal hires a newbie whose low salary will be averaged into the school's budget instead of not averaging an ATRs salary into the budget which would keep the average salary the same. There are still benefits of hiring novices. Also, we learned that ATR is not a title. You are a teacher in your licensed area. Also, there are no more forced interviews and if a site supervisor shows up without being announced, the observation is considered informal and doesn't count. There are also no expedited 3020 hearings. We get the same rights as regular appointees. Lastly, according to the new contract, after the first day of school. schools can no longer higher newcomers. They must take from the ATR pool or an ATR will be assigned that position. Also, the presenter made a good point. SHe said if a principal is hiring someone because of his or her salary, that shows signs of poor and misdirected leadership and you probably wouldn't want to work for that principal anyone as he or she clearly does not care about his/her staff, students and school.
Anon 2:30
Let me enlighten you on what the UFT didn't bother to explain.
The school doesn't have to pay for a permanently hired ATR only for the length of the contract and it then sunsets. Therefore, principals will not hire ATRs since they could be stuck with their salary four years down the road.
Same rights? Try applying for per session positions or grading?
So if now a permanent fixture we now deserve our own chapter.
I agree.
Yes, but anything can change with a new contract. You can't live wondering what will happen with a new contract. The doe drops bombshells every day. Also, they said to ask your union rep at the school if you don't get a per session position you wanted.
Maybe you can help. We called the UFT and they didn't know or care... My sister was a paraprofessional for five years and then her school asked her to be the parent coordinator last year, so she switched jobs (and unions).....she is still a DOE employee (and never stopped being a DOE employee), but not a UFT member. Does she get any of the retroactive pay??? Nobody seems to know (she got it last year, but became parent coordinator after that check was issued).
My understanding is that since your sister changed unions from UFT to DC37 she effectively resigned from thr UFT and is not eligible for the lump sum payments. Contact DC37 and see if they made a deal with the UFT like CSA did for supervisors.
You are missing one of the biggest and most important parts of the new proposed contract: More health care cost savings to be determined in the future. Read at the Ice blog. http://iceuftblog.blogspot.com/2018/10/uft-members-vote-on-entire-contract.html
I did mention it at the end of my post.
8:27 CSA did a great job for their members by holding out of the last contract until the city agreed that their new members (former UFT) would get their retro. UFT sold out the members that left the union. Shame on them.
Meathead Mike doesn't care if UFT members get their retro or not. He went along with it. If a UFT member resigns the City saves money. If a UFT member passes away their family doesn't get the retro and the City saves money. That money probably went into Mulgrew's pocket when he agreed to the limitations on the retro. The City is flush with cash right now. We're due 75% of retro. Mulgrew could have fought for us to get half of the 75% now and the other half in 2019. He should have fought so we wouldn't have to wait until 2020. The longer we wait for our retro the more money the City saves. How many more teachers will resign or retirees will pass away before we get all the retro we're due?
UFT retirees who retired after 6/30/14 that are getting their retro the same way as in-sevice UFT members, still didn't get their retro. The UFT claims they are getting it on 10/20/18 - which is a Saturday. In 2015 retirees got their retro on the same day as in-service members and the UFT also took double the dues from retirees also. In 2017 retirees were given a date for their retro and then there was a two or three day delay.
Why didn't the union address and demand the remaining lump sum payments with interest. We been waiting for these bonus payments for nine years without interest. Since Mulgrew did not demand this remaining money now then Vote No on this contract to stop the disrespect.
Post a Comment