The ATR Pool Attacked Once Again. This Time By The Citizen's Budget Commission.

The nonpartisan and anti-teacher Citizen's Budget Commission (CBC) in an error filed analysis blasted the City and the UFT that allows teachers to remain in the ATR pool indefinitely.  According to the CBC report, the ATR pool costs the DOE $136 million dollars in the school year   Their solution?  Give the ATRs a six month time limit. While I do not question the number, I do question the CBC's motives and their lack of exploring the real cause of the ATR pool..

In the next few months the City will be negotiating with the unions, including the UFT.  The City will most certainly ask for an ATR time limit as they have done since the creation oif the ATR pool.  Just as certain, the UFT will reject an ATR time limit, reminding the City of the deal that was made between DOE's Chancellor Joel Klein and UFT President, Randi Weingarten that allowed principals to hire whom they pleased while excessing veteran teachers into the ATR pool.  Part of the sleazy DOE-UFT agreement was that there would not be a time limit for excessed teachers who enter the ATR pool.  From the day the infamous 2005 contract was signed, Chancellor Joel Klein has tried to get the UFT to agree to an ATR time limit and has pushed the media to write articles that condemn the ATR pool.  From the Liberal New York Times to the Reformy Chalkbeat, to the Conservative Wall Street Journal and New York Post, all the media demonizes the ATR pool.

Since Joel Klein left the DOE the three other Chancellors have also pushed fir a time limit and to the union's credit, they point out that the time limit is non-negotiable since it was part of the new hiring process agreed to by both parties in 2005.  Moreover, if the union was to accept an ATR time limit, the other municipal unions would loudly object and probably sue as a violation of the Civil Service law since it would set a slippery slope of diminished worker "due process"  as all unions under "collective bargaining" would be forced to accept having excessed members who no longer can bump less senior members out of their job and with an arbitrary time limit can be fired.

The CBC's report fails to discuss the real culprit of the ATR pool,which is Fair Student Funding that penalizes principals who hire veteran teachers and incentivizes schools to "hire the cheapest and not the best teachers" for their school.  It's too bad that the CBC report failed to address the deeper issues like school based fair student funding, large class sizes, poor leadership, and tight school budgets as the real causes of academic underachievement.

ATRs Do Not Even Need To Respond To Job Interviews Outside Their Borough.

Over the last two weeks I have received 8 job interviews for Earth Science positions.  They are from the Bronx (ugh), Brooklyn (scary), and Manhattan (no parking).  No job offer, mind you, just an interview.  Even if it was a job offer, I wouldn't take it out of Borough.  In addition, I received a job interview at William Cullen Bryant High School and since it occurs before the school year and the terrible reputation the school has, thanks to the Principal targeting veteran teachers, I also ignored that invitation as well.

There is a severe shortage of Earth Science teachers throughout the New York City school system and quite a few schools use uncertified teachers to teach the Regents course, unless the Superintendent requires the Principal to have all certified teachers for their Regents courses.  For years, when principals did as they pleased under the useless and money sucking Children First Networks,  the majority of schools had uncertified teachers teaching Regents courses. 

Unfortunately, many of us in the ATR pool will be "forced placed" by the DOE during the school year and if you have a license in Special Education, ESL, and Science, you are in danger of getting a "developing"  (if your lucky) or an :ineffective", so that the Principal is not stuck with your salary and seniority for years to come.

Remember, when the school year starts and out of Borough schools request your attendance at an interview, you can ignore their request, even if the District Representative encourages you to go to it.  Just say no, unless you really want the position..

The Appointment Of Randy Asher To Tackle The ATR Problem Shows That The ATR Incentive Has Failed.

The DOE announced that the former Principal of Brooklyn Tech, Randy Asher, will get a promotion and a $185,000 dollar salary to tackle the vexing ATR problem.  According to Chancellor Carmen Farina, Randy Asher will bring a fresh approach and new strategies to reduce the ATR pool that cost the DOE over $100 million dollars annually.  This is proof that the DOE's ATR incentive has been a failure since if it was a success, there would be no reason to hire Mr.Asher to tackle the problem.  According to the Daily News article, there are presently, 981 ATRs in rotation, down from 1,303 at the beginning of the school year.  However, most of the reduction is due to provisional placements.  That means once their provisional assignments ends, they will be dumped  back into the ATR pool.  The latest anecdotal information showed only 125 ATRs were offered and accepted the incentive for a permanent placement.

What can Mr. Asher do to reduce the ATR pool?  The simple answer is to be given the authority by the Chancellor to prohibit principals from hiring outside the District until all exccessed teachers in the District in their content specialty are placed.  Without that authority, Mr. Asher will be met with resistance as principals who have been indoctrinated under the Bloomberg ideology and will simply refuse to hire ATRs.  Mr. Asher would need to obtain the power to penalize principals who fail to follow the new rules in hiring ATRs and get caught hiding vacancies.  These penalties should include but not limited to the following:

1. Monetary penalty in the form of a fine.
2. Taking away funding for the hidden vacancy
3. Removal of the Principal.

Of course this can only happen if the school-based fair student funding program is made District based and the schools no longer have a financial incentive to hire "newbies".

However, what I suspect will actually happen is that Mr. Asher will propose an ATR time limit and a reduced "due process" proposal when he negotiates with the union leadership.  Our union leadership will reject the ATR time limit but will agree to a more punitive ATR program that will once again make ATRs a "second class citizen".   Of course, our union leadership will once again declare victory and convince the DOE to make an inadequate ATR retirement incentive, similar to the one in 2014 as a sweetener so that everybody wins, except the ATRs who cannot afford to retire and are subject to more onerous requirements and more harassing pressure to quit the system.

I could be wrong but I strongly suspect that the scenario I outlined in the previous paragraph will be the most likely path that Mr. Asher will take as he won't step on the toes of his Tweed supervisors and the principals of the CSA union he was a long-term member in.

Why Does The DOE Continually Violate The ATR Agreement?

Last week I received a change in my assignment and was sent to a middle school, despite the fact the ATR agreement plainly states that rotating ATRs can only be placed in their district.   My district is District 77, Queens high schools, and that is the only district I am required to rotate in.  Yet the DOE continually violates the 2011 ATR agreement and tries to dump ATRs outside their district.

Luckily, I contacted Michael Sill and Amy Arundell who swiftly contacted the DOE and over the weekend I received a revised assignment to a high school in my district.  The question I have for the DOE are the following:

1. Is the DOE ATR group just a bunch of incompetent boobs?
2. Does the DOE ATR group simply ignore the 2011 ATR agreement?
3. Maybe the DOE ATR group tries to trick the ATRs by assigning them to an out of district assignment as if they are required to report or face disciplinary action?

I cannot say which of the three above questions apply, maybe all three, but if you believe you are placed out-of-district, please contact Michael Sill of Amy Arundell at UFT headquarters as quickly as possible and explain why the placement is wrong.  If the DOE does not place you in your correct district by Sunday night, report to your last school until the proper placement is assigned.  Do not simply stay home!  Otherwise, you will be marked absent without cause.

Speaking of the ATR agreement there are two other issues that need to be clarified.  First, the ATR incentive may have a hidden condition that wasn't explained by either the DOE or the UFT.  I have been informed that the first year of the ATR incentive is free for the calendar and not school year.  Meaning that schools will wait till the second semester to pick up ATRs since they can get the ATR for free for both the second semester of this school year and the first semester the next school year.  The same goes for years two and three when they get the ATR at a reduced cost.

Another hidden condition is that the school would still be responsible initially for the ATR salary and get reimbursed by the DOE which is a disincentive for principals who are on a tight budget and are reluctant to shell out up to $54,000 in salary for the second semester and hope the DOE will pay them back at the end of the school year.  If this is true, I see many principals deciding against hiring ATRs for their vacancies.

Finally, does the realigning of New York City licenses with New York State licenses allow the DOE to use it as an end around of the ATR Agreement and put high school teachers into middle and elementary schools?  Will the UFT allow it?  I certainly hope not as the DOE will most certainly take advantage of this and abuse the ATRs even more than they do now.

Remember, the ATR information meeting is scheduled tomorrow at 4:30pm at the Queens UFT office.  See you there.

Update:  Amy Arundell has clarified and corrected the issues dealing with the ATR incentive and the license expansion.  According to Ms. Arundell the DOE came up with the ATR incentive to try to place ATRs in permanent positions since schools are being paid for the vacancies anyway and it makes little sense for principals not to hire the ATRs for these paid for vacancies,  unless they have ideological motives that only hurt their students who end up with no teacher.

As for the license issue?  Amy states that it will not affect the placement of ATRs in their district.  The DOE cannot force place an ATR outside their district without the ATR's approval, even if his or her license now allows for them to be placed in, for example, in a middle school if they are a high school teacher.  

Amy also informed me that the DOE's assignment to a middle school was a "computer glitch" doe to a new computer system and new personnel. In other word the DOE showed their incompetence and carelessness in not checking to see if the placement meets the 2011 ATR Agreement.

.

Why Didn't Metropolitan High School Hire An ATR To Cover A Living Environment Class?

I'm sure this will not surprise my many readers or ATRs but I was told by a very smart and motivated summer school student that he failed second semester Living Environment (Biology lite) because his teacher was in a car accident and never returned.  Apparently, the school, Metropolitan High School, didn't bother to interview ATR Living Environment teachers to cover the class and help the students pass not only the class but the Regents.  Instead the school administration decided to have day to day substitute teachers cover the class and the result was predictable, lots of failures.

My question, if the student is being truthful, and I believe he is.  Why didn't Metropolitan High School hire an ATR certified to teach Living Environment?   Moreover, where were the school's Chapter Leader and the District Representative in allowing such a travesty to the students?  Finally, how can the school be allowed to hire day to day substitutes for long-term vacancies?  Didn't the ATR agreement prohibit this?

Of course the answer is that the DOE ignores these abuses of the contract and our disconnected union leadership buries their collective heads in the sand rather than fight for the students and their members.  Both the DOE and UFT rather than ensuring every classroom has a certified teacher teacher in the subject that needs a long-term replacement, its better to ignore the violations of the contract and pretend everybody is doing what's best for the students.  However,  the truth is far different as students suffer without quality teachers.  In other words both the DOE and UFT are complicit in what Metropolitan High School apparently did and continues the Bloomberg policy of "children last"....Always.

The City's Use Of Uncertified Teachers Results In Poor Student Academic Achievement And That's A Crime.

This week I was grading the Earth Science Regents for many of the schools  in Queens.  During the grading, I observed two very important things.   First, approximately 33% of the graders were not certified in Earth Science yet they were selected to grade the Earth Science Regents and were even selected for per session grading.  Second, many of the schools graded that had poor Regents results had one thing in common.  Few of the school's students had a certified Earth Science teacher instructing them!  By contrast, schools that had a full complement of Earth Science teachers showed a much higher Regents passing percentage.   That got me thinking if some of these graders, who were uncertified in Earth Science, did not properly credit some student answers because of the grader's lack of knowledge of the subject and this resulted in the student received a failing 63% or 64% on the Regents rather than a passing grade of 65%? The question is how can the use of uncertified teachers instructing and grading students be condoned by the DOE leadership in their "children first" policy?   The simple answer is the DOE doesn't care.

An organization that really believes in putting student first would demand that every teacher be certified in the subject they are teaching in.  A teacher who has deep curriculum and subject knowledge is a prerequisite for real student academic achievement.  Moreover, a certified teacher provides the necessary information for a student to fully understand and not memorize subject material as is done in too many schools.  However, as I have traveled through the Queens high schools, I saw schools like Martin Van Buren, Richmond Hill, Long Island City, Newtown, and Bryant high schools without a certified Earth Science teacher on staff.   Further, many other schools had uncertified teachers teaching nearly full Earth Science schedules rather than hire the Earth Science teachers available in the ATR pool.

Many of the Bloomberg small schools had not emphasized Earth Science and pushed students to take Chemistry and Physics instead.  The result was disastrous as many students failed the higher level and much harder Sciences and eventually these schools had the teachers teaching Earth Science.  Now that many of these schools have Earth Science, they have not hired certified Earth Science teachers to teach it.  The DOE allows this by accepting the false claim that there are no Earth Science teachers available.  True, few newbie teachers are certified in Earth Science but in Queens alone there are 6 experienced Earth Science teachers in excess but because they are expensive, no school is willing to pick up their salary, thanks to "fair student funding".

When I hear that the disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina, wants "effective teachers in the classroom" I can only laugh because under the DOE its hiring the "cheapest and not the best teachers" that count and its all about the money and not what's best for the children's academic achievement that is most important. Until this policy changes the New York City schools are doomed for failure.

How Many ATRs Are In The ATR Pool?

 


One closely held secret that the DOE and UFT don't like to share with the general public or even the employees is the number of ATRs in the ATR pool.  However, thanks to a FOIL by Francesco Portelos and the ATR Alliance (ATRA), as of September 10th, 2014 the number is 1,890, excluding ATRs who were provisionally hired by that date and that is 90 more ATRs than the same date last year.   That number is much higher than the UFT leadership claim of 1,600 in their September Executive Board meeting.

The ATR numbers include all teachers, guidance counselors, school physiologists, and secretaries.  But does not include CSA members, ATRs who were provisionally hired and ATRs who already took long term leave replacement positions.  That means that under the so-called "progressive" Bill de Blasio administration, there has been no real reduction in the ATR pool, despite the ATR buyout and pension incentive that should have seen a significant reduction of ATRs.  Instead it actually increased!  What a total failure by the DOE and UFT in their aim to drain the ATR pool! In fact, using the June figures the DOE gave the media, it cost an average of $127,000 for each ATR, including fringe benefits.  Therefore, it will cost the DOE 240 million dollars to fund the ATR pool, just to preserve the Bloomberg ideology rather than placing the ATRs back into the classroom to help the students.

The only way to reduce the ATR pool is to eliminate the "fair student funding", and to bring back preferred hiring that brings in "mutual consent" and requires principals to hire ATRs for their vacancies, no other method is acceptable.

Horror Stories From The ATR Pool.

With Halloween here, its time to recount some of the horror stories told to me by the ATRs in the last couple of years.

Freddy Kruger:
This nightmare started when an ATR, trying to go the extra yard in entertaining the class he was covering, by asking them to solve a math question, using a baseball analogy.  In describing the problem he used statistics commonly used in baseball.  However, one female student didn't understand the concept and he patiently explained the math problem to her.  When she still didn't get it, the teacher explained that since she really didn't understand baseball he could see her confusion in solving the Math problem.  The girl felt insulted and reported the ATR to the Principal who charged the ATR with gender discrimination and verbal abuse. The ATR ended up with a Letter To The File (LIF) and a "u rating" for the year.

Jason:

An ATR covering a leave replacement was teaching a Science lesson when three girls decided to play "UNO" instead.  The teacher asked the girls to put the cards away three times.  However, the girls refused the teacher's request.  The Teacher went over to three girls and took the UNO cards away.  One girl refused to give up her pile and the teacher grabbed them from her hand.  In doing so he touched her hand in taking the UNO cards away.  The three girls went to the Principal and the teacher ended up being charged with corporal punishment and OSI was contacted.  The result was a LIF for the teacher and no disciplinary consequences for the three students who failed to do their work or follow the rules.

Michael Myers:
A student was feeling ill and the ATR, who was provisionally assigned to the school, told the student to go to the school clinic to be checked out.  The teacher was trying to do what's right by having qualified medical personal observe her and to ensure the child's illness was not contagious to her classmates.  The student refused to go and an argument ensued until the student reluctantly went to the school clinic.  Two weeks later the Principal held a disciplinary hearing and charged the teacher with verbal abuse (yelling)  and embarrassing the student in front of her classmates.  The  teacher ended up with a LIF and a "U rating" for the year.

Chucky:

An untenured ATR provisionally assigned to the school saw a poor performing student's Regents paper being marked separately from others and in another room and quickly realized that the teacher was violating State rules.  She asked the teacher why he had the student's Regents paper and was told to mind her own business.  She reported it first to the Assistant Principal and then the Principal of the alleged Regents violation.  However, it appears the Assistant Principal and Principal wanted this student out of the school and were in on it.  The untenured ATR's satisfactory observations in the Fall semester became "Unsatisfactory observations" after she reported the Regents violation, in the Spring semester.  She was discontinued at the end of the school year.

Alien:
A certified regular education Math ATR was dumped into a self-contained Special Education class all day without any technology or lesson plans left for the classes and was told by the Assistant Principal to keep them entertained when he complained about the lack of appropriate work for the students.  He tried his best but the students were out of control and when the Assistant Principal walked in saw that the teacher was having trouble keeping them focused.  The Assistant Principal gave the ATR a "U observation" for poor classroom management.

These are just a few of the many horror stories from the ATR pool.  If you have some stories to share, please send them to the comment section and I will publish them.

How Could The Union Throw The ATRs Under The Bus For An Inferior Contract?

Reading the education blogs, my emails and speaking to many teachers as I rotate through the schools weekly, the overwhelming sentiment is that the UFT negotiated contract is short on money, too much of it is deferred for too many years in the future, and that they feel sorry that the ATRs are being sacrificed.  However, most will probably vote for the contract since they believe that there's too much risk in not voting for it. Almost universally, the teachers are very uncomfortable with this new three-tiered system that the union agreed to that has "special rules" for the ATRs since it shows that our union is willing to "sellout" a group of its members and that with the expansion of charter schools, they can find themselves in the ATR pool sometime in the future.

The union claims they didn't "throw the ATRs under the bus" and in their flyer they state the following about ATRs:

• "The union stood by its commitment to educators in the ATR pool.  We prevented the DOE from summarily firing ATRs, and we also won a voluntary severance package for ATRs.

• "In a new two-year pilot, ATRs will get improved access to professional and relevant job placements.  Under the new contract, the DOE is obligated after October 15 to send an ATR to any school in the district/borough with a vacanvy in the teacher's license area.  The Principal retains the discretion to keep a teacher or return him or her to the ATR pool".

What the union omitted in their flyer is that the union agreed to "special rules" dealing with ATRs that no other teachers are subject to.  What are these "special rules"?

• When an ATR is found to have committed "unprofessional conduct"  (a vague term subject to abuse) by two principals in two successive years, they will be given an expedited 3020-a one-day hearing to determine if they should be terminated.  

• When an ATR fails to show up twice to a "mandatory interview" in the two year period, they will have voluntarily resigned and taken off payroll.

• When an ATR fails to appear on the second day of a "forced placement", they will have voluntarily resigned and taken off payroll.

• The ATR severance package is inadequate as it gives a resigning (not retiring) ATR only 20% of his or her salary with a maximum of $20,000.  Its also deceptive since these ATRs will lose their "retroactive raises" and pay as well that will exceed the severance payment that is being offered.

• There's no "mutual consent", an ATR must take a "provisional or leave  placement" if a Principal offers it.

• Allows the DOE to continue the useless and demoralizing rotation system that has proven to be a disaster and a colossal waste of money.  Obviously, its being used as a "punitive practice" by the DOE with the UFT's approval.

Untouchables:
 For ATRs who won their 3020-a termination hearings, no matter how long ago it was, the DOE has imposed "special provisions" for them.   Any ATR that received a fine of $2,000 or more, a suspension of 30 days or longer, or took a stipulation will stay in rotation and the DOE reserves the right not to offer them a mandatory interview or "provisional placement".  In other words, the DOE has decided that these teachers are guilty of their 3020-a charges despite the  findings of an independent Arbitrator that showed that the termination charges were false or frivolous and are now known as the "untouchables" in the the DOE developed and UFT approved, "caste system".  How can the union agree to this is mind-boggling and very unfair system is very troubling.  Combine that with those teachers who were subject to a substantiated corrupt OSI or SCI investigation and "red flagged", the union is allowing the vindictive DOE to unjustly punish these teachers yet again for charges that were found to be untrue in a fair hearing in front of an independent Arbitrator.

When a police precinct or fire station closes or the police officer and fireman is disciplined, they are sent to another precinct or fire station, only the UFT allows their excessed members to suffer the indignities that the DOE has imposed on them.  Please vote NO for this unfair contract that hurts its most vulnerable members.

Our Union Stabbed The ATRs In The Back.

Well our wonderful union apparently did it again! An inferior contract with raises of 10% for 7 years or approximately a 1.4% annual increase.  Worse our retroactive pay for the two 4% raises from the last "City pattern" will be back loaded and stretched out five years from 2015 to 2020 and if one resigns before the  end of the contract, they will not get the full "retroactive raises".  Further,  we get two "zeros" (2011-12), not good if you ask me.  Moreover, the union seems to have agreed to a form of "merit pay" by giving bonuses to highly effective teachers and teachers who work in hard to fill schools.  However, the worst is how the union abandoned the ATRs to the mercies of principals.

According to the new contract there will be an expedited termination process for ATRs who fail to show up for two job interviews, have time and attendance issues, or are removed by two separate principals who find their pedagogy inadequate.  While the union claims the the ATR will still have "due process rights", its greatly weakened and a one day hearing by an arbitrator will decide the ATRs fate, all within 50 days! As for the terrible and demoralizing weekly rotation system?  Who knows if it will continue?

Interestingly, the DOE budgeting process appears to remain unchanged which encourages principals to continue to hire the "cheapest" and not the "best teachers" for their students.  In fact, principals are not required to hire ATRs for their vacancies until October 15th, by then all vacancies are usually filled.   Moreover, the new contract claims that the ATR pool will be drained but under this contract age and salary discrimination will still rage leaving many "highly qualified teachers" languishing in the ATR pool.  Of course, the ATR pool will be drained by the proposed buyout and the new expedited termination process for the weakest performers. 

The UFT/DOE contract  reminds me of the DOE/UFT PIP+ program that resulted in over 90% of the teachers being terminated as our union leadership told the hapless members to take the PIP+ program, knowing that over 90% of them faced termination in their 3020-a hearing.  I am uipset that our union sold out the ATRs and stabbing them in the back by making it easier to fire them.

If I'm wrong about the issues than I will apologize but if I'm right, than shame on the UFT leadership who sacrificed its most vulnerable members for a few insufficient shekels.

The complete press conference can be found Here.

The ATR Advisory Committee Discusses The Issues But Many Of Them Remain Unresolved.

Last week the ATR advisory committee met with the UFT's Michael Sill on our first formal meeting to discuss the issues dealing with the ATR pool.  Mr. Sill started the meeting by handing out the agenda and all the agenda items were discussed.  The first item on the agenda was scanning and signing in.  Mr. Sills told the committee that no ATR should be put through scanning if the teachers in the school don't need to and the ATR should only sign in on the first day at the school.  The discussion expanded into ATR rights in the school and Mr. Sill made it clear that ATRs should only do one circular six assignment daily and only if the teachers in the school do it such as cafeteria duty, or hall patrol.  ATRs should do only what the teachers in the school do, if its part of the contract. If a school is not following the rules then we should contact the Chapter Leader and call Michael Sill immediately and he will attempt to get the problem resolved.

The next item on the agenda was the status of contract negotiations.   Michael Sill informed us that "Amy Arundell" is on the UFT negotiating team and has been assured that an ATR time limit is not a negotiable item.  UFT President Michael Mulgrew has stated that time and again and according to Mr Sill, the UFT's position is that the ATRs should be back into the classroom and that the "fair student funding" should be eliminated with teacher salaries coming from DOE Central not the schools.

The third item was the the contentious issue of the ATR field supervisors.  Mr Sill reported that there are 24 ATR field supervisors in the City and so far only 6 of them came to his attention as being unfair to the ATRs.  Mr Sill told us that he and Amy have spoken to their DOE counterparts (unnamed) and complained to them about how some of the field supervisors are playing "gotcha" (my word) and "U" observing ATRs.  According to Mr. Sill the DOE was receptive to the complaint and has instructed the people in charge to speak to the field supervisors about giving a fair observation.  Nobody on the committee appeared satisfied that things will change and I stated that the process itself was unfair since we have no ownership or familiarity with the students and that "time and attendance" should be the only rating criteria for ATRs.  Also many field supervisors are demanding "rigor" and higher level critical thinking instruction which we all believe is next to impossible to do without a detailed knowledge of the students.

The final item on the agenda was "other matters" and that dealt with the continuation of the weekly ATR rotation system for the next school year.  All the committee members believed the weekly rotation was humiliating and should be discontinued.  I ask for a show of hands and 9 of the 10 member committee voted to end the weekly rotation system if they could.  The lone dissenting  member didn't care either way. 

Santa Claus's Experience As A Weekly Rotating ATR.

It's Christmas once again and the very best present the New York City Public School System will receive when they go back to the classroom will be that the "Grinch", Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his "poodle" Chancellor Dennis Walcott will be gone.  However, the damage they did will take nearly a decade to correct.  This article will talk about the experience Santa Claus has had as a rotating ATR in his weekly assignments.

Santa Claus has been an ATR for the last two years and because of his salary and age, cannot land a position in a school because of the "(un)fair student funding formula" and age discrimination.  Thanks to the UFT who agreed to the weekly ATR assignment travesty, poor Santa finds himself traveling from school to school in his District in a futile attempt to find a permanent position.  Previously, I chronicled Santa Claus's experience with the New York City Schools under Mayor Bloomberg.  First, how Santa Claus was subject to a biased SCI investigation and terminated in his 3020-a hearing, Here and Here. Then how he won his appeal in the courts only to find himself in the ATR pool rather than getting his position back Here.

Santa Claus is used to traveling since once a year he travels around the world giving gifts to all the children but traveling weekly from school to school in his District made little sense to him.  Each school he went to, he felt like "a stranger in a strange land". The school administration treated him with either disdain or was ignored.  The school secretary would always try to give him a "sixth period" if he didn't object or make him do hall or cafeteria duty that no other teacher did in the school.  Few schools supplied him a key to the bathroom and a place to store his stuff.  Most times the Chapter Leader never sought him out and in some schools there was no Chapter Leader.

Santa Claus also found that when he asked if there was parking for his sled, he was told that "ATRs cannot park in the schoolyard or garage like our teachers".  One week Santa showed up to a "D" rated school which needed a Social Studies teacher with knowledge of Geography and Global History.  "What a stroke of luck", Santa Claus was perfect for the job.  However, when he met with the Principal, the Principal told him that he had a  red flag on his file and that his CFN told the school not to hire anybody that had a substantiated investigation.  However, the Principal admitted to him that it would have been difficult to hire him because his CFN wanted him to hire new teachers who were 21st century thinkers and he didn't fit into that world.  Santa instantly knew that the Principal really meant that the schools can only hire the "cheapest teachers" under the "(un)fair student funding formula".

Santa Claus is hopeful that under the de Blasio Administration, he will be able to land a permanent teaching position and help his students in understanding the world instead of being treated as a substitute teacher and disrespected by the school administration. Maybe it really will be "children first".

What If The UFT Called Mayor Bloomberg's Bluff In Layimg Off The 4,700 Teachers Back In 2011?

Back in 2011, Mayor Bloomberg threatened to lay off 4,700 teachers as the City was slowly crawling out of the recession.  A major part of his threat was to have the law changed on who gets laid off.  However, his attempt to change the "last in, first out" (LIFO) failed and if the Mayor had tried to follow through, the New York City schools would have had to eliminate the "cheapest teachers", the "newbies". Once the Mayor lost the LIFO battle, he was not laying off anybody and most people knew that.  However, our union "snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory" yet again and caved into the Mayor's demands and eliminated teacher sabbaticals for the 2011-12 school year and allowed the DOE to impose the idiotic and asinine ATR rotation system that saves little money and a wastes a lot of talent. What would have happened if our union had called the Mayor's bluff?  Let's look at the two possible scenarios.

Scenario #1:  The City would have laid off the 4,700 "newbie teachers" as the layoffs are by seniority ranking.  The result would be that principals would have two choices.  They could keep the now suddenly vacant positions unfilled but that would severely hurt the students.  Or the most likely effect would be to hire the ATRs and demand that the DOE help pay the cost.  The result, would be the elimination of the ATR pool and the reintroduction of experienced and in many cases, "quality teachers" back into the classroom.  The good part of this is that the ATRs would not be "forced placed" but apply for the positions that they believe they are "a good fit" for as the principals compete to hire the many "quality teachers" to their classrooms.

In this scenario the students win because they are no longer the "guinea pigs" for the many "newbie teachers" who have no clue how to teach and half will leave the teaching profession in five years. Instead the students will thrive under highly experienced teachers with good classroom management skills and deep curriculum knowledge guiding them to academic success,.


Scenario #2:  Mayor Bloomberg's layoff bluff is called and he retaliates against the UFT by reducing school budgets, raises class sizes, closes more schools, and refuses to negotiate a contract. Furthermore, he blasts the union and demonizes teachers by refusing to issue tenure and to implement policies to terminate as many teachers as possible.  Moreover, he would try to eliminate teacher "due process rights" while lowering the already low morale and making the classroom environment as hostile a place as possible.  Finally, he imposes the "education on the cheap "policy that forces principals to hire the "cheapest" and not the "best teachers" for their students.

In this scenario. the students lose because of higher class sizes, lack of resources, and inexperienced teachers who have no classroom management skills or curriculum knowledge. Come to think of it had our union not capitulated to Mayor Bloomberg's bluff, nothing would have changed from scenario #2.. Except we would not have lost our sabbatical rights for a year and the ongoing and ridiculous ATR rotation system that wastes $160 million dollars a year and demoralizes those 2,000 + teachers who must rotate from school to school.

To the union leadership, good job, once again in screwing the members.

Will There Be An ATR Time Limit In The Next Contract? The Union Says No!

The Independent Budget Office (IBO) came out once again that if there was an ATR time limit the City could save 71 million dollars each year.  This report, on top of the Bloomberg influenced New York Times Editorial asking for an ATR time limit has worried 2,000+ excessed teachers, guidance counselors, social workers, assistant principals and secretaries.  "Is the union going to completely sell us out"?  According to the union leadership the answer is an emphatic no.

First, let me give the reader a brief history of how the ATR pool came about.  The ATR issue goes back to the non-binding"fact finding" by a three arbitrator panel which was the basis of the terrible 2005 contract.  The arbitrators recommended that the seniority transfer system that allowed senior teachers who wanted to leave their school, could bump untenured teachers out of their positions at more desirable schools.  The result was the highly experienced  teachers ended up in the best schools while the poor and minority students in struggling schools experienced an unstable and inexperienced teaching staff.or so that was what the DOE claimed and accepted by the arbitrators.   However, then Chancellor Joel Klein wanted to take it one step further and requested that the provision that required that "all excessed teachers in a district in the license area must be placed before schools could hire teachers outside the Department of Education" should be eliminated.  Shockingly, Randi Weingarten agreed to Joel Klein's request with one provision. That the teachers in excess cannot be terminated and that failure to obtain a position is not grounds for termination.  Joel Klein eagerly agreed to the provision and from the moment the 2005 contract was signed, Joel Klein demonized the ATRs.  The Chancellor told the principals, politicians, the media, and anybody else who would listen that the ATRs are :"bad or failed teachers".  The introduction of the "fair student funding formula", tightening budgets, and teacher salaries as part of a school's budget have brought about the ATR crises we are now in with over 2,000 ATRS without a permanent classroom. That's were we now find the situation at the present time.

Previously, the union has consistently refused to include an ATR time limit in contract negotiations with the Bloomberg Administration.  According to the union leadership, the City offered the union the two 4% raises if the union agrees to a 4 month time limit for the ATRs.  The union has refused and have informed me that an ATR time limit is not a negotiable item in any contract negotiations with the new de Blasio Administration.

Another reason for the union's steadfastness on the ATR time linit is that the other Municipal unions would probably file a lawsuit since it violates New York State Civil Service Law and sets a "slippery slope" for other government organizations to form their own "excessed worker pool" and then set a time limit to ensure their termination.  I spoke to one high union official in a uniformed service who claims that the rest of the Municipal unions warned the UFT that they would pursue legal action if they negotiated a ATR time limit.  How true that is, I don't know but I believe its true.

Can the union change their minds and negotiate an ATR time limit?  Well, anything is possible but I believe the union will not sell out the ATRs and let the DOE impose a time limit.  Instead, I look for the union and the new de Blasio Administration to work out procedures to get ATRs back into the classroom by the 2014-15 school year.

There Is No Truth To The Rumor That The ATR Weekly Assignments Will Change This School Year.

There has been persistent rumors floating around the schools that there will be changes to the ATR rotation this school year.  One rumor has the ATRs staying in a school for a month rather than a week; the other is that the ATRs will be forced placed in the second semester.  The rumors gained some credibility when Gotham Schools reported that the DOE and CSA made some changes to the ATR system for supervisors.  Here. Even principals who I have spoken with believe changes are being implemented presently. However, its sad to say that "none of these rumors are true"!  Where these rumors originated from, I could not tell you since I have received numerous calls and emails from various sources about the rumors. It seems to have a life of its own.

Therefore, to find out the truth I placed a call to the lead UFT official on the ATR committee, Special Representative Amy Arundell, and she informed me that the DOE is very happy with the ATR weekly rotation and there has been no meeting or one being planned to discuss changing the weekly rotation system.  Furthermore, Ms. Arundell believes that the DOE will be unwilling to change the ATR system until a reorganization of the DOE leadership and policies occur when Bill de Blasio takes office in January and that will take time.  Therefore, it will not be this school year that any changes to the ATR situation is expected.

Hopefully, when the UFT and the de Blasio Administration negotiates a new contract, the ATR situation will be resolved and for many of us it will be a bad memory of a secretive deal that ended up very badly for many of the members in the ATR pool.

For a more humorous take of what weekly rotating ATRs are experiencing go to the Traveling ATR blog. 

An ATR Open Letter To The DOE, Principals, And The UFT.

Dear fellow educators of the New York City School System I write this letter to tell you about my fellow ATRs you seem so determined to demonize, ignore, and refuse to hire,  We are experienced teachers that have a "passion for teaching" and "wanting to make a difference" by motivating our students to succeed in life.  However, we find ourselves displaced as teachers traveling from week to week to different schools and find our considerable talents wasted as "babysitters".  We come from closed and downsized schools or were accused of actions that were found to be false and as punishment we were excessed out of the classroom and sent to the ever growing ATR pool.

To the principals:  You should be falling over each other to hire ATRs, we are experienced, have good classroom management skills, and deep curriculum knowledge.   You claim you want the "best teachers", instead you hire untested "newbies" or inexpensive and usually not tenured teachers.  Instead of maximizing your students' academic potential they are simply "guinea pigs" for teachers that have not mastered the teaching skills and are subject to a steep learning curve themselves.  I ask you, would you have your child operated on by an inexperienced or new surgeon or an experienced surgeon with a good track record?

Yes, I know its primarily about the salary (age and seniority issues are also a factor) and that the misguided "fair student funding" formula makes it difficult to hire "quality teachers" but I need to remind you that your schools "student growth" scores will affect your own job performance numbers.  Its in both you and your students best interest to hire the "best teachers" available and not the cheapest if you want to keep your Principal's position.

To The Department Of Education:  Stop with the slogan "children first....Always".  Your actions speak for themselves.  You have cut school budgets by 14% since 2007 and your "fair student funding": formula makes it difficult for principals to hire the "best teachers". If you really want to help the students then have a separate budget line for teachers and make them a "unit".  Principals will be happy to hire ATRs knowing they are experienced and will improve student outcomes in the school.  In fact give the principals an incentive like the one in 2009 where the principals are paying the salary of a new teacher with the DOE picking up the rest.

It makes no educational sense to have over 2,000 ATRs and pay $160 million dollars while class sizes are the highest in a decade.  Finally, is it more important to maintain a faulty ideology and force schools to hire untested and teachers from alternate certification programs like the two year Teach For America wonders or the "one and done" Teaching Fellows than retaining and appreciating the experienced teachers necessary for the best student academic achievement?

To The United Federation Of Teachers:  Be pro-active.  Make sure students are being taught by teachers certified in that subject area.    Stop putting your head in the sand and pretend its not happening, we all know it is and having teachers teaching a subject they are not certified to teach only hurts the students.  Moreover, put the DOE's feet to the fire and threaten an age discrimination lawsuit.  Yes, Amy, there really is age discrimination even if you can't see it. How about spending our COPE funds on an effective commercial that show the DOE's policy of recruitment over retention restricts schools from having the "quality teachers" our students need. The union really needs to expose the DOE's "children first" policy as a fraud.

All three groups need to do the "right thing" and maximize the potential for student academic growth by putting the ATRs back in the classroom where they belong. Its about what's best for the children.  Right?  Right!

The ATR Bill Of Rights

Being one of over 2,000 teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) is not the most pleasant of positions.  The "ATR Agreement" is bypassed whenever possible by the DOE and our union seems powerless to enforce it. The ATRs must travel weekly to different schools within their district and are treated with disinterest or outright contempt by the school they are assigned to.  The ATR program consist of senior and higher paid teachers as principals refuse to hire them due to budget constraints imposed by the DOE using the "fair student funding" formula that discriminates against senior teachers.  Over the years I have heard many stories from the other ATRs I have encountered.  Therefore, this post spells out the "rights" that the ATR has as they go weekly to the different schools in their district.

First, and foremost an ATR has the same rights as any appointed teacher in the school that they are assigned to.  That means that the ATR is required only to do the duties the teachers are allowed to do by contract.  They are as follows:

• Classroom instruction.
• One period of hall or cafeteria duty but not both!
• Other circular 6 duties (one period) when not given hall or cafeteria duty.
• Attendance or Library

Any other duties such as secretarial or administrative duties are not appropriate and can be refused if you don't want to be assigned to it.  Contact the school's Chapter Leader if you believe you are given an assignment that is not part of the teacher's contract.

Many schools try to give the ATRs six classes.  The only time this is appropriate is when the teacher's schedule is a block schedule when every other day is a sixth period.  However, the school should give you a four period schedule the next day to compensate for it.  If the school insists that you cover six classes, let the administration know that you will be glad to do it if they pay you for the sixth period and threaten to file a grievance if they refuse,  This is enough for the school to take away the sixth period class.

In multi-sesson schools the ATR should be given one time period.  Insist that the schools adheres to the one time period.  If the school requires it, but most don't, you are to attend teacher meetings during the professional period.  However, you are required to attend open school night.

During the school year you will be contacted by various schools for a "mandatory interview" for a leave replacement or vacancy.  You are only required to attend a "mandatory interview" if its in your school district.  However, be polite and e-mail the Principal back that you are not interested in leaving your school district.  If you take a position outside your district, you have only one year to ask to be reinstated to your old district.

 All ATRs should have a bathroom, classroom, and elevator key and if the school has a parking lot, the ATR has the same rights as appointed teachers to use it if it's " first come first serve".  Moreover, if the teacher's room is locked a key should also be provided to the ATR by the school. Additionally, no ATR assigned to a scanned school should go through scanning, even if school safety insists. Finally, the school must provide a safe location for the ATR's belongings.

In some cases you will be provisionally appointed to a vacancy and at the end of May the Principal will call you into a meeting and tell you that they will not offer you the position after all.  Over 90% of the ATRs that sign these provisional agreements find themselves back into the ATR pool.   The reason being that in the first year the ATR's salary does not affect the school's budget but if the school decides to keep the ATR, assuming the ATR agrees to stay at the school, the ATR's salary gets put into the school's average teacher salary and reduces the Principal's budget.  Therefore, its goodbye to the ATR and the DOE points to this lack of retention as their basis of their false clam that the ATRs are "bad teachers".

There are many schools that the ATR should not go to.  I listed those Queens High Schools here. 
While the union will insist you have no choice but to accept a position offered to you in your district.  A simple e-mail or phone call to the Principal informing him or her that you believe that you are not a good fit for their school is sufficient for the Principal to look for another ATR.  It doesn't always work but its worth a shot.

In a year where the badly flawed teacher evaluation system is a "work in progress" when a simple state test can make a quality teacher "ineffective" because of the "high needs" students assigned to the teacher and the unworkable Danielson Framework just adds to the already stressful classroom environment, its good to be an ATR so try to enjoy your time traveling to the different schools in your district and get your satisfactory rating at the end of the school year.

Have a nice year.

Why Doesn't The Union Tell The ATRs That They Are Not Subject To The Teacher Evaluation System?

I was reading the union propaganda rag, the New York Teacher, and noticed that the paper published an article that said who were and who were not subject to the flawed teacher evaluation system.  Absent from the list who were exempt were ATRs.  Was this omission deliberate?   I think it was, why else would our union ignore over 2,000 teachers?  I guess they don't want people to know the truth.

Let me clarify the issue.  ATRs who are not in the classroom the entire school year will not be evaluated under the new system since no pre-test or post-test baselines can be established for them.  Therefore, if a teacher takes a long term leave position say after November 1st or leaves before the end of the school year, they can only be evaluated under the old system "S" and "U".  A much better system for teachers.

If the ATR is unlucky and takes a long-term leave position in a school that does not meet the following criteria, I wish you all the luck in the world because you're going to need it.  The criteria is listed below.

1. Administrative quality.
2. Student body
3. School tone/discipline policy

Good luck and best wishes for a successful year,

Back Into The ATR Pool For Me.

Well, I am back into the ATR pool, complete with weekly assignments, administrative abuse, and student disrespect.  Normally, I would be upset that I am not teaching but this year is very different than any other year.  You see ATRs are not subject to the badly flawed teacher evaluation system!  The Danielson rubric and the use of Common Core without a road-map or resources. That's right, ATRs will be rated under the old "satisfactory/unsatisfactory" system since the DOE cannot account for the "student growth" component that is incorporated in the "junk science" equation developed by the State.  Moreover, I look forward to travel throughout the Queens high schools and evaluate the three components that makes a school good or bad for teachers and you will find it on the resurrected "Traveling ATR blog". .

The three criteria I will use to evaluate and grade the schools I will pass through are as follows:

1. Administrative quality.
2. Student body
3. School tone/discipline policy

The quality of the administration is of primary importance for a school's success or failure.  Last year I had the pleasure of being in a school the entire year where the administration worked collaboratively with staff and had an experienced teaching staff.  In this environment the students thrived academically and there was little fear of vindictive reprisals against effective teachers, even if they are outspoken since it's  "what's best for the students" .  By contrast beware of the Bloomberg small schools with "Leadership Academy Principals".  The staff is usually inexperienced and are required to work extra assignments without compensation.  These schools are  dangerous to the long term survival of a teacher.

The student body is extremely important as the "peer effect" affects the overall student learning. A diverse and engaged student body will lead to a successful school like the one I was in last school year.  On the other hand, if the student body is disengaged and unruly, the "broken window theory" will come into effect and the school will fail. The "peer effect" will make or break a school's potential for success.

Finally, school tone is very important and is usually a deal breaker for a school. The "peer effect" if it's a positive influence on the learning environment, the school will be successful. On the other hand, many schools are trying the restorative approach to student misconduct which allows the student to continue to disrupt the classroom time and again which interferes with student learning.  While restorative approaches have their good points for the misbehaving student, it ignores the needs of the vast majority of students who follow the rules and want to learn but see that there is little consequence for student misbehavior.  The school-wide restorative approach adds to the "broken window theory" and makes a successful school an impossibility for a school's academic success.  A zero tolerance policy against student misconduct will eventually lead to a successful learning environment and go along way to make a successful school.

In summary, if you are an ATR and a school calls you for a long term replacement, check out the school on insideschools and schoolbook to get an understanding of what the school environment is.  Without the necessary information about a school, I suggest you think really long and hard about taking a long-term leave replacement.  I certainly will, especially with the badly flawed teacher evaluation system and the punitive Danialson rubric that will damage the teaching profession for years to come.

Why The Open Market Transfer System Is A Joke.

Today is the final day for teachers to look for vacancies under the Open Market Transfer System (OMTS) and just like the last few years, the OMTS is simply a joke when it comes to veteran teachers.  Only young and inexperienced (especially untenured) teachers are hired through the OMTS.  With few exceptions teachers with ten or more years experience have little or no chance to even get an interview for these vacancies.  Many of my colleagues applied to various positions only to get no response from the schools except for the required notification that the school received the application.

I spoke to a friend who is an Assistant Principal and he told me that the principals are encouraged by the DOE to hire "newbies" whenever possible to reduce their staff  budget costs and to find any reason possible not to interview ATRs.  Moreover, the DOE and the UFT has done little to enforce the ATR Agreement and that has added to the problems for veteran ATRs.  It matters little how effective a teacher is, its all about how much will the teacher cost the school and that is reflected in the OTMS hiring practices.

Even in hard to staff shortage areas like Special Education,ESL and Earth Science, the DOE allows the schools to bypass the available ATRs and hire "newbies", some not even certified!  Yes that's true, the Assistant Principal I spoke to told me that he was instructed by his Principal to do just that.   Why does our union leadership stay silent when the DOE continues to abuse the process?  I wish I knew but its obvious that the union leadership considers the ATR issue a low priority and they have other issues on the table to deal with.

The DOE's motto is "children first.....Always" but in reality its not about whats best for the students but pure and simple discrimination against veteran teachers who were excessed.  In effect its really "children last" as principals, with the encouragement of the DOE, rather hire inexperienced "newbies" than "quality teachers".