The DOE’s arrogance and incompetence is just unbelievable. When the DOE and UFT completed the “rubber room agreement” , the understanding was that many of the reassigned teachers would be placed in their schools in their District and do circular six duties. While, those teachers who were determined to be a “threat to the children” (what a joke. See my Ebony and Ivory post) was to be sent to their CFN’s or the Regional Office. However few, if any, teachers were sent to schools and the nincompoops at the DOE did not have the intelligence to even follow this simple directive from the “rubber room agreement”. Instead, these lazy DOE employees appeared to have spun a wheel to determine the placement of many of the reassigned teachers. This haphazard and ill-conceived distribution of reassigned teachers seems to violate the spirit of the “rubber room agreement” (what else is new?) and the UFT/DOE contract. The DOE’s inept handling of the reassignment problem has resulted in numerous grievances by the reassigned teachers due to the apparent violation of the contract that requires the DOE to place the teachers in their district or Region
In some of the more egregious cases teachers from Staten Island and the Bronx must go to the School Construction Authority in Queens for their duties to measure school buildings. Moreover, Brooklyn teachers were sent to Queens while Queens teachers were sent to Brooklyn. I also wrote previously that it appeared that the reassigned teacher’s location was based upon the first letter of their last name. I guess they spun the wheel and whatever the first letter of the last name came up, that is where that person was sent.
The question is what will our union do about it? Based upon Michael Mulgrew published comments it would seem the union will not take the lead in forcing the DOE to abide by the “rubber room agreement” and the contract but will accept individual grievances for reassigned teachers who are unhappy with either their work assignments or geographic location. Here again the union fails to be pro-active and require the DOE to follow the rules. Instead they leave it up to the reassigned teacher to fight the DOE’s abuse and disregard of the “rubber room agreement”. As for the criticism that the DOE has received from their incompetent handling of the reassigned teacher placement, Tweed has went into a defensive shell and blamed the teachers union New York Post and the Daily News for the many grievances. Our union should have taken the lead on this issue and make sure that the DOE followed the rules. If that means filling a lawsuit, so be it. For many of us it seems that the union once again signs an agreement with the DOE only to take no action when the DOE breaks that agreement.
How many times has the UFT negotiated an agreement with the DOE only to watch the DOE break the agreement or deliberately misinterprets the conditions in the agreement. When it comes to the DOE/UFT agreements, the more things change, the more they stay the same.