In the October 13th 2007 contract which everybody thought was a good contract for the teachers a voluntary teacher improvement program was quietly slipped into the contract (Article 21J pg 123). This voluntary program was called the Peer Intervention Program Plus otherwise known as PIP+. The PIP+ program is supposed to follow the union-supported PIP program in which a union member mentors a struggling teacher and tries to correct any flaws in the teacher’s classroom management ability. If after PIP the mentor is unable to improve the teacher’s ability to run a classroom, the mentor tries to consuls the teacher out of the profession if necessary. However, in many cases the Principal pressures the teacher to take the PIP+ program with out either the teacher being given PIP or had satisfactory passed the PIP program. On the other hand the PIP+ individual can be either an ex classroom teacher or Administrator who is paid by a vendor, hired and paid for by the DOE to evaluate the teacher. The PIP+ program is enthusiastically promoted by both the DOE and the UFT leadership as a way to get rid of teachers deemed incompetent. The PIP+ program is not a teacher improvement program but a teacher termination program!
Before PIP+ came about, teachers charged with incompetence by the Principal were usually found guilty by the 3020-a Arbitrator and were fined $5,000 and forced to take a course in Classroom Management. The reason very few were terminated by Arbitrators was because the Administrators who targeted the teacher with incompetence charges were not considered “master teachers” and many of them were “mediocre teachers” at best themselves. The teachers who were terminated usually had companion charges such as insubordination, corporal punishment, verbal abuse, time & attendance, etc. Consequently, the termination rate for incompetence was extremely low. Along came the 2007 contract and Randi Weingarten and her non-teacher flunkies agreed with the DOE that it should become easier for Arbitrators to terminate teachers charged with incompetence. Therefore, the establishment of the infamous PIP+ program in the 2007 contract. The PIP+ educator is now considered an “expert witness” and the Arbitrators are seeing them as such. Therefore, the termination rate for teachers charged with incompetence is at least 75%, based on a limited sample. This is a far cry from the approximately 10% termination rate before PIP+. You might ask how could our union agree to this? Simple, the UFT leadership, who have not been in the classroom in ages, if ever, believe that if a teacher is charged with incompetence, it must be true. Additionally, the DOE formed a 1.2 million dollar Teacher Performance Unit (TPU) known as the “gotcha squad” consisting of lawyers and retired principals to help terminate teachers charged with incompetence. Once, the NYSUT lawyers could fight hard for teachers charged with incompetence and if not win, at least make sure their client wasn’t terminated. Now the NYSUT attorneys believe that they are fighting an uneven battle as the burden of proof is shifted from the DOE to the teacher in these cases. One lawyer was quoted as saying “that it is like betting on a one legged man in a butt kicking contest when it comes to defending a PIP+ teacher". The sense of defeatism is evident as they are urging their clients who are charged with incompetence and had PIP+ to take a deal, any deal. What are the deals being offered? One year and resignation or two years and a $10,000 to $15,000 fine along with resignation. In all cases the PIP+ teacher must leave the system and never be hired back.
For the sake of clarity, let me explain how PIP+ works. The Principal targets a teacher for a variety of reasons and decides that the best way is to get the teacher out is through the incompetence procedure. The Principal will usually discourage the teacher from taking PIP, since the PIP teacher may tell the Principal that there is nothing wrong with the teacher and might help offset the PIP+ educator in the future 3020-a hearing. The Principal will then call in the teacher and Chapter Leader and inform the teacher that the teacher must take PIP+ or face charges of incompetence and removal from the classroom based upon the administrative observations. The Chapter Leader follows the guidance given by the District Representative who recommends taking PIP+ and this keeps the teacher in the classroom an extra six months. However, nine out of ten times the taking of PIP+ by the teacher is the death warrant for the teacher and termination is just a 3020-a hearing away. Let’s take a look at the limited statistics from the PIP+ program.
- 3 out of 4 teachers who had PIP+ were terminated by the Arbitrators.
Chapter Leaders are the first line of defense and they must understand what the consequences of PIP+ means to the targeted teachers and encourage these teachers from taking what is in essence a termination program. Remember, the PIP+ program is a voluntary program and teachers cannot be charged for refusing to take PIP+. It is better for the teacher to be removed from the classroom six months earlier if it means they will be able to keep their job down the road. Remember, without PIP+ the DOE has no “expert witnesses” to testify against the teacher in the 3020-a hearings. As the elected representative, Chapter Leaders must protect their staff and that means recommending to teachers that taking PIP is a good thing but agreeing to PIP+ is agreeing to be terminated in the 3020-a hearing.
More information about the PIP+ vender contracts and a similar take on the PIP+ termination process can be found on Betsy Combier’s rubber room reporter blog.
19 comments:
I have been closely monitoring the outcomes of incompetence charges on the teachers at former Staten Island TRC. I do not recall anyone out of 20-30 incompetence cases who ended up being terminated. Only one teacher went through 22 sessions of hearing and ended up settled. They all went through PIP plus. Almost everyone was offered a settlement and settled for various amount of fine ranging from $2000 to over $10,000.
This is largely a black box, but no one should doubt admins' and doe's intent.
Anon:
I believe you are mistaken. PIP+ started in the 3020-a process in 2009. There have only been about 8 cases that went to their conclusion with six being terminated. Many of the teachers settled either did not have PIP+ or were given the option to resign in a year or two with a fine.
I do not disagree with your post.
I specifically asked most of them if they had pip plus when incompetence cases started showing up in large numbers in Sept 08. All of them showing up in Sept 08 did have pip plus. Actually very few , no more than 3, incompetence cases at Staten Island TRC eventually went to trial in 09, and I am certain none were terminated.
Yes, there were settlements of resignation in a year and/or combination with fine, but most went to back as ATRs, some of the fine were surprisingly low, say $2500. A few did pay over $10,000.
All I can say is that 3020a proceeding when used properly does acts and provides as a barrier of protection for many teachers who face termination.
It is obvious that current form of 3020a is not good enough for Bloomber and Klein, they want to get rid of senior teachers in wholesale by hundreds at one scoop.
Teachers are being picked upon mainly because they do not fight back and render themselves to an easy target. UFT's pacification policy more or less reflects the charactor and tolerance level of its members.
Why can't our union provide us with exact numbers? I have been told that there have been 4 decisions with cases involving PIP plus and all 4 resulted in termination. There also have been many settlements, but DOE no longer has incentive to offer them as backlog is almost gone. Many teachers do not understand the differences between PIP and PIP Plus which may account for the different versions. Thanks for doing this Chaz.
UFT will not tell you anything !!!.
NYSUT attorneys are just as manipulative to the teachers they represent and suppose to be loyal to. The last thing UFT and NYSUT want is to have teachers see that whole picture of the 3020a proceedings.
All they want to do is to coax, intimidate and force any and every teacher to settle, this is not to say there are no circumstances that a teacher should settle. Actually there are many occasions where settlements are the best way out. However, it is an entirely different story when NYSUT attorneys routinely violate their fiduciary responsibility to their clients and do not put their clients teachers interests first by using underhanded strategies to force teachers to settle regardless of the strengths and weaknesses of his or her case.
It is awfully difficult for a teacher to fight on two fronts, DOE and NYSUT at the same time, especially to guard against NYSUT attorney who is legally bound to be in a teacher corner to help defeat charges.
UFT is such a hopeless self-interest group that sometimes I am forced to believe that teachers probably will be better off UFT, or at minimum, you keep a $1000 per year in your own pocket.
The current education system is a modern day slavery system, everyone on the top, union or management, lives off the sweat and blood of teachers.
Teachers are the problem, but at the same time, schools will fall apart in 5 minutes without teachers.
Any and every thing they do on either side is to keep the slaves scared, confused, and suppressed.
I am just glad that I have 24 times more days behind me than before me at this time.
Teachers probably will be better off without a union like UFT. DoE will be forced to deal with 80,000 individual teachers without a centralized union, there will be widespread wild cat strikes, there will be thousands of individual or class action lawsuits, and legal or illegal acts by the admins will be much more crystallized.
Yes, teachers without union may suffer some losses of contractual rights. Now we do not even have our constitutional rights being protected. Without UFT, many more teachers will have to pursue court actions, and the courts will be much more sympathetic towards them n their harassment and discrimination lawsuits.
Without that useless UFT, something more rigorous will emerge to take it place.
I will have to say it is in the BloomKlein’s interest to keep a weak and impotent UFT in place. It is much easier for DOE to deal with a weak and centralized union than to fight directly against and suppress thousands of teachers one on one..
anon 11:33:
I believe you hit the nail on the head. The previous teachers had PIP and not PIP+ and didn't know the difference. The teachers who only had PIP, the DOE made settlements with. For the teachers who had PIP+ it is resignation if they ake a deal or termination if they o through the hearing. Another reason not to take PIP+.
I am planning one day writing guidelines on dealing with your NYSUT attorney. The first chapter will be called The First Face to Face Meeting - That is the meeting where you insist over and over again that you will not settle the false charges - they will be withdrawn or dismissed, the charges are absolutely outrageous, and you that are a highly organized, efficient and well spoken individual. All subsequent meetings and phone calls with NYSUT attorney are occasions to repeat each of those messages.
This message works wonders with the sidebar and off-the-record discussions between NYSUT attorney's, arbitrators, and DOE 'adversaries'
The next chapter will be titled: Finding Good Witnesses to Your Good Conduct and Your Complete Teaching Competence - Prepping them Prior to their Meeting with Your NYSUT Attorney.
(essentially with the NYSUT bunch...you are on your own unless you want to settle unfavorably.)
Anon:5:59
While I do agree with your points, I must point out that some Arbitrators don't care for character witnesses, while others do. Furthermore, the most important witness is you. How you act, react, and present yourself.
Being professional is extremely important, especially when confronted with witnesses againstyou. Finally, it is very important to make sure you tell the truth. If the witness against you lies, so what, but you cannot lie.
Every teacher is advised to first discuss the code of professional conduct with his or her NYSUT attorney. First and foremost, the attorney has fiduciary responsibility to his or her client, secondly, any attorney is obligated to ZEALOUSLY represent the client.
I instructed my NYSUT attorney NOT to engage any settlement negotiations without my clear and specific permission. By doing so, I am in the driver's seat.
Every teacher who uses NYSUT attorney is advised to go to NYS Bar Association website NYSBA.com, to download and to read the Code of Professional Conduct before the first meeting with NYSUT attorney, and to discuss the Code during the first meeting.
If you set proper parameters and do your homework well, the NYSUT attorney can be made to work well for you without the expenses of hiring an outside attorney.
Even an outside attorney will try to manage his or her client, make sure you manage your attorney not the other way around.
As someone who has two lawyers in the immediate family, I treated this relationship with most care, attention, preparation and respect. Make every effort to have your lawyer respect you and to work for you.
If you are charged with incompetence, please please and please do your homework thoroughly and deal with your own lawyer with complete COMPETENCE in every aspect of the trial.
Without the financial incentive, NYSUT lawyer will mostly do what they have to do. Believe me, you can make them work for you if you are well prepared and know what to do.
You already paid them, do not pay twice on outside attorneys.
Chaz
Anon 5:59 here. Please re-read my comment. I said NOTHING about character witnesses. I said to prep witnesses to your good conduct (if this is a misconduct 3020a) and good teaching (if this is an incompetency 3020a). Those are NOT character witnesses.
Second, I wrote NOTHING about lying to anyone. I am afraid your comments might dilute my sound advice.
I 'won' my 3020a (all charges dismissed, directive to immediately restore me to the classroom, directive to pay me all missed 'back pay').
Not all cases are alike. The best advice I received was prior to the first meeting with my NYSUT lawyer I repeated it in my 5:59 posting. It worked.
The problem is not with the NYSUT lawyers, the problem is with the system that the UFT agreed to and the DOE. Don't waste your time mistrusting your lawyer. I saw nothing wrong with my lawyer talking settlement so long as I have the final say-not her.
Playing a professional responsibility game with your lawyer is likely to piss him or her off and therefore they may be less likely to go above and beyond for you-as opposed to merely doing a barely adequate job. Think about it.
If you do not trust your lawyer or if you want an outsider then perhaps the best investment you can make is with a private attorney.
Anon 10:28. Who said anything about a 'game' with a NYSUT attorney? Who said not to trust your NYSUT attorney? I first commented 5:59. Every teacher ought to educate him or herself as only they have their best interests at heart.
Evey teacher ought to realize the sidebar and off-the-record discussions occur between DOE 'adversaries', arbitrators and NYSUT lawyers. They ought to realize this prior to their first meeting with their NYSUT attorneys. Don't you agree? Are you trying to make teachers fearful of 'pissing off' their NYSUT lawyers? Sure sounds like it. Do you suggest accepting every representation made to you by a NYSUT attorney in terms of tactics and settlement? Rather than 'pissing them off' by rejecting their 'advice'? Thank g-d I didn't or I would be out of a job and my family would be starving!! Thank g-d I was not afraid of taking the advice I was given by a veteran teacher prior to the start of my 3020a experience.
11:57.This is 10:28. If you do not trust your nysut lawyer and will follow advice veteran why use them? I am well aware of 5k cost of attorney. Nobody seems to talk about representing yourself. That is a viable alternative given what we are up against. I for one think my NYSUT lawyer trys. The problem is her supervisor hirsh who care more about the uft then us. That Is the reason to hire your own attorney.
I will say this only once. Every case is different, as are the Arbitrators, teachers and attorneys. You can only control your personal behavior in the 3020-a process.
Pro Se in English is you are screwed.
Even you are as familiar with the particular laws as a NYSUT attorney who does similar cases everyday, it is very difficult if not impossible for someone to play two completely contrary roles at the same time. Few can successfully play the role of a hapless victim and an assertive defender at the same time.
5g attorney will not worth more than 5g, he or she probably is only interested in quick settlement.
Anon 12:37
I am unsure what you are trying to say. If you are saying that the decision is predetermined. Maybe in some cases but in misconduct cases the DOE embellishes and the Arbitrator tends to have an open mind to some extent and your testimony is very important.
I have said it before and I say it again: If you are hit with a 3020a you will be doing your own investigation as NYSUT has no investigators. Part of that is gathering and 'prepping' witnesses to your good conduct and competent teaching. (Chaz I am not suggesting lying, I am not suggesting mere character witnesses, I am not sugesting arbitrators are crooked, and I am not suggesting all cases are alike)
Also, be aware off-the-record conflabs between NYSUT, DOE and arbitrators are the rule and not the exception. Use that to YOUR advantage as you plant the seed with your NYSUT lawyer that YOU ARE NOT SETTLING UNFAVORABLY BECAUSE THE CHARGES ARE FALSE AND FRIVOLOUS. Let him/her spread that word in conversations w/DOE and the arbitrator (and NYSUT supervisors). This is not to say you won't some day settle but that is the message you want sent to NYSUT, DOE and the arbitrator form the outset.
- BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT, THANK GOODNESS
Post a Comment