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.
who said anything about not showing up for job interviews?
ReplyDeleteLet me get this straight...The 8% was given to us because others got it. We agreed to 10% over 7 years, totally backloaded, gave up time, got 0 plus 0 for 2011 and 2012, the get 1 % per year from 2013-2016. And retro get paid 5 years from now? That's pathetic. I would like specifics on ATR Severance.
ReplyDeleteWhat proposed buyout?! Sign me up. All ATRs will have a target on their back. Who determines what professional behavior is? The principal you're placed with for the week? The ATR supervisors? Go over 10 days absent, you're fired! Come in late, you're fired! Can't get the thug brats under control, you're fired! Don't have a meaningful lesson, with common core, you're fired! Who the fuck wrote the contract, Donald Trump? I actually have a lot more respect for him than Mulgrew.
ReplyDeleteChaz,
ReplyDeleteYou seem to know the details of the ATR provision in the new contract. Will all ATR's be placed in a full time position after 10/15/2014? What if there are no openings. Do you keep doing weekly rotations? Can a principal return you to the ATR pool after a very short time or do they have to keep you a predetermined time (i.e. till the end of the year). The Wall Street Journal is reporting that an ATR who is returned to the pool twice will face dismissal charges. Why would any principal keep an ATR if they are at max salary. I am freaking out.
A complete sham. I spoke w a rep and asked why i have been paying union dues
ReplyDeleteI pray this deal is killed by the local nlrb
Im sickened
Notice how the UFT doesn't mention any of this stuff? They don't show the salary structure anywhere, they just say full retroactive, don't mention zero plus zero plus 1 plus 1 plus 1. Also, what are they new per session rates?
ReplyDeleteThe only reason why the union would negotiate such a horrible, deja-vu 2005 contract is to see if the members would vote it down and the UFT would renegotiate and come back with more protection for all the members but less in % increase and retroactivity.
ReplyDeleteMy goodness the union has made me so cynical!
Sickening. We are all potential ATR's. A union is only as strong as it's weakest members. Now, ATR's will have the scarlet letter on them forever. I am beyond upset at the UFT for allowing this to happen. I thought the mayor and chancellor were on "our" side. Looks like the next 5 years are going to be the same old gotcha mentality. What a freaking shame. Can't wait to vote "no" on this contract.
ReplyDeleteGreat contract, top pay to hit a base salary of 118K. I mean this is fantastic news!! Let's see, I make about 15K in per session and summer school. Can easily get my supervisor to grant me the highly effective merit pay at approx 10K let's say. What's that total? Ummmm, 143K? Yeah, score!! Oh wait, if I do a 6th class (which I'm doing now) that's an additional .2 or about 23K extra. So let's see, that's 166K. I have no idea what people are complaining about. This is an incredible win for the teachers. Keep complaining Chaz.
ReplyDeleteWhen is the next meeting of the bogus ATR committee?
ReplyDeleteRight on, Chaz. How many times have Mulgrew and Amy cried to the heavens that the union would never sell us out? And now they agree to this masquerade of due process? Who's kidding whom? We must appeal to the rank and file to say no mas to Mulgrew's immoral utilitarianism. Maybe our brothers and sisters will stand with us.
ReplyDeleteThe 18% sounds nice on the surface. However, the way I'm reading this agreement, is that our retroactive raises of 8% will be slowly eased in between 2015 and 2020, along with our cash being paid out during those years. Okay, I can accept the cash being paid out over five years, but the retroactive raise percentages? I believe I will find a lot of company here when I ask this question; In what way, shape or form would this constitute a retroactive raise? On top of that, if they start paying us the cash over five year increment, wouldn't the price tag go up further for the cash payments? It disturbs me deeply assuming I'm reading the language right, that we won't be getting the 8% rate of raise right off the bat. I assumed, as well I'm sure 99% of my colleagues, that we would at least get the 8% up front, and then get the small 1 or 2 percent increases going forward. I feel like we were hoodwinked in a big time way. 18% by the year 2020, does not excite me at all. I also hate that my brothers and sisters who are ATRS were sold down the river.
ReplyDeleteYour still playing the fool anon 8:58. You crack me up. Can't wait for your 1 person show on broadway. Don't forget I still have that smartboard presentation for you.
ReplyDeleteNo way this gets voted down, even though it clearly should be...
ReplyDeleteMy friends who are non atrs are against this contract which once
ReplyDeleteagain gives little $$ in exchange for disguised givebacks.
You have to judge it on what could possibly be allowed to happen to the most unfortunate union member under the worst of circumstances, not the potential of all planets aligning perfectly for you. Payment must go back to coming from central. Any zero anywhere is unacceptable. The proposed treatment of ATR' s can not be tolerated. Any union member with half of a brain & an ounce of integrity will reject this offer.
ReplyDeleteOnce again the UFT has failed to protect a faction of its membership and has enabled the creation of a permanent underclass: the ATRs. While Bloomberg tried every dirty tactic/ trick to get rid of tenured teachers, the UFT swore that it would fight tooth and nail for its membership. Well, when they had a chance to effect a positive outcome with a labor friendly mayor they didn’t fight for the ATRs. What's the point of paying union dues if the leaders, who are paid handsomely to represent ALL of its members I might add, don’t do the job they’re paid to do?!
ReplyDeleteYou missed the biggest issue of them all. HEALTH INSURANCE GIVE BACKS. That is why Municipal Labor Committee upset. By by ATRs. Unfortunately 90 percent of members will vote this contract in. We have only ourselves to blame.
ReplyDeleteThe money Alone is reason to reject. 2011 and 12 with zero. Retro paid in 2020. 1 percent per year 2013 to 2016. That's a joke.
ReplyDeleteguys, help me out. I have been in system since 2010, but my wife got a job in Poughkeepsie and depending on where we move I may be too far to commute and therefore leave the system. Any idea what would happen to those who won't be around potentially for the back pay thats rolled in?
ReplyDeletethanks.
Let's talk facts, shall we. No one was sold down the river, or sold out: The ATRs don't have a timetable to find a position; they're allowed to be in the pool for eternity and all that's asked of them is to be at work on time and come every day to work. In essence, be professional, and act professional. And yet you attack these ideas as if they heretical. How will we ever be taken seriously if bloggers like you, keep trying to topple windmills. And if I'm not mistaken, Michael, Bill and Carmen all reiterated the same mantra about not attacking ATRs who wound up in this pool, due to no fault of their own. That means they know Bloomberg really screwed up the system, and they want to make it right. We're looking at a contract with no givebacks and no additional time and the possibility of actually working with the administration, as opposed to fighting with the administration. Even if it is a struggle, when have any of us heard these type of ideas being bandied about between a mayor, the chancellor and the UFT president. Collaboration was a curse to the past two mayors, now let's see how things can evolve and become cordial, dare I say fun. Let the dust settle before you declare the system dead and bloated. And lastly, what exactly would you ask for in a contract that is so different? Do you think you'd get a 20% raise in two years with full retroactive monies? What's your plan, besides the pell-mell hurling of libelous accusations? Thanks for your time
ReplyDeleteThe sheep will approve this terrible contract. The powers that be have no respect for teachers and their union and why should they. All teachers see is a monetary number and fail to realize that that one day they too could be an ATR. As long as principals have to account for the salaries of teachers and not the way it used to be (units) every experienced teachers has a target on their back. Wake up teachers!!!!!!!!!!! VOTE DOWN WHAT WILL BE A TERRIBLE DEAL,
ReplyDeleteThe sheep will approve this terrible contract. The powers that be have no respect for teachers and their union and why should they. All teachers see is a monetary number and fail to realize that that one day they too could be an ATR. As long as principals have to account for the salaries of teachers and not the way it used to be (units) every experienced teachers has a target on their back. Wake up teachers!!!!!!!!!!! VOTE DOWN WHAT WILL BE A TERRIBLE DEAL,
ReplyDeleteChalkbeat just reported that it may not be legal to get rid of ATR's the way the union is proposing. I believe ATR's are protected by state civil service law. Chalkbeat reiterated that an ATR sent back to the pool twice would start the removal process. ATR's could start getting fired as soon as next December.
ReplyDeleteMennipus are you mulgrews relative? This is a ramdi Wei tartan style kill union deal
ReplyDeleteOn top of everything else, not only do we not get the RETRO pay until 2020, we don't even get the 8% raise added in? This cant be serious.
ReplyDeleteThe 8% won't be added to our salary schedule fully until 2018 and the retroactive money the city owes us since 2009 won't be coming soon either. Here is the schedule for the retroactive payments:
October 1, 2015- 12.5% lump sum
October 1, 2016 - Nothing
October 1, 2017 - 12.5% lump sum
October 1, 2018 - 25% lump sum
October 1, 2019 - 25% lump sum
October 1, 2020 - 25% lump sum
The 4 % + 4% that other unions received in 2009-10 will not be added to our salary schedules until the increases kick in one year at a time starting in 2015. Here is how the 8% will be added in:
May 1, 2015 = 2%
May 1, 2016 = 2%
May 1, 2017 = 2%
May 1, 2018 = 2%
I plan on retiring in June. What happens to the 8% owed me for the years I worked. Do I get it up front or in increments along with the rest of the active service members? And how will that be figured into my pension going forward? Anyone know--Please Post!!!
ReplyDeleteYou get it up front of you retire before '15. This contract treats retirees wonderfully.
DeleteI don't see how the expediated removal of ATRs can be legal. All teachers must have the same due process rights or it simply won't stand up in court. Perhaps those who view this as a good contract should consider this. The city may have to use that 50 days termination process with all teachers. Still like that contract?
ReplyDeleteArundel and Sill need to have an ATR meeting to explain the details of this contract. Is there still a weekly rotation? How and why will any school hire us, if there's an economic incentive NOT to? How can there be two sets of rules for teachers- one for ATRs and another for assigned teachers? What does it mean if a principal "removes you" - is that from a provisional assignment or a weekly one? And finally is there a proposed buyout? (The ATR pool is going to skyrocket in June, and its much higher now than the figures quoted in the local "newspapers").
ReplyDeleteChaz, if anything, if you really want to put your energy into something that will actually matter, please research for your bloggers and through your contacts about the legal issues surrounding the termination process on the table "just for ATRS??" There are reports out there indicating just that - that there are legal issues regarding the proposed ATR pool revised system. This is truly a shock as we all believed the UFT had our backs....That is what the UFt or any union is really all about. Who the hell needs a union other than a union which provides job protections i.e. police and fire have real unions. If this is going to be the case with the new ATR process of 2 SHOTS and your out, then who the fu** needs a union?? What are they doing for us?? If not job protection than anything else is all bull crap. Wow, in retrospect today, I am feeling that Mr. Mulgrew is really not cut our to be pres of uft. I mean this guy hasn't done sh** and has been schooled by just about anything he seems to represent us for. Chaz, getting back to the laws with regards to this issue, it would be great if you could shed some light on the situation.
ReplyDeleteTo Mennipus,
ReplyDeleteWe're currently being asked to do alot more come than to come to work and be on time. We are being observed at a higher standard and for higher stakes than assigned teachers. We are constantly asked to do tasks that are against the contract and demeaning. If we refuse, the principal can now f--k us royally. This is not a fair contract even if you are not an ATR- paying for health care, pseudo charters without rights, modest pay increases, and more responsibility.
Right on chaz! I guess we will see if principals will really hire us since the union claims that the ATR salaries will not be held against the school.
ReplyDeleteWhat non-ATR teachers have to realize is that unless they are in a schools with zero percent chance of being closed (say for example a PS 6), they can end up in the ATR. They should also understand that this contract extends pass this mayoralty term, so they are running the risk that the next mayor will be quick to close schools. I would like to understand the purported provision being referred to that principals will not be hurt by ATR salaries. I am guessing it is for a very short time.
ReplyDeleteAm I the only one who's incensed over this contract? If someone owes me a $100, I don't want to be repaid 10 cents a day, especially if it's Bloomberg who borrowed it. I don't care if you're an ATR or assigned teacher- you'd have to be an idiot to sign off on this. It's the beginning of the end for the union, by opening the door to pseudo charters- who will not want teachers to have union representation. Also if ATRs are targeted and terminated, in the way the union has agreed, all will question the legitimacy of taking dues from our checks.
ReplyDeleteAlso the sexual misconduct clause is yet another way to get teachers (ALL teachers) on trumped up charges. Now kids can say anything about you and you lose your job. Oh just let these little monsters learn that - !!!!
ReplyDeleteUnions are weak This is a sham, You go to college, get a masters degree put in all these years as an educator and in the end THEY STICK IT TO YOU in the end
ReplyDeleteI agree with you BRONX ATR
the beginning of the end for the union, by opening the door to pseudo charters
OUR unions were once strong but now they cant even stand up to EVA AND THE CHARTERS how will they stand for us..I have only 10 years in and I will have to keep my eyes open to a possible career move
Do you know that a ratified contract can set precedence over a state or fed law. For example the UFT's "special 3020a" for ATRs supersedes the NYS ed law 3020a. I feel that the members should understand this and the members should ask the DRs if the ratified contract is the document to follow than the state ed law. I really don't think ATRs or any member wants their due process minimized.
ReplyDeleteI would like to see what James Eterno's chart would look like once it was corrected to account for inflation:
ReplyDeletewww.google.com/search?q=%22annual+inflation+rate%22+%22New+York+City%22
Even if salaries were increased by 4% yearly, starting with the expiration date of the existing contract, much of that would be eaten up by inflation.
Here is a good reference to check up on NYC public employee salaries, in general:
www.nyc.gov/html/records/downloads/pdf/civil_pdf_noadr_Y2013.pdf
Unfortunately, pedagogical employees are omitted.
And the potential treatment of ATRs in the proposed contract is absolutely unheard of!
I think besides campaigning to vote NO for this contract-we as a community need to begin the process of campaigning to get Michael Mulgrew out of office. I don't want this man representing my voice, needs, or welfare anymore. I am ashamed to be associated with this man who calls himself first an educator and a union member. When you don't protect your weakest members you don't protect any of your members. He is not helping the ATRs, the children of the city and certainly not the working teachers! VOTE NO FOR THE CONTRACT and VOTE MULGREW OUT OF OFFICE in 2016!
ReplyDeleteI am an ATR, I live in NJ and like most teachers that don't live in the city know that from time to time, the traffic nightmare that occurs almost everyday will make us late to school. Imagine when you don't even know where the school is located and have to drive around to find it. Add to that the parking problems in the city. Thanks to all the teachers that are very kind and helpful with ATRs.
ReplyDeleteI will vote yes because as a ten year veteran on almost every count it's much better than what I've been dealing with for the last half of my career. This is not an easy decision, but I feel that on almost every area of the proposal we will not be affected adversely by the details.
ReplyDeleteI wish that we were getting more money upfront, but I can wait. I wish that the breakdown of per year increases kept up with inflation. But, I can see that by 2018 (four years hence) we will have an approx. 20% increase in current salaries, and will receive back the retro due. Sure, it would have been nicer and neater to come today. But, I can be patient. I will vote yes because it's fair. Is it extraordinarily generous? No. But, I will be glad to know that each year my paycheck will increase. I will vote yes because i do not see any outright screwing of our members. With the additional funding, I will put it into my TDA and save for the future and for my families well being.
If an expedited termination process is permitted for ATR's, in due time it will also be permitted for all other union members: especially after they practice a few hundred times and get really good at it.
ReplyDeleteJust today I got the post-observation conference from a lesson I taught last Thursday to a class I saw for the first time in an all boy H S. Like I thought, the field supervisor gave me a U. Is this the end of my teaching career? What are my options? Any advice.
ReplyDeleteMy field supervisor set me up to teach in very bad high school in Queens. I got her e-mail on monday night - I had to teach the unknown 9th graders the day after, on tuesday. I was laughing to myself - I new IN ADVANCE I would get the U rating, as it happened. The students were disruptive, didn't look at the assignment, and of course it was my fault I didn't manage them and engage them to do work.
ReplyDeleteNobody informed the students that I would 'teach' them, nobody introduced me, the field supervisor dismissed the regular teacher who wanted to help me by staying in the classroom..all in all, these people are capable to do anything to make you look a BAD teacher...There are so many inhumane, vicious and hypocrital supervisors out there...TOO MANY...and this contract - shame for the union.
Now, dear colleagues, regularly appointed teachers: vote YES - all of this can happen to you if your principal suddenly decides to excess you!