What Happens When A Teacher Decides To Return To Teaching Before He Exhausts Terminal Leave?

One of the little noticed aspects of the DOE/UFT contract is the decision to dump teachers who decide to return to teaching before they exhaust their terminal leave, into the ATR pool rather than their appointed position.  Previously, teachers who decided to return to teaching before they exhaust their terminal leave would be allowed to resume their appointed teaching position.  Principals were very unhappy with this situation because it meant excessing a recently hired "newbie" and bringing back a veteran teacher who had institutional memory and knew their rights. Therefore, the DOE changed the rules, with the approval of the disconnected union leadership, and allowed principals the right not to reappoint teachers who decided to come back to teaching before they exhaust their terminal leave. Instead, they were assigned to the ATR pool.

This is just another example of our rights being nibbled away, piece by piece, as our union closes their collective eyes and proclaims how everything is just wonderful.  Welcome to Mikey Mulgrew's fantasy world where there is a new tone at the DOE as he continues his "love affair" with Chancellor Carmen Farina, while any ATR can be appointed, if they are good teachers, and there are no principals in need of improvement.

To understand terminal leave and termination pay please read my post Here.

Why Teacher Tenure Is Necessary.

The California court decision that struck down that State's teacher tenure law is already having the education reformer groups salivating in anticipation of similar lawsuits throughout the nation, including New York. According to the California judge, teacher tenure is a civil rights issues that causes school districts to dump poorly preforming teachers to instruct poor and minority students.  While I find his reasoning faulty and without merit, it does open the door for similar attacks on teacher tenure elsewhere.  It's no secret that nationwide, teacher morale is an an all time low and teacher disrespect, especially by the media, is on the rise.

Interestingly, the main issue for the judge was the extreme difficulty in terminating teachers for misconduct and incompetence and that teacher "due process rights" made it nearly impossible to fire teachers in California  Furthermore, he mentioned how California's teachers received tenure in eighteen months and few principals rejected teacher tenure due to the short time limit and fears of high teacher turnover if they did which can destabilize a school.. While I believe that the judge's decision will be reversed on appeal, let's look at t5he New York City's tenure and termination process and how it's applied to City teachers.

First, tenure is given after three years of satisfactory service and in many cases tenure can be extended for another year or two before the teacher finally achieves tenure. The latest statistics show that only 53% of teachers who were eligible for tenure received tenure while 3% were discontinued.  The rest had their tenure decision extended another year. In fact, in some cases principals wanted to give tenure only to be told by the Superintendent that the tenure request was rescinded!  Unlike California,in New York City tenure decisions take longer and is more difficult to achieve.

Second  in New York City, teachers brought up on 3020-a charges for incompetence or misconduct are much more likely to be terminated by independent arbitrators.  The latest statistics show that in 2013, 38% of the teachers who went through their 3020-a hearings were terminated and only 4% were found innocent.  The rest had fines or suspensions.  In other words, of the 133 teachers who went through their 3020-a hearings 50 were terminated and only 6 were find innocent of all charges against them. In all cases the teacher had a relatively fair hearing and their "due process rights" were protected, even if the results may not always be to one's liking.

Remember, teacher "due process rights" were necessary because school districts would practice favoritism, nepotism, ageism, racism, and use "arbitrary and capricious" actions to fire teachers, especially ones who were higher salaried and outspoken.  To go back to the "bad old days" is not only unacceptable but would hurt the students who would no longer have the benefit of highly experienced teachers with excellent classroom management skills who advocates for them and that help the students reach their academic potential.  Look at the new contract.  The DOE still believes they have the right to fire ATRs who won their 3020-a termination hearings by having the option not to offer these "untouchables" an opportunity for an interview when vacancies are available.  Giving the school districts the ability to "hire and fire" at will, will destabilize schools and hurt the very children they claim to serve.  Teacher tenure and "due process rights" are an integral part of a stable school environment and for the students to reach their academic potential.

Why Teacher Tenure Is Important.

In today's New York Daily News there is a sympathetic piece about a teacher who was pressured to resign from his $75,000 per year teaching position because he was seen with his shirt off.  The article shows a very ripped Stefan Serie who explained that he was an extra on a Bravo show Jewish-American Princesses and at a "pool party" he was seen with his shirt off.  According to Mr. Serie he was summoned a week later and told that his pending tenure will be revoked and told to resign, which is what he did.

What gets me is that many after school sports activities on school grounds will have male athletes practicing without their shirts.  This is called "shirts and skins".  Even female athletes will go with "sports bras" in real hot weather.  Yet this suburban school district decided to terminate Mr. Sire for simply not having his shirt on at a televised "pool party".  Unbelievable.

Interestingly, Mr. Sire is an eight year teaching veteran and untenured which is a major problem when  it comes to Long Island schools.  These school districts are notorious for hiring teachers for a year or two and not give them tenure.  Therefore, the teacher probably had been teaching in other school districts and finally found one willing to give him tenure.

Why did the School District deny tenure to Mr. Sire on such an innocence action by him?  It's because they can!  Tenure is important because it protects teacher from frivolous actions by school administration and false  accusations by vindictive students.  This disgusting action is just another example why tenure is important for teachers.,  In this case one person saw a problem with it and the poor guy now has no job.

That is why teachers cannot allow one person who does not know the facts to decide the fate of a teacher.  Like giving the clueless Dennis Walcott the right to terminate teachers accused of "sexual misconduct" without real evidence and the equally clueless Campbell Brown that cannot even get her facts straight when it comes to how independent arbitration and "due process" works.

See nyc educator blog for another take about this story.

Why Do I Love Teaching? It's Seeing My Students Succeed.

My son asked me why I still teach since he hears and reads my complaints about the injustice and incompetence of the DOE and the politicians (Bloomberg, Cuomo, Obama, etc) who rather scapegoat teachers as the cause of all of what's wrong with the school system than the poverty, lack of funding, and unproven mandates that are the main causes of much of the academic shortcomings.  I though about it for a minute and told him it was the satisfaction of watching my students improve academically and mature as young adults.  All the useless nonsense that the DOE imposes on us pales in comparison when one of my students tell me how much I have made a difference in his or her life.  No matter what Mayor Bloomberg says about experienced teachers or what Chancellor Dennis Walcott would like to fire me, if he only had the power, the bottom line is what do the students think of me as a teacher and are they learning? To me that is the reason I teach.

I must admit I have been fortunate this year as I have landed a long-term leave position in my subject area in a highly rated school with a supportive Administration and a well-run department.  However, more importantly the students are eager to learn and try their best in mastering the skills necessary to pass the year-end Regents exam.  I have three ESL classes and two classes with English speaking students and enjoy teaching them all.  With some support, and encouragement from the school I have settled into a routine with my ESL classes and have successfully integrated my teaching style to fit their limited English vocabulary.  The result is that my ESL classes are rapidly improving and I have even used this approach with my English speaking class and it has helped some of my struggling students who have weak vocabulary skills.  However, what I enjoy most is the exchange of ideas with my students and I am especially proud of my ESL students who are now asking questions, a real breakthrough from the beginning of the year.  I feel like a proud father watching them grow academically and becoming more confident in their ability to master the English language.

As much as I like the Principal or the Assistant Principal telling me I am doing a good job and I do appreciate their feedback, it is what the students think of me that counts the most.  To me, what makes teaching so enjoyable is when a student tells me that I am a good teacher and that they are learning in a subject they never liked before, that is what is important.  When a student goes out of their way to complement you it just makes my day and helps me refocus on what are the most important things in life and that is to see the students becoming successful and that I had something to do with it.

The Education Reformers claim they want "excellent teachers" in the classroom and so do I.  However, these so-called Education Reformers have no clue what goes on in a classroom and what makes an "excellent teacher"?  The intangibles that make an "excellent teacher" are many and test scores are only a small percentage of that equation.  If you ask the students what their idea of an excellent teacher is somebody who manages his or her classroom effectively, has passion for the topic, motivates, is caring, has a deep knowledge of curriculum, is nurturing, can be entertaining, and most of all helps them to achieve academic success as they move on in life.  

Why do I teach?  It's because of the students.

The Christine Rubino Facebook Decision And Why The Arbitrator's Award Is Excessive.

As many of my followers know, Christine Rubino's case has made the newspapers.  She was charged by the DOE for her Facebook comments that, were to say the least, ill considered and wrong.  However, this was Christine's private Facebook page and only her friends should have been able to see it.  Unfortunately, for Christine she had a falling out with one of her teacher friends who ratted her out to the Principal.   Despite the DOE having no policy on social media at the time and no students were hurt by what she said on Facebook, Christine was charged under section 3020-a anyway. In fact, she continued teaching until her 3020-a charges more than five months later!

She was assigned an Arbitrator, Randi Lowett, who people in the 3020-a hearing process believed was reasonably even-handed in her "awards".  However, according to Betsy Combier in Christine's open and public 3020-a hearing, this one was different.  The DOE seemed especially interested in terminating Christine for her Facebook comments and in many of the sessions the head of the "Administrative Trials Unit (ATU), Teresa Europe, showed up.  According to Betsy Combier who has been in many 3020-a hearings, this was a rare event to see the head of the ATU show up on more than one occasion.   The question must be asked did Teresa Europe showing up at Christine's 3020-a hearing influenced Arbitrator Randi Lovett's decision?  Furthermore, since Christine had fired her NYSUT lawyer, did this make it easier for the Arbitrator to terminate Christine?  I do not know the answers but I have my own suspicions.  The Arbitrator's original decision can be found here.

Based upon the Arbitrator's decision to terminate Christine Rubino for her Facebook comments it would seem that the "award" was excessive and Christine rightly appealed the case under section 75-11. The Supreme Court Judge, Barbara Jaffae, ruled that the "award"  was shocking to the conscious" and sent it back to Arbitrator Randi Lovett, for a less severe "award".  In the meantime the DOE has appealed the Judge's decision to the Appellate Court and since they were required to follow the Judge's decision for a lesser "award", the DOE arbitrarily asked that the Arbitrator rule that a two-year suspension would be appropriate.  This type of severe penalty has not been "awarded" since the turn of the century to any one's knowledge.  Either the educator gets a one year suspension or is terminated.  The last two year suspension issued by a NYS Arbitrator is in the 1990's and that was based upon more serious charges.

Shockingly, but not surprisingly, the Arbitrator Randi Lowett agreed with the DOE and issued a two year suspension without pay or health benefits in what reads as a very angry decision.  Christine is appealing again against the excessive "award" issued by the Arbitrator and  hopefully, the Judge will once again send it back to a different Arbitrator, this time, for a decision that does not "shock the conscious".

I really know how Cristine feels about her persecution by the DOE.  I spent 1567 days in the "rubber room" on false and frivolous charges and even this year the Mayor's poodle, the Chancellor, Dennis Walcott proclaimed me guilty even after the real evidence showed otherwise. Read the following blogs for more information on the DOE's crusade against Christine Rubino, a teacher with a fifteen year unblemished record.  Here, Here, Here, Here, and Here.

Educators 4 Excellence Is A Group Of Fifth Columnists Who's Sole Purpose Is To Sew Discord In The Union Ranks On Behalf Of The Mayor & Chancellor.

The United Federation of Teachers (UFT) is not a homogeneous group, there are various factions, known as caucuses, that represent different viewpoints on how the union should represent its members. These caucuses are "Unity", "New Action", "Independent Council of Educators", and "Teachers For A Just Contract". At times the different groups will disagree with the controlling caucus which is "Unity" and this dissent can be very vocal. However, when outside forces start to attack our profession, the different caucuses put aside their differences and act as one to support the union. This is apparent in the present where Mayor Bloomberg and his poodle Chancellor Walcott has made the elimination of seniority-based layoffs known as "last in' first out" or LIFO as the top priority. In fact the Chancellor was quoted as saying his full time job is to eliminate LIFO. I thought it was to run the New York City Public Schools and ensure they are adequately funded? Silly me for being so naive.

That brings me to a new organization that has shown up as claiming to represent teachers. It is called Education 4 Excellence (E4E) and was founded by two former teachers who had a combined five years of teaching experienced before they fled the classroom. They are Evan Stone and Sydney Morris who are now paid a salary by organizations run by Bill Gate, Joel Klein, and other education deformers whose main purpose is to destroy the union and teacher "due process rights" in their quest to privatize the school system. E4E is called a cult by some in the education community and bloggers South Bronx School and Accountable Talk have commented extensively on E4E and are must reads if you are to understand the real goals of E4E.

Personally. I consider E4E a group of fifth columnists who's sole purpose is to destroy the union from the inside. Their "white paper" was very similar to Mayor Bloomberg's bill to eliminate LIFO and it is obvious to me that E4E coordinated their "white paper" with Tweed and the Bloomberg Administration. E4E has blitzed the schools where inexperienced teachers are numerous with their philosophy and are doing their best to pit younger teachers against their more experienced counterparts and hope to break the union apart. They tried to get the union to agree to a survey on LIFO knowing full well that the union would never allow such a survey since LIFO is the law of the land and a "collective bargaining rights" issue. This was simply a public relations ploy to embarrass the union and bring more ammunition to the Bloomberg Administration's attempts to end LIFO. It is bad enough that the four columns from the outside, the Bloomberg Administration, Tweed, Education Deformers, and Politicians are attacking the union from the outside, now they have E4E, the fifth column that wants to attack the union from the inside.

I would like to know where their funding stream comes from? Who are paying E4E's bills? Finally, I would like to know why E4E did not fight for more school funding in Albany or with their friends at Tweed and the Bloomberg Administration? I know if I was to start a new caucus at the UFT, my top priority is to demand no layoffs, increase school funding, and reduce class size, yet when you look at the E4E "white paper" they are very silent about how to do any of them. Instead they harp on LIFO.

On May Day, the day we are supposed to celebrate unionized labor, we now have a privately funded group who's main purpose is to remove the union protections on behalf of anti-union forces from the inside. That is why E4E is in my opinion a fifth column.

Administrators In New York State Want To End LIFO But Say Nothing About Reducing The Administrative & Beauracratic Bloat In Their Own Ranks.

It would appear that high-level Administrators & School Boards would like to see the elimination of seniority-based layoffs known as "last in, first out" (LIFO). Over the last week since the New York State budget did not include the weakening or elimination of LIFO, Administrators throughout the State are getting on the end LIFO bandwagon. First, it was Mayor Bloomberg who proposed a bill to end LIFO, next, it was the New York State School Boards Association, made up of non-educators and bureaucrats and now it is the School District Superintendents who want LIFO reform. What is obvious is that these groups are not involved on the day-to-day operation of schools and in many cases are not even educators. However, these very same groups that clammier for the so-called LIFO reform are quiet about reducing their own Administrative bloat, instead they whine about teacher layoffs or reducing student services while ignoring the increased bureaucracy and Administrative salaries that have exploded in the last decade.

The Cuomo Administration found that there was an astounding 34% increase in Administration since 1997 . While there was a reduction of 4.6% in students. There was also a 9.6% increase in teachers. However, that is mostly explained by a reduction in class sizes, and special education requirements. That is why the Governor has told the School Districts to reduce the Administrative bloat before you layoff teachers. Interestingly, there has been dead silence about the Governor's report and for good reason. You can't scare parents by laying off some faceless bureaucrats but you can scare them by laying off teachers and student services such as sports.

Before, these bureaucrats can layoff teachers, the School Districts should be drawing up plans to get rid of unnecessary Administration and go back to the levels in 1997.

Unions Level The Playing Field Between Employers And Employees & Check Employer Abuse.

There has been much criticism about unions over the last year. Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, New Jersey, and even New York City unions have seen attacks on their very existance. The Republicans have jumped on the anti-union bandwagon and even in union-friendly States like New York have tried to pass legislation that would limit or destroy the union's right to collectively bargain.

The question is why now? The short answer it is a recession out there with a nationwide unemployment rate of 9% and an additional 16% underemployment rate. That means a quarter of the working nation is not able to maintain their expected standard of living. These people need to blame somebody and they listen to the mass media and the politicians on who to blame. Do the news media blame the Wall Street bankers who gave out mortgages to credit unworthily people causing a major housing crises that started the recession? Or the hedge fund managers who manipulate the markets that results in phony profits, when it really was a deficit? How about the corporate speculators that buy and sell companies based upon their whims that result in many layoffs? No, the news media and their Republican allies blame the unions. The unions are an easy scapegoat for the country's economic ills. Take away the outrageous bonuses for Wall Street? No way! How about eliminating tax credits for companies that move overseas? Bad for the country. How about making the rich pay their fair share of taxes? Do you want to hurt the American economy? However, these very outlets that defend Wall Street, Corporate tax loopholes, and low tax rates for the rich have found something they seem to all agree on. That is to reduce the benefits of Public Workers. To them it doesn't matter that when jobs were a plenty, many workers didn't want the sub par salaries (teachers) when they can make 25 to 75% moire as a professional in private business but with a recession, these jobs dried up and now these public worker jobs look good. The result is a jealously by the very people who snubbed these jobs in the first place and now demand that the public worker "due process" and fringe benefits be reduced.

Across the country the many news outlets want a rollback of public worker health and pension benefits. Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana are only the latest States to pass legislation to do just that. Even in a hotbed of unionism like New York health and pension benefits are under attack by the very politicians who approved these benefits instead of wage increases in the first place. According to the politicians "that was then and this is now". Worse is the attack on the union's right to "collective bargain" a contract. The elimination of "collective bargaining" is the main goal for many States as it will give the employer the upper hand in negotiating a contract by imposing whatever conditions it desired. For example if the teachers' union did not collectively bargain a contract, Mayor Bloomberg could simply end "last in, first out" (LIFO) by decree and fire teachers the DOE does not want or like.

Both internally and externally the unions must band together and not give one inch when it comes to public worker rights. This is not the time to snipe at each other while we are under attack. Divided can only result in giving up our precious Civil Service protections will start a "slippery slope" that will result in losing more of our "due process" rights. Once we lose those rights we will never get them back and make our unions toothless. Only the unions keep employer abuses in check and level the playing field. Our unions deserve 100% support in their stated goal to fight this Media and Governmental onslaught against worker rights.

Mayor Bloomberg's Real Plan Is To Fire The Experienced Teachers The DOE Does Not Want Or Like & Replace Them With "Newbie Teachers".

Defenders of Mayor Bloomberg's plan to layoff teachers based upon a DOE list of teachers they wanted fired but failed in that attempt were very disappointed when Governor Andrew Cuomo and The Assembly put and end to the Mayor's attack on "last in, first out" (LIFO). The defenders of the Bloomberg Bill cast it as reform but what it really is far more sinister.

The Bloomberg Bill does not simply layoff experienced teachers based upon some nebulous and subjective criteria but includes this seemingly innocuous language below:

"When schools remove positions for any reason, absent a citywide layoff condition, the sole basis for such decisions will not be employee length of service."

If you carefully read into this statement you will realize that if implemented, it would allow the Mayor and Chancellor the right to fire whatever teacher they pleased and even if there was no financial emergency for teacher layoffs, they can still fire the teachers they don't want or like and hire "newbie teachers". For example School "X" is scheduled to lose 3 teaching positions. All of the three were selected by Tweed for firing based upon the theirs and the Principal's recommendation (salary, ageism, discrimination, favoritism, etc). The three experienced teachers are laid off as of June 28, 2011. During the summer the City quietly tells the Principal that the three positions have been returned to the school and that she can hire whomever she wants. Knowing that she is constrained by the Tweed imposed "fair student funding" formula she hires three "newbie teachers" rather than rehire the experienced teachers she let go. As for the three experienced teachers? They are effectively fired! Worse, once the above statement is implemented, the Mayor and Chancellor could use it year after year to get rid of experienced teachers.

Bloomberg's bill is simply an end run around the unions collective bargaining rights and New York State's Civil Service Law. Most interesting about Mayor Bloomberg's attack on teachers is that he wants to eliminate 4,666 teachers while only proposing to layoff 823 other City employees. That is 85% of the total layoffs. Furthermore, he only assumes 1,500 teachers leaving the system when the average in the last two years averaged 2,500. While the low balling? The answer is very simple. He can still fire the 4,666 teachers and save even more money (and sharply increase class size) and let Tweed do with the windfall as they see fit, like hiring more consultants or non-educators that have no direct application to the classroom and the children.

It is a pity that the general public cannot see through what Mayor Bloomberg is doing to destroy the NYC Public School System but as as long as he has the News media in his back pocket, we must depend on our union and the allies in the New York State Assembly to protect our "due process rights" Because nobody else will.

Bloomberg Loses Out On Eliminating LIFO On His Terms. However, Do The Teachers Lose In The Long Run?

In what is a major (and expected) defeat to Mayor Bloomberg. His court jester, Jonathan Bing's bill is "dead in the water". Shelden Silver has publicly stated that the Assembly will not take up the bill to end seniority-based layoffs for "last in, first out" (LIFO) in this session. That effectively puts an end to Bloomberg's attempt to get rid of teachers that he does not like. To make matters worse for Bllomberg, the Governor Andrew Cuomo, has also rejected the Bloomberg proposal and proposed his own teacher evaluation process that mirrors RttT. There is little doubt that the Mayor is upset that he could not get what he wants. The question now is what will the Emperor, Mayor4Life Michael Bloomberg do now?

Unlike Providence Rhode Island he cannot fire the entire teaching staff. New York State law is much more stringent than Rhode Island's when it comes to mass firings. The New York State Civil Service Law is iron-clad when it comes to this. Any civil servant will be rehired based upon a seniority list, no exceptions, Therefore, Bloomberg can fire all the teachers but will be required to rehire them based upon seniority. This draconian approach might encourage some teachers to leave the profession but not many and It will cost the City millions of dollars to implement only to eventually not achieve its desired purpose. I truly believe that if Bloomberg actually does issue layoff notices to the entire NYC teaching staff it will backfire in his face as parents, educators, politicians, except for his court jester, Jonathan Bing, will be up in arms and any support he might have will vanish both in the City Council and the State Legislature.

The next question will he actually layoff the "newbie teachers"? The short answer is no. We all know he has the money to avoid layoffs. Bloomberg has a 3.1 billion dollar surplus this year and we all know that his 3.6 billion dollar deficit for next year is not real. The only question is will the Mayor simply say that he found money to avoid layoffs? Or will he issue layoff notices to the "newbies" only to rescind them during the summer and risk losing some of them to other school districts or other professions. My guess he will do the latter since he loves the attention he will get by issuing layoffs only to rescind them based upon his great management style and what is best for the children.

The real question is what happens to LIFO in the future. It is highly likely that LIFO as we know it will be gone by the next Presidential election and it was disappointing how the entire Republican Senate voted for eliminating LIFO for New York City. The unions should eventually make the Republicans and those two treasonous Democrats pay for their blatant effort in destroying LIFO for New York City teachers as the first step in dismantling public worker Civil Service protections in New York State. As for the UFT and NYSUT, they should do whatever it takes to make sure that the teacher evaluation system is fair and unbiased and not just a "fig leaf" for vindictive Principals to remove teachers they don't like.

It is time that the New York State unions use their tremendous power to let politicians know there are consequences to voting against Civil Service protections and those consequences can lead to their losing the next election. To the Republicans who voted for this political travesty by Bloomberg, I will do everything in my power to see you removed from office and of course that goes for those treasonous Democrats that voted for the Emperor's favor over their constituent's needs. We need to fight Bloomberg and his political whores every step of the way to ensure we keep our Civil Service protections and "due process" rights.

Randi's Actions Are Incrementally Worsening The Teacher Profession

Randi Weingarten, in a New York Times puff piece was proud to point out how she wanted incremental and sustainable changes in the New York City education system, I did an investigation of these incremental changes she brought us and here is what I found.

First, Randi gave us the 192 day year for us. Including those wonderful two days in August. Yes, she certainly incrementally increased our work year.

Second, Randi gave us the extra 150 minutes of classroom time during the week. Thanks Randi for incrementally increasing our work day.

Third, Randi has allowed the DOE to incrementally increase the paperwork that the classroom teacher must do. Another promise Randi has kept.

Fourth, Randi has allowed the DOE to increase the number of "ATR" and "rubber room" teachers. Here again Randi has kept her promise to incrementally change the New York City education system.

Fifth, Randi agreed to incrementally increase teacher administrative duties such as cafeteria, hallway, and potty patrol. Way to go Randi.

Sixth, Randi has agreed with the DOE to incrementally increase the number of teachers, subject to a 90-day unpaid suspension and no health benefits based upon hearsay.

Seventh, there appears to have been an incremental increase in Letters-To-File (LIF) since we cannot grieve them anymore.

Finally, Randi has seen more and more teachers leave the system as she buys into the DOE's recruitment over retention policy. Yes Randi has kept her word in incrementally increasing the resignations of New York City teachers.

Some bloggers call Randi Weingarten a liar. However, in this case Randi has lived up to her promise to incremental and sustainable changes in the New York City educational system. Unfortunately, these incremental changes have worsened the New York City teacher profession but why should she care? Randi and her inner staff are not in the classroom and not subject to any of the incremental and sustainable actions that have affected the classroom teacher.

I AccuseThe Union Of Eroding Teacher Rights & What They Need To Do To Reverse It

I accuse the UFT of not protecting teacher rights. The retreat by this union under Randi Weingarten and her friends has made teaching in the classroom unbearable. That's assuming you are not an ATR or in the "rubber room". I do not come to my accusation lightly. I fact, I am very reluctant to write this article but I have had enough how we teachers are disrespected not only by the DOE and their media minions but by our own union leaders who look the other way as more and more mandates are dumped on the classroom teacher. I accuse this union of betraying it's members and demand that the union present my twelve point plan to allow teachers to teach with respect and dignity.

First, The union agreement to allow a non-educator to be chancellor was a mistake and needs to be ended. The chancellor controls the DOE budget priorities and his emphasis has been the hiring of more and more non-educators at the top levels at Tweed at the expense of the educator.

Second, mayoral control. Who in their right mind would allow one person (the mayor) to determine policy for an education system that he has no understanding of. This too must end. The two most powerful people who control the schools are both non-educators who are clueless what goes on in a classroom. How could a union allow this?

Third, The October 2005 contract disaster that made teaching in the classroom unbearable. The union must recover all the givebacks in the next contract. Not one but all! This terrible contract givebacks for you teachers who forgot what you gave up are listed below.

• Increased workday - 150 more minutes a week in the classroom.
• Longer work year - 192 days this year alone.
• Elimination of grievances for Letters-In-File (LIF).
• Elimination of the Seniority Transfer System.
• Inclusion of administrative assignments - cafeteria, hallway, and bathroom duties.
• The expansion of the number of ATR's.
• The suspension of a teacher for up to 90 days without pay and health benefits based upon hearsay evidence.

Fourth, the union must stop allowing a steady increase of teachers reassigned to the "rubber rooms" based upon frivolous, or minor charges. The increase under Bloomberg and Klein went from 315 in March 2003 to 757 in October 2007. Rumors are that this number is still increasing as the "rubber rooms" are bursting at the seems.

Fifth, stop the recruitment over the retention of teachers approach. Our union seems more concerned with recruiting teachers than retaining teachers. Just look at the givebacks on the classroom teacher just so that our union could pay the newbie teacher a competitive salary. Is there any wonder that we have seen teacher resignations double to 4,600 last school year? How about those housing vouchers and loan forgiveness programs for newbie teachers?

Sixth, stop allowing the DOE to hire teachers from alternative certification programs (Teach for America & Teaching Fellows programs) as well as conducting an intergalactic job fair for foreign teachers while experienced teachers are relegated to be ATR's.

Seventh, The union's acceptance of the dismantling of the large traditional high school and the resulting overcrowding of the remaining large high schools is disgusting. To further spike the data the union looks the other way as small schools don't need to take special education and ELA students for the first two years. Further, these small schools can weed out the level one students with attendance and/or behavior problems. By the way where do you think these students end up? Right. the remaining large, increasingly overcrowded, traditional high schools.

Eight, The union's acceptance of weakened and non-enforcement of student discipline codes. The union should be demanding a strengthening of the student discipline code and bring charges against administrators who refuse to enforce these codes.

Ninth, Demand that the DOE culture of teacher disrespect end by requiring a fair and impartial investigation of any alleged teacher misconduct. presently, a principal can find any excuse to remove a teacher and the non-educators that are at Tweed assume the teacher is guilty until proven not guilty (you expected me to say innocent?. According to the DOE no teacher is innocent if accused).

Tenth, Go back to the State 3020-a process, where teachers have due process rights.

Eleventh, all excessed teachers must be placed before a school district would be allowed to hire a newbie teacher in that subject area.

Twelfth, make the Fair Student Formula (FSF) for the schools salary blind and does not give the lower salaried teacher an advantage as it does now.

Under Randi Weingarten and her staff the once-strong union has become reactive rather than pro-active. All I hear from our union leaders are talk, talk, talk, but little action. Under her leadership we have seen a deterioration of the classroom environment and teacher respect. It's time to stop the DOE micromanagement of the classroom and let teachers teach the way that is best for the students in that teacher's classroom