Why Did The UFT Agree To Suspend Teachers Without Pay & Health Benefits?

We all know how terrible the October 2005 contract was to the classroom teacher. However, from my point of view the worst part of the 2005 contract was the UFT agreement of the "probable cause" section for teachers subject to the 3020-a process. To refresh your memory the "probable cause" section of the 2005 contract allows the DOE to suspend teachers without pay or health benefits for up to three months simply on hearsay testimony. Hearsay testimony is as simple as one student accusing the teacher of misconduct and getting his/her friend to agree it happened without the friend being there. that is all it takes for a teacher to spend the next three months without pay or health benefits. Do you think this is fair? I don't.

Randi Weingarten told the delegate assembly that the only teachers subject to the "probable cause" provision of the contract are ones that are arrested and subject to felony charges. Her stooge Leo Casey has commented on Edwize that the union agreed to the "probable cause" section because the union does not protect perverts and pedophiles. I fully agree with Leo Casey that there is no room in any union for perverts and pedophiles. However, how about the teacher unjustly accused by vindictive students and his/her friends of misconduct that did not rise to even a police investigation? According to Randi Weingarten & Leo Casey those teachers will not be subject to the "probable cause" section and it's associated unpaid suspension and no health benefits. Were they telling the truth? Or was it that the DOE expanded the definition to include incidents that did not result in criminal action? As much as I want to blame the DOE on expanding the alleged misconduct subject to the "probable cause" section, there is a smoking gun that shows that the UFT was a willing participant in what misconduct is subject to "probable cause". Listed below is "Appendix H" that explains all.

Teacher Contract 6/1/2003-11/12/2007

APPENDIX H
PROCEDURES FOR PROBABLE CAUSE HEARINGS

On October 2, 2005 the following understanding was reached regarding probable cause hearings:

"The UFT will conduct a meeting of lawyers who represent UFT members in 3020-a proceedings to inform them about the new procedures regarding offenses involving sexual misconduct with a student or minor not a student. During that meeting there will be a discussion of what would constitute probable cause including that we agree that in a probable cause hearing the hearing officer may accept hearsay as evidence of probable cause, and that a criminal complaint and corroborating affidavit of the SCI report is sufficient evidence to create a rebuttable presumption of probable cause".

The key statement from the above paragraph is " We agree that that in a probable cause hearing the hearing officer may accept hearsay as evidence of probable cause". What happened to Randi's statement to the delegate assembly that only teachers subject to criminal felony action would fall under the "probable cause" section? Did she lie to the delegate assembly or was she deceived by her flunkies? Regardless, she misinformed the delegate assembly to push through a very unpopular contract that has put the teachers in a very dangerous position in and outside the classroom.

Yes, there are many disagreeable givebacks in the 2005 contract but nothing affects a teacher as much as the UFT agreement with the DOE in the unreasonably low burden of proof to remove a teacher under the "probable cause" section of the contract.

Shame on both the UFT and DOE for allowing the use of hearsay testimony to affect the livelihood of innocent teachers.

P.S. By the way Leo how come in your October 23, 2005 (3:25 pm) comment on Edwize about sexual misconduct, you chose to overlook discussing Appendix H? I could only assume you knew that simple hearsay can get a teacher a 90 day unpaid suspension without health benefits. Shame on you most of all for deceiving the members by omitting that hearsay is evidence enough under the "probable cause" section.

Holy Cow! The DOE Continues Their Anti-Teacher Crusade

The day before "Holy Thursday" the DOE instructed principals that they can deny Religious Observance (RO) days to teachers who want to take "Holy Thursday" and "Easter Monday". The DOE instructed the principals that if the teachers insist on taking the "RO" days that they can either dock them pay for those days or issuing a Letter-To-The-File. Historically teachers never had trouble taking "RO" days and while principals can say no, they rarely ever refuse. However, this is the new DOE, populated by non-educators who seem to think that they know best.

Luckily, Randi (I am shocked again) and gang were alerted to the DOE directive to the principals and went to court and received a restraining order prohibiting the DOE from refusing "RO" days for teachers who requested them. The DOE was outraged. The restraining order took discretion out of the Principal's hand and was a violation of the contract. Too bad DOE, you got greedy. When you are given an inch and you try to take a mile, you can expect consequences for your actions. Of course the judge slapped you down and for good reason.

You would think this crises is over, right? Wrong, the DOE has appealed the restraining order as a violation of the DOE's right to determine if the "RO" would not affect the school. If the DOE wins the appeal then all teachers who took off for "Holy Thursday" and "Easter Monday" can be docked pay or receive a Letter-To-The-File if the principal claims that they would have denied the teacher permission to take the two "RO" days off.

I can just laugh how Tweed always states they want quality teachers but when it comes to "sticking it" to the teachers, they always find a way. Teacher disrespect is the slogan from these non-educators from Tweed.

Have the UFT & DOE Weakened Our Due Process Protections Under the State 3020-a Laws?

There is little question that more and more teachers are being removed from their classrooms (315 in 2003 to 757 in 2007) and many of them are charged under State education law 3020-a. These teachers are removed from the classroom and eventually reassigned to a Teacher Reassignment Center, commonly known as the "rubber room". Some of these teachers are removed from the classroom for serious felony charges like having sex with a student, hitting a student, selling drugs, or stealing school funds. However, these serious charges are probably 5% of the total number of teachers in the "rubber rooms". Approximately 50% of these teachers are there for incompetence and the rest for minor or frivolous misconduct issues (of course some teachers are there under false accusations), primarily due to an administrator who doesn't like that teacher.

Regardless of why, the teachers find themselves in the "rubber room", most of them can expect 3020-a charges to be filled against them. The New York State Education Law allows tenured teachers to have an impartial arbitration hearing to determine the remedy of the alleged charges against them. The remedy can range from an acquittal to termination. However, over the years the UFT and DOE have weakened these teacher due process protections that tenured teachers enjoy under New York State laws. How were they weakened? Let me count the ways.

First, The NYC version of the 3020-a process has selected 20 arbitrators who hear all the 3020-a cases for the New York City Teachers. To keep their jobs, their decisions can be influenced by the UFT and DOE who pay them. Therefore, these arbitrators will tend to "split the baby" when it comes to the remedy. The result is very few aquittals or terminations but fines or suspensions are likely. Under the State 3020-a outside New York City the arbitrator is only allowed to hear one case every two years. Therefore, they do not rely on the income and are more likely to come up with the proper decision.

Second, Under State 3020-a the teacher is allowed to reject an arbitrator. based upon the arbitrator's record. However, no such teacher choice is allowed under the UFT & DOE agreed process. The teacher is stuck with whatever arbitrator is randomly selected for the case.

Third, with teacher incompetence cases, the State 3020-a process allows for a three arbitrator panel. No such three arbitrator panel exists under the NYC 3020-a process.

Fourth, under State 3020-a, there must be a pre-hearing conference to ensure that a list of witnesses are exchanged and the charges are finalized. However, under the NYC version of 3020-a there are cases where there are no pre-hearings and the case is started without the teacher or attorney aware of the witnesses until the last minute.

Fifth, in the NYC 3020-a process the arbitrators are teamed up with a NYSUT lawyer and a DOE lawyer. This trio will be together for up to three years. That to me, is an uncomfortable familiarity at the expense of the teacher. The State 3020-a has nothing like this approach.

Finally, only in the NYC version of the 3020-a process can teachers be suspended without pay or health benefits, for non-felony issues. In fact, in some cases hearsay is only needed to suspend a teacher for up to three months. This "probable cause" section of the contract has resulted in many teachers being suspended based upon hearsay evidence.

Presently, there is a lawsuit filed by teachers4action.com that is trying to address some, if not most of these issues. However, this lawsuit is in it's early stages and whatever comes of it will be in the distant future. I can only hope that this lawsuit will result in the teachers regaining their due process rights under the State 3020-a regulations.

Have the UFT & DOE weakened our due process rights under 3020-a? You better believe they have!

The 8th Grade Social Promotion Problem

The Kleinberg administration has rammed through a vote that stops the social promotion of 8th graders. While I usually disagree with the DOE position. Here, I reluctantly agree that 8th graders should not be automatically promoted to the high schools. As a high school teacher I have seen too many of these not-ready-for-high school 8th graders fail academically and drop out. While I understand that as many as 18,000 8th graders may be "left back". The alternative is worse, social promotion.

Presently, only 1,200 8th graders are not promoted to the high schools. I am shocked that we have that many 8th graders "left back". Why? Because the middle school principals are always trying to push as many not-ready-for-high school 8th graders into the high school, knowing they are unable to academically succeed in the high school setting. Time and again I hear stories from middle school teachers how the principal will pressure them to change failing grades to passing, just to get the student out of the school. The most common statement by the principals is "do you want 17 year old boys with 12 year olds?" Therefore, many of the not-ready-for-high school 8th graders are promoted anyway. Let the high schools handle them.

The supporters of "social promotion" have only themselves to blame for this new policy. Many of these supporters don't see the big picture and insist that with extra help, the students can catch up to their peers. The problem with this outlook is that it is not realistic. Yes, if there was in place an intensive program in a self-contained, small class structure, some of these students may eventually succeed. However, in the real world of the DOE this transitional program does not exist in the high schools, except in special education programs. The transitional program necessary to assist the not-ready-for-high school 8th graders cost money, lots of money and we all know that the DOE will not be funding programs like this anytime soon.

Realistically, the Kleinberg either or proposal pits social promotion supporters against the grade retention groups and since there is no money allocated for the programs necessary to help the not-ready-for-high school 8th graders. I find myself reluctantly agreeing with the DOE in this case. Ugh!

DOE's Children Last Program Continues - Stops Elementary School's Pizza Day

The micromanagement by the DOE just continues. Now those wonderful non-educators have told PS 193 in Whitestone Queens that their twenty year tradition of "Pizza Day" is a violation of the DOE regulations on what type of food can be used in the school.

The PTA has been using Pizza Day as a fund-raising tool to supplement school supplies, teacher grants, and after school activities. Pizza Day generates $200 a month to fund these activities and this money is even more important as the schools suffer from budget cuts. Pizza Day is done once a month and the children give $5.00 to participate in it. The DOE first told the school in January that Pizza Day violated the nutrition standards of the DOE, then the DOE changed that reason by claiming that it violated the Chancellor's regulations on the sale of food inside the school. However, when the New York Post reporter interviewed a DOE official. That official claimed that the PTA is not allowed to have more than two fund-raising events in a school year. What nonsense! To understand what these parents went through, just see what the Vice-President of the PTA said about the DOE.

"They (DOE) were not nice about it," Tortora said. "They were obnoxious and nasty and condescending, over a pizza party. They told us we were getting away with it for way too long. It's a joke."

Even the local politician is outraged. Here is what City Councilman Tony Avella said in helping the parents fight the pizza ban.

"It's just plain stupid," he said. "This is just one more example of the bureaucratic red tape that comes out of the DOE. It's bizarre . . . It's amazing that they're focusing on an issue like this rather than cleaning up the waste and inefficiency and making sure the kids are getting a good education."

Let's see what the DOE did to hurt the children.

First, they took away a 20-year-old fund-raising event that gave the school $200 a month for school supplies, teacher grants, and after school activities.

Second, they took away an activity that the school's students looked forward to.

Finally, they showed the students that their wants and needs are not important when it interferes with the bureaucracy of the DOE.

Is it any wonder that I call it the DOE's children last program?.

Yet Another Nasty DOE Surprise & Randi Is Shocked

In the New York Daily News today was an article that talked about how the DOE will cut their budget by 5% for the 2008-09 school year. Apparently, two of the three options concern the Joel Klein supported "Fair Student Funding" (FSF) program.

For you readers that are not familiar to the FSF program. The FSF program assigns money to each student and allows the principal to control the school budget, based upon the FSF program. The good part of this program is that more money is attached to high-need students and schools. However, less money is assigned to high preforming students. Therefore, school budgets in the better schools will be reduced under FSF. The use of the FSF program puts budget pressure on the schools, especially the better schools, and has many deficiencies. However, the real cost under FSF will be the elimination of highly-paid, experienced teachers in many schools.

A deal that Randi Weingarten worked out with Joel Klein would allow schools to hire highly-paid veteran teachers without penalty to the school budget for the 2008-09 school year. However, for the 2009-10 school year and beyond the school budget would be penalized if too many highly-paid veteran teachers were on that school's payroll. Why worry? That's when Kleinberg will be a lame duck and a more teacher friendly DOE will soon emerge. Surprise, surprise, the DOE is seriously considering reneging on the deal with the UFT. What else is new? This blog has pointed out how almost on a monthly basis Randi is shocked by the agreements the DOE has worked out with the UFT, only to have Tweed ignore or renege on those agreements.

If the FSF program is implemented without the UFT negotiated agreements, look for an explosion of highly paid ATR's. Why would a principal hire a highly paid teacher when he could get two newbie teachers for the same price? Further, by not hiring these highly paid teachers the principal will have more money in the school budget to fund his/her pet projects. What about the children? Wouldn't a quality teacher in the classroom be the most important item for student learning? Most educators would think so. However, in this DOE it is all about the money.

Remember it is not children first, it's children last in the Kleinberg DOE.

Disciplinary Letter-In-File (LIF) , Is It Subject To A 3020-a Hearing?

A little noticed event happened a while ago when four Brooklyn teachers received disciplinary letters in their files (LIF) for not reporting on another teacher who may, or may not have improperly touched students. The four teachers sued in court since the UFT negotiated away the right to grieve LIF. The NYS Supreme Court judges agreed with the four teachers that since disciplinary LIF cannot be grieved, the teachers should have their LIF's expunged or brought before an arbitrator under the state 3020-a regulations. The judges rightly determined that the teachers due process rights were violated. The DOE has appealed the judges decision to the NYS Appellate Court and if they lose, the consequences can be earth shattering.

Why are the judges decision significant? Because if it stands, the DOE and UFT will need to pay arbitrators to hear all disciplinary LIF's if the teacher demands it. Can you imagine the cost and chaos that will occur if all teachers appeal their disciplinary LIF's? As is, there are not enough arbitrators to hear the existing 3020-a cases, which is why there are two year waits by teachers presently in the 3020-a process. Many of us were slow to realize the implications of the four teachers winning their disciplinary LIF lawsuit. However, it is now becoming clear the havoc it will do to the 2005 contract provision of ungrievable LIF. In other words it looks like the lack of a grievance for a disciplinary LIF, agreed by the UFT & DOE, has backfired. The ICE-UFT blog has reported on the lawsuit previously but seemed not to realize the implications if the DOE loses the appeal. The article can be found on the link below.

http://iceuftblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/cant-grieve-letter-to-your-file-sue.html

The destruction that the 2005 contract has had on the teachers is well documented by many education bloggers, including myself, and I will not rehash it here. However, the judges decision may be the first significant step in reversing these terrible and punitive provisions of the 2005 contract. One can only hope that the DOE appeal is shot down and with it, the ungreivable LIF.

The Ideal DOE Teacher - Young, Inexperienced, & Clueless

During the Kleinberg years it has been increasingly obvious that despite their emphasis on test preparation at the expense of a full educational experience, the federal test scores have shown little change since they took over in 2002. The question is why haven't the test scores improved despite the almost single minded emphasis on test preparation? While the answer seems complex to some, for me it is simple. It is the quality of the teacher.

Under the Kleinberg administration the ideal teacher have the following characteristics.

1. Inexperienced and lower paid.

2. Less than 50 years of age.

3. Thankful about having a job.

4. Unaware of his or her rights under the union contract.

5. Never complain about working conditions or the classroom environment.

6. Just teaches the students and let somebody else handle their problems.

7. Follow blindly all dictates by administrators, even when they make no sense.

8. Clueless to what good teaching techniques are.

In my mind the above characteristics are of a mediocre teacher, the type of teacher that will never make a difference in the lives of his or her students. However, this is the type of teacher that the DOE wants teaching the children.

Gone are the days that teachers can challenge the student academically without that teacher endangering his or her career. Remember, a student accusation, however, ridiculous, will get a teacher removed and investigated. If a teacher even tries to get into the student's face about his or her classroom behavior, you can be sure that the student will retaliate and since the DOE always will side with the student, guess what happens to the teacher? Right, the "rubber room". Is it any wonder that the number of reassigned teacher goes up every year? Therefore, as the DOE pushes older teachers to retire, whether due to administrator harassment, deteriorating classroom conditions, or teacher disrespect, they will be replaced by younger & inexperienced teachers who, for the most part, are clueless on what quality teaching is. Is it any wonder that the test scores don't improve?

What Happened To Our Children's Social Skills?

I read an article in my local section of Newsday about how little today's children play with each other and it reminded me of my preteen, tween, and teen years. Presently, the boys seemed to be always playing video games while the girls are usually on their cellphone or on the Internet. With the heightened awareness of strangers trolling after our children has resulted in adult supervised play. Soccer, Dance, sleepovers, basketball are all adult supervised activities. Gone are the days that the children will come home, drop their books, and go play with the neighbourhood children. Now it is going on the Internet, watching TV, talking on the cellphone, or playing video games. There is very little social interaction, except by electronic means.

During my preteen and early teen years in the Bronx, I used to drop off my school books and meet my friends to play outside. At times, I would take my little sister along and she would always run into people she knew in the park. My friends and I would play a range of games such as box ball, stoop ball, skully, punch ball, and stick ball. We always found other children at the park to play with or against. We learned to negotiate when choosing sides, auguring plays and know when to stop teasing so the teased child wouldn't cry (or not cry so much). Were there fights and loud arguments? Of course there were, that is how we learned our social skills. With no adults around we had to work it out ourselves.

During nights with no school and in the warmer weather all the kids in the neighborhood would play hide & seek, Ring-a-leveo, or capture the flag. In this case I can proudly say we practiced "no child left behind" No thought was given to what might happen to us and nothing did, except for an occasional older teen giving us a hard time. Were we naive? Probably, however, this is how we played in the city. These social skills were necessary and evolved in even the shyest children, as they learned that they would be selected and be part of the group and feel important.

As a tween I was very much into stick ball and played it almost all the time on schooldays. The stick ball court (a wall with a box drawn on it) was about two blocks from my house and everybody in the neighborhood would hear my mother yell from the sixth floor kitchen window "Eric it's time for dinner". The stick ball game was over and the kids playing in the park knew it was 6:00pm, time to go home. Yes my mom had a very loud voice, you can hear it for three blocks or about 600 feet into the park, including the playground. Who needed cellphones when my mom was the the best communicating device in the neighborhood!

Now we watch our children get together in adult supervised organized play with the adult doing the picking and telling the children what to do. Where are the games that the children play in which they can develop their social skills? Is it any wonder that cooperative learning is a tough concept for the student to handle? You must have social skills if you want the students to work together. I find these social skills sorely lacking and worry about this generation as they approach adulthood.

By the way, most of my punch ball games were played in the school yard during recess and lunch. The school yard now has trailers in it and the students are stuck in the cafeteria or their classroom. See a problem?

How Do We Compare To Paterson New Jersey?

New York City politicians are always calling us the best and the brightest. However, the real truth is the Kleinberg administration is always trying to do "education on the cheap". The result is that the New York City teacher is overworked, under appreciated, disrespected, and underpaid. Underpaid? Yes, underpaid. Many of the surrounding school districts are head and shoulders better paid than us. As for days worked, the average Long Island school district works 184 days a year and less, if snow days are not used. However, instead of comparing the New York City Teacher work and pay scale to the surrounding Long Island or Westchester schools districts (which we are inferior to), I decided to compare a typical working-class, blue collar school district in New jersey to our work and pay scale. The area I selected is Paterson New Jersey. A city that is heavily minority (82% black & Hispanic with many Middle Easterners making up most of the rest) and has a household income of $33,000, compared to $41,000 in New York City. A much poorer city indeed. However, they treat their teachers better than New York City treats us.

First, the Paterson, New jersey teacher works a maximum of 185 days compared to the 192 days the New York City teacher works this year. Further, the Paterson New Jersey Teacher has 5 half-days compared to "0" for the New York City teacher.

Second, the Paterson teacher pay scale ranges from $47,000 to $97,000 compared to our present-day pay scale of $43,000 to $95,000

Finally, the Paterson New Jersey teachers are allowed to attend workshops and professional development programs during school time. Rarely, can a New York City teacher leave the classroom for these sessions.

While I'm sure that the Paterson teachers suffer from similar afflictions as us such as gangs, unmotivated students, parent disinterest, poor classroom supplies, and vindictive administrators. It certainly appears that for a city always on the brink of bankruptcy, they seem to treat their teachers better than New York City treats us.

Who is the blame for allowing the city to disrespect us and for subjecting us to the shoddy treatment? I give you one guess. You want a hint? The First letter starts with an "R" and the last letter ends with a "i", with two letters in between.

DOE's Children Last Program Cobtinues -it's About The Money

There is a discussion going on in District 75 that the DOE wants to reduce it's size or even eliminate it. For the few people who don't know what District 75 is, it's the special education district. Therefore, this district is a very expensive part of the DOE since special eduction students need more and expensive services.

Already the DOE has proposed separating the deaf and blind program from District 75 and give it to the local school principals.
Now there are discussions about removing site 7 & 8 students from District 75 and send them to the local schools. What's interesting about sending the site 7 & 8 students back to local schools is that these students were sent from these very same schools because of their emotional disabilities. Why would they do better back in those schools from which they were sent from?

Makes no sense? Why bring students who were in a self contained restricted environment into a less controlled environment which they couldn't handle it previously? The reason is money. It can cost almost three times the expenses than for the general education student. Therefore, if you can dump these District 75 students into the general education population you can save money. So what it may cause classroom chaos with these special needs students getting frustrated and causing disruptions in the classroom. True, some special education students can be mainstreamed. However, at present, that is a case by case basis. not the proposed mass inclusion of these students.

By giving the local school district responsibility for the special education student this will allow the DOE to reduce funding since the local school principal will fight tooth and nail to put the special education student in the least restricted environment as possible (mainstreaming and inclusion classes). Thereby, saving precious budget funds for enrichment and after school programs rather than spending the money on paras, and other support personnel for the special education students. The result is less money for the local schools than was given to the District 75 schools.

I hope that District 75 doesn't follow the fate of District 79 and I don't believe it will. However, look for Tweed to squeeze any money it can out of the schools and if it hurts the children? So what, it is the DOE's children last program.

Updated Blogger List

I was finally able to update my blogger list, thanks to NYC educator's help. The updated blogger list was created after a serious investigation of the articles of these bloggers. The bloggers I selected may or may not have me on their blogging list. However, my final cut was based upon how well they represented the classroom teacher environment. My blogroll has some new and very interesting blogs. Newly added to my blogroll are:

Have a Gneiss Day - A very interesting blog that cuts to the truth and stakes out positions similar to mine.

Under Assault - One of my favorites with the articles providing insight to the problems of the New York City classroom.

Snytactac Gymnastics - I admit at first I didn't like the blogger articles, too light and too much like another popular blogger who seems more concerned with the blogger's personal life and not the classroom. However, I started to appreciate this blogger more as the articles became more focused on the school environment. Now one of my favorites.

Norm'snotes/ed notes humor - Let's say it's good reading and quite funny at times.

Life After The Rubber Room - A very interesting and detailed account of a survivor from the "Rubber Room". A must read.

Ed the Apple - A very in-depth and serious discussion on how the DOE affects the NYC public schools. A must read for teachers who want to see the big picture. Yes, I know the blog is(was) Unity flunky Peter Goodman's blog. However, he was the only one on Edwize that spoke the truth about Tweed and, unlike Leo Casey, had readable and interesting articles.

Untamed Teacher - A teacher at war with the administration, certainly not a suck up.

Diane Ravitch Articles - One of the best education writers who usually has opinion articles in the New York Sun.

NYC Public School Parents - These bloggers see past the Tweed "bullshit" and cuts to the chase.

I am sorry to see Edzup go. I think it was really funny and the authors should really consider it's revival. It must have been a happy day for Unity when it disappeared. I also took off other bloggers who no longer interest me and have lost their way in the classroom.

Finally, I would like the following people start their own blog.

17 years to go (or is that 15)?

Schoolgal (I know she is part of NYC educator's blog, its time to go solo)

Unitymustgo

Thanks to NYC educator for being there and keeping Unity on their toes.

What Will Really Happen TO The ATR's?

One of the questions the union gets. Can ATR's be terminated? Not likely, even under Randi's giveback contracts. Further, it is highly unlikely that she will ever agree to an ATR time limit (18 months in Chicago)? However, it is not impossible that an ATR time limit will be negotiated based upon her past performance as president of the UFT. Will teacher tenure be negotiable? Not a chance. Even Randi the sellout wouldn't stand for that. I hope.

However, the DOE budget changes will sharply limit the chance of experienced (highly-paid) ATR's from, obtaining a classroom teaching position. That is because the DOE will no longer adjust the school budget based upon teacher salaries. Presently, if a principal hires a highly-qualified teacher who makes $80,000 a year and that person replaces a $50,000 a year teacher, the budget for the school is increased by $30,000.

Under Fair Student Funding (FSF) that won't be true anymore. In In the 2008-09 school year if the principal decides to hire a $80,000 a year teacher to replace a $50,000 a year teacher, the school budget would have $30,000 less to pay for other school priorities. Further, the school will be accountable to fund any future raises. Therefore, the school would have even less money for other activities.

While the DOE may delay the FSF budget until the 2009-10 school year by adjusting the schoolwide average teacher pay, eventually, it will result in financial pressure for principals to hire newbie (cheap) teachers. Yes, the DOE claims that since school principals can never pocket any surplus funds, there is no incentive not to hire experienced teachers since the principals are graded on their student achievement. However, what the DOE fails to understand is that many principals will be happy to fund their "pet projects" at the expense of the classroom teacher. For example, the principal can hire one of those highly paid consulting firms to run after school learning and staff development programs. Therefore, if the principal wants to fund these expensive "extras, they will be inclined to hire cheaper teachers to ensure the money is available.

The UFT should have immediately filed a lawsuit to protect excessed teachers and ensure that no newbie teacher can be hired in their content specialty area until all excessed teachers are placed. Instead the UFT begged the DOE to reconsider and Kleinberg appeared to throw Randi a bone by delaying the implementation of FSF for a year. Big deal, what happens after that? Many principals look long-range and don't want to add more salary. Therefore, look for the ATR crises to worsen under FSF as Randi becomes the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) president.

Thanks Randi for protecting the classroom teacher. With friends like you we don't need enemies.

DOE's Children Last Program Continues

According to Peter Goodman in Edwize (yes I do read Edwize even though I no longer leave comments on them) the actual budget cuts are closer to 4% than the 1.75% claimed by the DOE. Because most of the money are spent by the schools early in the school year, the schools have very little, if any excess funds. Take into account the loss of students in the high schools by the 2nd semester and you have a potential disaster in the making.

Beach Channel High School has to eliminate up to 10 teaching positions and increase class sizes. The budget cuts are as high as $447,000 for some large, overcrowded high schools. In the spirit of No Children Left Behind, no school is immune from these budget cuts. Where are the cuts at Tweed Central? How many managers, lawyers, and educrats (a dying breed at Tweed) were laid off? I venture not many, if any. Pushing paper is more important than classroom learning.

Time and again budget cuts are placed on the schools and translated to the classroom, while budget surpluses seem to be spent on the "flavor of the day" programs that highly-paid private consultants run that don't show any classroom improvement.

Teacher disrespect is evident, look at the reduce parking permit program by Bloomberg. It turns out that many of the reduced parking permits were to be from teachers, not the bureaucrats. Further, why not eliminate the ATRs? By placing teachers in the classroom instead of paying them as subs. you reduce class size and eliminate the need to hire newbie teachers.

It is a real pity that Kleinberg starves the classroom and disrespects it's teachers and gets away with it. If only the public, politicians, and the newspapers would wake up and smell the coffee.
Well the clock is ticking and Kleinberg will be gone in 2010, I hope.

DOE Wants Essays From New Teachers- What Should The Essay Say?

According to the DOE all new teachers who want to work in the New York City public schools must write an essay on why they want to teach in the classroom. Therefore, I believe my essay would most certainly qualify for employment by Tweed and those wonderful Leadership Academy principals looking to hire me.

My name is Cleo. I am a 22 year old liberal arts major and have made it through the "Teaching Fellows" program. I am ready to make a difference in the classroom. I have heard about all the negative things about teaching in the New York City public schools and am ready for the challenge.

I'm happy to handle as many students that the school administrators see fit to give me. Thirty-four to a class? No problem, give me more students. Load me up with more non-teaching duties? I just love the idea, I don't need prep or lunch periods. I will even volunteer for after-school and Saturday programs without pay!

I have heard that there is a disrespect of teachers by the DOE. However, I believe if I work hard and respond to my school administrator's call to jump by saying how high? I will be respected. Student discipline? I know that my administrators will always believe me over the student. Everybody knows that kids lie. Right?

I will give that extra effort to interact with my students and be personable and engaging. I'm sure my administrators want me to work closely with my students. I will be a loyal employee to the school and earn my administrator's respect and loyalty in return. I'm sure my administrators will support me against student allegations.

I have such good ideas that my school administrators will just love my lesson plans as they will enhance the curriculum. I refuse to believe that my administrators will require me to "teach to the test". No right thinking educator subscribes to the "one-size-fits-all" approach. Right?

Come to think of it. What teacher would want to put up with teacher disrespect, lack of student discipline, large class sizes, a hostile working environment, and the unbelievable (but believed anyway) accusations of students. On second thought take this job and shove it.

DOE's Children Last Continues - School Budget Cuts

Here will go again. The DOE was told to cut the budget and instead of getting rid of highly-paid consultants, F status do-nothing administrators, or reduce managerial overhead, they have demanded a 1.75% cut of the school budget. Now a 1.75% budget cut may not sound like much. However, the budget cuts result in higher class sizes, fewer enrichment activities, and a vastly reduced after school program. Worse, many schools will have to fire teachers and combine classes. Children first? Try children last.

The school budget cut is as high as $400,000 in the big high schools and is going to be painful to students and staff alike. However, the DOE has decided to protect their cherished programs and the high salaried people running it. Therefore, the school budget cuts rather than managerial overhead reductions.

Remember, under Kleinberg there are thousands of ATR's who should be in the classroom teaching. Instead, Kleinberg encouraged principals to hire inexperienced (and cheaper) teachers causing the DOE to pay these ATR's for doing day-to-day substituting. This is a waste of between 100 & 200 million dollars a year. Further, add the nearly one thousand teachers removed or doing clerical work while waiting for 3020-a charges and you have another 60 million dollars wasted. While some people should have 3020-a charges filed most do not and having them detained in "rubber rooms" for over two years with full pay is a terrible waste of talent and money.

I can only hope that Randi & gang stop with their talk and start acting, like filing a lawsuit Of course I'm not holding my breath for that to happen,

P.S. Sorry about my blogger links I tried to update them and lost them all. I tried edit me and nothing doing. Anybody have any suggestions?

The DOE Must Save 324 Million Dollars In The Budget - Here Are Some Ideas

Bloomberg has told Joel Klein that he must find 324 million dollars in budget cuts. The question is how will the DOE do this.? Will they reduce administrative overhead? Eliminate no-bid inflated contracts? Maybe cancel consultant services? Not likely. Knowing the DOE, look for many of these cuts to find their way into the classroom as Kleinberg plays "rob Peter to pay Paul" game as they try to save their pet projects at the expense of the children.

However, I do know a way to save the money and improve the classroom environment at the same time.

First, stop hiring new teachers before all ATR's are placed. Millions of dollars are wasted as experienced, older (and yes higher salaried) teachers are used as substitutes, costing the school district not only money but wasting demonstrated teaching ability as well. Instead the DOE insisted on hiring newbies who are at the beginnig of a long learning curve at the expense of the children.

Second, stop pulling teachers out of the classroom, based upon frivolous charges. Only in New York City are teachers subject to 3020-a hearings based upon non-criminal incidents. Presently, many of these teachers can spend over two years in the "rubber rooms" being fully paid and end up with a small fine or a letter to the file. Meanwhile, the person who is replacing that teacher is also being paid a full salary. Talk about wasting money! A better way is to have an independent arbitrator who talks to both sides and decides if the teacher warrants removal. This procedure will greatly reduce the teacher removal rates and add money to the school budget.

Third, the dramatic increase in teacher incompetence cases are well documented. Not only is Kleinberg doing their best in trying to get rid of these teachers, they are spending a million dollars to setup a "gotcha squad" who's prime purpose is to fire teachers for incompetence. Here again a master arbitrator can be used to determine if the school has exhausted all remedies before the teachers is charged.

Finally, reduce the administrative ranks from the district and the borough offices. Many of these administrators exist because they are friends or family of big shots in the city and are a drain to the DOE budget. Just try to call these offices for guidance and see how you are shifted from one bureaucrat to another without getting an answer.

I believe that if the above items are implemented, the DOE will have more money for the classroom. Of cause what do I know, I'm only a teacher


Thanks to NYC educator for suppling me with his graphic on budget cuts.

Rubber Room Teachers Sue The DOE - Where Is The UFT?

The ever increasing teachers being reassigned to the "rubber room" have decided to fight back. On Monday January 21st, fifteen teachers have filed suit that the DOE's abuse of the contract has caused an unreasonable increase in reassigned teachers. While I'm not optimistic that the teachers will win their lawsuit, it's about time that somebody took on the DOE.

For the delusional who think the UFT is fighting for them. Guess again. The UFT reminds me of the Kennedy administration when they told the Cuban refugees that they will support them during the "Bay of Pigs" invasion. When the Cuban refugees landed on the beach and were subject to Cuban firepower, the Americans were nowhere to be found. Oops, did we say we had your back? I guess there was a misunderstanding.

The UFT allows the DOE to violate the contract when it sees fit. How many grievances are not heard in a timely fashion? How many teachers are not charged in the period specified in the contract? Finally, why does the UFT allow principals to remove teachers on frivolous charges?

Randi Weingarten, rather than supporting the lawsuit by the teachers, has stated that she is bringing her own proposals to the DOE. Nice try Randi. Talk is cheap and so far the only thing we got from you is talk, talk, talk. Results? None to my knowledge. The UFT reminds me of the doctor who said the operation was successful. However, the patient died.

It seems every month the DOE comes up with some anti-teacher initiative that surprises the UFT. Why?

Until the UFT becomes proactive, look for the DOE to continue to ride roughshod on the disrespected rank and file.

Why Aren't ATR's Placed First Before New Teachers Are Hired?

In the real world most companies want older and experienced workers. These workers are the most dependable and mentor the younger and inexperienced workers. Further, the experienced worker is associated with good work habits, loyalty, and trusted by the company. However, in the New York City school system the older and experienced teacher is treated with disrespect and are encouraged to retire or resign. Many of these teachers find themselves as ATR's in another school as their school has been closed and the newer schools don't hire them. In fact many of the small schools have very few teachers with at least five years of teaching experience. This is especially true of the schools run by the principals that came from Kleinberg's leadership academy.

Just look at the "rubber rooms" where most of the teachers are 45 and over with a minimum of ten years of experience. When an administrator wants to get rid of you, they only need to accuse the teacher of improper conduct and the teacher is removed. it doesn't matter if the teacher didn't do anything, just say the teacher did, that's all it takes.

When the teachers are released from the "rubber rooms" (and more are arriving every day) they are added to the ATR ranks. How does our union respond to this? Well they say you still have jobs. In the Kleinberg's DOE more and more experienced teachers are being replaced by newbies. Is it any wonder that despite the constant test preparation grades are flat?
\
Too bad our union does not go to court to stop this abuse. Instead Randi and gang just talk, and talk, and talk as the DOE marginalizes the experienced teacher.

The "Probable Cause" Bomb By The DOE & The Union's Ignorance

The DOE has apparently expanded the definition of the "probable cause" section for teachers subject to 3020a proceedings. The "probable cause" section allows the DOE to suspend teachers for two months without pay. The union informed us that the "probable cause" section would only be used against teachers subject to felony arrest, sexual touching or repeated sexual talk. Seems fair if the police have a probable cause to arrest you or you deliberately touched a student in an inappropriate area (breast, ass, privates, inside thighs) or you repeatedly talked sexual things with the students you can be subject to the "probable cause" section of the contract.

However, lately the DOE and their investigating arms (OSI & SCI) are carving new ground on what is subject to the "probable cause" section", thanks to the failure of the UFT & NYSUT to challenge their perverted interpretation , that any touch or statement can, and will be determined to be sexual in nature.

Praise a student and use a word like kiss in a sentence and you can be subject to sexual talk.

Touch a shoulder or arm and you can be ac cussed of sexual touching.

You try to challenge a student to do better and the student doesn't like it, you can be ac cussed of sexual harassment.

Sounds crazy. How can anybody equate the above actions with the original intent of the "probable cause" section? Unfortunately Randi and her flunky, Leo Casey, convinced the members that only the most serious misconduct would apply to the "probable cause" section of the contract. When in fact it only takes an OSI or SCI investigator to state that he or she thinks it was sexual. Sure the teachers are allowed to try to rebut the SCI investigators (apparently not the OSI investigators). However, very few teachers win. The result is that the DOE has expanded the pool of teachers subject to the "probable cause". section.

Why haven't the UFT & NYSUT fought this expansion of the "probable cause" definition? I don't know. Maybe they don't care. Or worse, they are in agreement with the DOE and to keep the peace with the DOE, they just sacrifice some teachers. Whatever the reasons the unions are aiding and abetting the DOE in their attack on teachers.

While Randi dances with Bloomie her teachers are being suspended without pay for actions that no right-thinking people would find wrong. Thanks Randi, thanks a lot.