Francesco Portelos, tenured teacher in Néw York City, was just exonerated after a suspension that lasted 826 days. The Néw York City Department of Education tried to fire him, but he refused to leave. Nearly $1 million was spent in this long ordeal. Just recently, Portelos won, was exonerated, given a $10,000 fine for some minor offense, and restored to his classroom. No, wait, he was not restored to his classsropm; he is being rotated from class to class, without an assignment.
Here is the latest:
Subject: Big news from NYC Educator Exile. A Big Score for Teacher Tenure!
From: mrportelos@gmail.com
To: daughtersofbukowski@gmail.com
Good afternoon fellow educators,
Just sharing exciting news here in NYC. After the NYC DOE tried so hard to fire me for over two years, after 826 days they found out they failed. This is why tenure is important. Let the corporate reformers know. Thanks for your support!
DOE vs Portelos Termination Verdict Is In 826 Days After They Took Aim to Fire.
Francesco A. Portelos
Parent
Educator
IS 49 UFT Chapter Leader
EducatorFightsBack.org
DTOE.org
“In the end, we will not remember the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” -Martin Luther King Jr.
Yu
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The website doesn’t give much information – it’s pretty much assumed we know the backstory, which I, for one, do not. He also says he’ll explain that $10,000 fine at a later time. Sorry, but that’s a substantial penalty for a “minor offense”, so I need to know more about that before I cheer too loudly.
I’m happy for him that he’s been returned to the classroom, which does seem to indicate exoneration. But there’s something more going on than he’s saying, at least in the linked post.
He’s talked about this case for years; he was one scapegoated on petty allegations. Lots and lots of NYC teachers pay a “fine” when they “win” these tribunals. I doubt he will even notice it much because he has all of that back pay coming, and they will probably take the money out of that.
I have to correct myself since this teacher was apparently paid for his time on administrative leave, so he will pay a penalty simply for existing, so it will hurt him financially and tell him not to do it again. Most teachers railroaded out are on unpaid leave and are literally starved into settling.
Sorry for the delay, but I’m back to teaching and not sitting around for 7 hrs a day anymore. Here are the reasons why I was fined:
A Case for Tenure- A 3 Part Series http://protectportelos.org/a-case-for-tenure/
What exactly did he do? That’s a long time to fight and a lot of people would have moved on to another school system.
Francesco, I don’t think that “winning” a coordinated 826 day assault against you by NYC Public School can in any way be deemed a victory for tenure. Because you and your family have been able…so far… to survive this sustained attack doesn’t mean that the average teacher can do the same on their own where there continues to be a complete absence of union support for you and these other teachers. It is also worth mentioning- something you and I have already talked about- that once the assault on a teacher starts, it rarely ends. Rather, there is a strong likelihood that you will again be subjected to a new series of bogus charges in the not to distant future by the bullies that initially targeted you, since they have deep pocket and have paid no price for their initial assault on you.
More important than the rather tenuous defense that tenure offers a teacher would be the collective indignation and coordinated response of our teachers unions in defense of our clearly defined rights under collective bargaining agreements and both state and federal law. It is the complete lack of this that has only empowered the district’s assault on more and more teachers whose only crime is there status at the top of the salary scale, the cost of their benefits, their disability, or their tenacious desire to put students needs above the self-dealing financial agenda of district administration and those corporate interests that keep them in power. Lenny@perdaily.com
Almost all teachers forced out by districts take severance agreements called “settlements.” It really doesn’t increase their chances of getting a teaching job elsewhere thanks to “do not rehire” designations and intrusive job applications asking if you resigned in lieu of dismissal. However, some cannot afford to go without money for months on end, as school districts LOVE to drag these phony hearings out so that teachers will take the puny severance agreements in hopes they don’t sue in civil court.
I want to know the facts in this case as well. I’ve never known a teacher to get a $10,000 fine so I’d like to know what that was for.
That said, I love it when teachers fight injustice and I am almost always thrilled when a teacher wins.
Arbitrators in NYC routinely fine teachers brought up on charges, even while they dismiss those charges, as a way of allowing the DOE to save face (especially so in Francesco’s case, since it was so high profile and because the DOE was so invested in getting him, even going so far as to have him arrested on trumped charges that were immediately dismissed by a judge), and to keep from being dismissed themselves.
If this is true, I hope this teacher files a civil suit against the district, if he can.
K-12 teachers don’t have “tenure,” only the right to a basically bogus hearing. The problem is this teacher will have a target on his back for the rest of his career. At least he is one of the lucky ones who got to resume a career; more than a few of us around the country who were scapegoated out have never been able to work again in a regular job, let alone teaching.
For every one of these very few teachers who go through and “win” these sham tribunals, there are three or four who lose them. Very few teachers are “guilty” of whatever garbage a principal alleges they have done.
More about Francesco Portelos is here: http://www.endteacherabuse.org/Portelos.html
…and here: http://Educatorfightsback.org
It stopped being MY fight a long time ago. It’s OUR fight.
That is true. Every targeted teacher represents teachers as a group.
Francesco, you truly are a man of the people.
Thank you for thinking collectively instead of the typical average American mentality of me, myself, and I . . . . .
We should all follow your example with regard to your mindset and activism.
Francesco bravely persevered, in the face of vicious and absurd targeting, when most would have given up. I know I would have.
Teachers in NYC and elsewhere owe him a debt of gratitude for carving out a space for teachers to fight back.
Michael, don’t think people like you, Norm, Diane, Leonie, CTS and MORE, didn’t play a role in inspiring me to fight.
What is the deal with the fine? I’ve never heard of such a thing. Does the district have to pay a fine also? If not why not? Talk about a deterrent to teachers to not contest these bogus banana republic tribunals. How many teachers have a spare 10g’s? This one certainly doesn’t.
Man, if districts find out they can get a fine out of a teacher why not bring up a lot more charges and just fine the “bad teacher” up front?
That’s a NYC quirk. I haven’t heard this with any other school districts around the country. NYC teachers have more “protections,” such as they are, than teachers just about anywhere else.
You are right about it being a way to teach him and others not to “cross” a school district administrator or administrators ever again.
That’s a lesson I just did not learn. I’m a parent in the community and the principal of my community school was engaged in questionable practices of clocking in to programs she was not working. You, as the taxpayer, paid for her to call out sick and get overtime. $40,000 in just three years. http://protectportelos.org/all-down-hill/
Corruption in our schools? Not on my watch!
And they tried to get rid of you. They may never stop despite this setback to the district.
You will have to look over your shoulder from now on.
This is a problem. If you are found innocent, you may still well have to pay the NYC DOE a fine, which makes no sense if you were cleared of the charges of if the charges get dropped.
This is something Ms. Farina and Mr. DeBlasio obviously refuse to address, as well as the UFT.
But something tells me Francesco is not at all done with his situation at all, and that he has overcome these critical hurdles but now must continue more indispensable fighting for complete justice.
If anything, the NYC DOE owes him money in the form of punitive damages, and that’s just to start with.
He is, obviously, an innocent man.
I direct myself to the owner of this blog—
Are you using “tenure” as shorthand for “due process rights”? Or are you using it in some other meaning?
I thank you in advance for the clarification.
😎
It’s the same thing. It shouldn’t be called “tenure” because it makes it look like having the right to a bogus hearing is unique to teachers when in fact all public employees who have post-probationary status have it. Or public school teachers are supposed to have it and not be singled out being denied a property right.
A word to the resident troll: I have always implied due process applied only to those who have past probationary status, so don’t twist my words and lie.
I am not referring to you, KrazyTA, but to the person who loves to twist my words and tries to be a condescending *ss.
Don’t neglect the big picture on tenure and the determination of USDE to use all of its carrots and sticks to get rid of it with the alternative pay-for-performance based on the shoddy metrics, promoted by its network of agencies like the Institute of education Sciences and regional/topical R & D centers
For those who have an interest where tenure is headed, here is one path to finding out.
This is from Politco, this morning.
THE TENUOUS STATE OF TENURE : More and more states are requiring districts to use teacher evaluations, rather than seniority, as a key factor in layoff decisions. And fewer teachers can count on the job protections of tenure. That’s according to three reports out today from the Education Commission of the States, which reviewed policies nationwide and found the ed reform movement gaining steam.
In 2012, just five states explicitly declared that districts couldn’t use tenure or seniority as the primary factor in deciding which teachers would get pink slips. Now, 10 states have such laws on the books, including Arizona, Michigan, Ohio and Virginia. Teacher performance must be a primary consideration in layoff decisions in Georgia, Louisiana and Maine.
Florida, Kansas and North Carolina are moving to eliminate tenure altogether. And seven states, including Arizona, Colorado and Louisiana, will strip tenured status from veteran teachers if they receive an ineffective rating.
A total of 16 states require teacher performance ratings to be a factor in tenure decisions. Read the ECS reports: http://bit.ly/1qVuGm7, http://bit.ly/1j7VuWa and http://bit.ly/TuO8r7
Also remember that states receiving federal grants or competing for them under various programs, including the unending NCLB, Race to the Top, and so on must have teacher evaluations that rate teachers on their output of high scores on tests, deliberately mis-labeled “growth measures.”
I will say it a million times that “tenure” doesn’t exist for K-12, only the right to a hearing other public employees get.
It is illegal to deny to post-probationary teachers the same right to due process other public employees get.
“It is illegal to deny to post-probationary teachers the same right to due process other public employees get.”
I see you’ve finally started to modify this statement with “post-probationary.” That’s good, you’re getting closer. Now you just have to work on this idea that it’s illegal to deny one group of public employees due process protections if another group of public employees has them. It’s not.
I have been saying it all along, you troll. “Tenure” is only a hearing for post-probationary employees.
You are such a liar it is sickening. You’ve never heard of equal protection or property rights for public employees.
You are a troll. Get lost.
Since FLERP, you have no understanding of what a property right is for government employees and no concept of due process, just get lost.
“Tenure” is the same property right for teachers as it is for other public employees. Contrary to what the term “tenure” implies, it has nothing in common with what college and university professors have. Some states have tried to do away with it for teachers, but that isn’t legal or constitutional. When you have union leaders and teachers who don’t understand what it is, then of course state legislators try and get away with denying teachers the same rights as other public employees.
Private employees don’t have that right to “due process” because they don’t work for a government agency.
There will NEVER again be another response by me to you, FLERP, because you are a troll. I saw through your act a long, long time ago. You are like teachingeconomist who is also a passive-aggressive troll.
I know a lot more about this subject than you do.
Let me tell you somethings that would benefit your understanding of this issue. I would think that you’d want to have a better understanding of it, because it’s obviously one of the most important issues to you.
The Constitution protects property rights. It protects those rights by guaranteeing a minimum level of due process.
So there are two things: a property right and a due process right. The Constitution is the source of the due process right. But it is not the source of property rights. The property right has to come from an independent source, such as a state law, or an express or implied contractual relationship. If you don’t trust me, you can read all the big cases on the subject. This is what they all say.
Once a public employee a property right in his job through one of those independent sources, it cannot be taken away from him without minimum due process. So a legislature can’t eliminate the due process protections that exist for current, permanent employees.
However, a legislature can revise statutes to eliminate due process protections for *future* employees. Why? Because future employees do not exist. They have no property interest in their jobs because they haven’t been hired yet. If a state decides that it wants to make future public employees at-will, there’s nothing in the 14th Amendment to stop them. Because the Constitution protects property rights, it does not convey them.
Do you understand what I’m saying?
You are also twisting my words like a good troll. I have always said “due process” for was post-probationary employees, the same as with other post-probationary public employees.
Good morning, Thank you Diane. I am in the process of copying and pasting the 107 page decision to make it easier to read. I am putting the minor defenses together, the arbitrators discussion and my rebuttal.
I’ll give you a trailer: I was found guilty of placing DOE confidential information on my site here: http://protectportelos.org/disciplinary-letters/ which was the witness statement of my former colleagues that threw me under the bus. The issue is that witness statements are not confidential as they become part of the public domain and are FOILable. The arbitrator ignored that fact and the fact that the DOE attorney told SCI there was “no violation.”
There is much more to the story and it started when I raised concerns and initiated investigations against the principal. Investigations that the DOE have purposely left open so they do not have to answer.
Our feeling is that the Department of Education knew the decision would be favorable and had me also falsely arrested in March. The DA declined to prosecute, but just last week, May 16th, the Office of Special Investigation questioned me about the satirical post that caused the false arrest. Seems like the NYC DOE put the carriage before the horse.
http://protectportelos.org/wanted-tenure-protections-destroyed/
Francesco – did they not just make you an ATR? Is there not a concern now that you could fall into the new contract’s “Patterns of problematic professional conduct” (or wording close to that) which is so vaguely defined that they might apply it to you?
It sounds like they’re still setting you up, and the sell out of the ATRs could hand you to them on a silver platter with what they could not get in arbitration.
Assuming you can’t grieve your way back into your old position and are not trying to – you’d need to find another position on your own. You’re extremely talented and dedicated from what I see – but if I were an admin, I’d see you as a radioactive hire because of how this whole affair played out.
That would mean it very likely he would NEVER work as a teacher anywhere again. This is a well-publicized case.
The UFT has done nothing for Mr. Portelos.
NOTHING!
They would sooner have thrown him under the bus, as most Unity members in the UFT would sell their mothers into prostitution if they could profit from it . . . . .
Mr. Portelos should have his story broadcast nationwide.
His is a story our founding forefathers would be proud of.
I think I would be going back into the private sector. They are not going to let you teach again. It took years for me to give up my naive faith in the system. The union sounds as corrupt as the administration.
It is.
I’ve been following Francesco Portelos’ case on his blog for years now. It seems as though until he raised concerns about budgets and other financial issues at his school he received numerous letters of commendation from his administrators for his hard work and dedication. He was elected Chapter Leader by the staff (I believe it was AFTER he was reassigned to the “non-existent” Rubber Room). During his long “fight” I often wondered why Francesco wouldn’t just take the easy route and go back to his previous profession as an Engineer but I’m glad he didn’t give up. After the long, drawn out hearings, a decision came down in his favor and he was supposed to be returned to his school. Unfortunately, instead of abiding by that decision, the DOE decided to make him an ATR.
I had the opportunity to meet Francesco during the Save Our Schools Rally last weekend. Although it was a brief encounter, I found him to be a vey personable, likeable guy. I’m sure he’s a great teacher and I think any school would be lucky to have him as a member of their staff.
Mary
ps Thank you Diane for posting Francesco’s story. It’s a story that needs to be told. Big changes have to be made at the DOE’s Office of Investigations. Hopefully the new Chancellor and Mayor will make sure that happens.
Hooray… but the fine? Blackmail. He needs to sue them for their complete abrogation of Article 5 &6 of The Bill of Rights, and the union for their ignoring the contract–which I hold in my hands–as to grievance procedures that would have prevented this lawlessness, Understand ONE THING… the union is the legal rep for a teacher, and when they look away, then this costly, hurtful agenda can take place.
I remember when they sent me to teacher jail, took me from my classroom overnight, and with no charges kept me there for 6 months, and never returned me to my classroom practice where I was working as a cohort for the standards research with Harvard, even when I spent 25 k on a lawyer to get me back to the school.
I swear that when I finally, by accident met the head of the UFT Manhaatan Bureau in the hallways, he said,’ Do you know how lucky you are? You get to collect your salary and do not have to do anything?”
That was in 1999, a few months after I was awarded the NYSEC Educator or Exellence award for the SUCCESSFUL PRACTICE AND MY WORK AS A COHORT FOR THE STANDARDS.
When the union can say this, there is nothing more to add.
Sorry for the delay everyone, but I’m back to teaching and not sitting around for 7 hrs a day anymore. Here are the reasons why I was fined and the bigger picture. It comes down to rocking the boat as a parent and citizen:
A Case for Tenure- A 3 Part Series http://protectportelos.org/a-case-for-tenure/