A New Contract, A New Beginning
The other day the largest teacher union in the nation (New York City’s United Federation of Teachers) and the New York City Department of Education reached a ground breaking agreement on a new contract. Subject to approval by union members, this agreement should explode many of the myths that corporate education reformers like to spread about teacher unions. It shows that in an environment of trust and respect unions and districts can come together and agree on innovations that make sense for students. These innovations are not driven by the unimaginative test-based accountability metrics and privatization schemes that corporate reformers espouse and are now being imposed on the community and students in nearby Newark. Rather, they are founded on principles of mutual learning, collaboration, and support.
First let’s take a look at the history.
New York City’s teachers have been working without a contract for five years. There was no agreement because Mayor Bloomberg insisted that in any new contract “schools identified as being at risk of phase out or closure” be forced to follow “a modified, scaled down version of [the] collective bargaining agreement.” This ignored the fact that it was Bloomberg’s own policies, such as deliberately overloading specific schools with the most challenging students, which created these so-called failing schools. Bloomberg wanted to modify the pay scale so that teachers with high value-added scores would receive additional pay. This, despite all the research showing that such metrics are not valid. At the same time Bloomberg insisted that teachers not get raises that, at a minimum, kept up with the rate of inflation. Bloomberg demanded that any teachers who lost their positions due to declining school budgets or closure be fired after 4 months if they did not find another permanent position (they were, of course, used to fill temporary teaching positions and were working with students every single day). Again he ignored the fact that more experienced educators were over-represented in this pool, due to his policy of charging schools for the actual salaries of teachers rather than the district average. This meant that schools were incentivized not to hire experienced educators. Research in other districts has already shown that this approach does not help students and must therefore be chalked-up to pure ideology rather than an interest in improving public education.
What changed? Carmen Farina, the new Chancellor, is a true educator, having taught for 22 years before becoming a principal, then a superintendent, and then deputy chancellor for teaching and learning. Bill DeBlasio, the new mayor, praises public servants for their dedication to public service. Together with the UFT leadership they were able to come to agreement on a genuinely innovative set of ideas.
First they addressed the bread and butter issues. Teachers will receive raises that slightly exceed the rate of inflation over the past 5 years and will receive additional raises, including back pay, going forward. These raises and payments will be spread out across a number of years, which will ease the impact on the city budget and allow city social programs to access funding after being squeezed for many years. Teachers will continue to receive free health insurance which, in an environment of continuously increasing healthcare costs, represents an additional and significant raise. At the same time the city and the union agreed on over a billion dollars in savings through more efficient provision and management of the health insurance programs.
Then they agreed to build cultures of collaboration and learning in schools. Schools will be permitted to modify the contract to meet the individualized needs of their school with the agreement of 65% of the faculty. Teachers who take on leadership roles by sharing their expertise with colleagues, coaching colleagues, spreading best practices in their schools, and opening up their classrooms as learning labs will be eligible for career ladder bonuses. None of this will happen in a top-down manner.
They agreed to move away from an overemphasis on test-prep by ending the 150 weekly minutes of small group test-prep sessions. They repurposed that time to create structures for professional development and parent engagement that will support genuine teaching and learning. This includes adding parent-teacher conference days, adding weekly professional development and collaboration time for faculty, and adding time for weekly parent outreach.
They also agreed that teachers would not be evaluated based on the test scores of students they don’t teach. That this was even a possibility is one of the absurd outcomes of the corporate reformer obsession with putting a number to everything, even when that number clearly makes no sense.
They agreed that teachers will hold each other accountable to the highest standards of the profession. This includes teachers serving as peer-observers and validators for colleagues who received poor ratings the year prior.
They agreed to ease out the small number of teachers who are not suited to the profession. This includes an expedited firing process for teachers who are unable to find permanent positions (despite being given the opportunity to teach at schools with openings and their salaries being paid independently of the school’s budget) and who have been released from two schools for documented unprofessional behaviors.
Importantly the New York City Department of Education committed to providing curricula to all teachers. Under the former management, when the headquarters building was populated by data analysts with no expertise in education, such a promise would have been impossible to fulfill. This foreshadows a return of educators to the central offices who can support teachers and schools, appointed to positions of influence.
This agreement will help turn the page on the corporate-reformer playbook. For all their money, and powerful lobbying groups, and media influence, it will be hard to argue now that top-down mandates, teacher bashing, and test-driven accountability is the way to innovate in education. Districts such as Cincinnati, Ohio, Union City, New Jersey, and Meriden, Connecticut have already shown that collaboration and educator-driven change create the innovations that lead to better student learning. With this agreement, New York City has joined this group of dynamic innovators.
What about using VAM for students they do teach?
Replying to Peter Smyth: unfortunately the city and the union are not able to change the use of VAM for students they teach. That is enshrined in New York State law and can’t be overturned as part of the new contract. What the union and the city did accomplish was to limit the impact of VAM to the minimum mandated by the state.
I am sorry if I am skeptical, but I worked in NYC when the assault on teachers began, and I know exactly what enabled their removal.
Now, I actually know NYC teachers who were wonderful, and reduced to being substitutes. They couldn’t find a ‘job’ in the very schools where they taught as ATRs.
Evaluated on their performance? How does that work? It is a joke to the woman I meet at the gym who lost her position as a reading specialist. Sent hither and yon for years SHE WILL NEVER WORK AGAIN because NO PERMANENT POSITIONS WILL EVER COME HER WAY!
if this is true… this small number of teaches will INDEED be EXPEDITED (read railroaded”)
“They agreed to ease out the small number of teachers who are not suited to the profession. This includes an expedited firing process for teachers who are unable to find permanent positions (despite being given the opportunity to teach at schools with openings and their salaries being paid independently of the school’s budget) and who have been released from two schools for documented unprofessional behaviors.”
Define “given the opportunity” define “schools with openings.”
The devil is in the details, when a top-educator is given an ‘opportunity’ in some school with some sort of ‘opening.’
I love this part:
“Then they agreed to build cultures of collaboration and learning in schools. Schools will be permitted to modify the contract to meet the individualized needs of their school with the agreement of 65% of the faculty.”
This faculty? Could they be young novices who are fearful that they will be sent out the door?
“Teachers who take on leadership roles by sharing their expertise with colleagues, coaching colleagues, spreading best practices in their schools, and opening up their classrooms as learning labs will be eligible for career ladder bonuses.
I worked in such a school, which such a team. I took on the leadership role, and shared my expertise. Our school rose to the top of NYC middle schools, attracted Harvard, and the Standards, and my BEST PRACTICE was legendary with the LRDC at the Univ of Pittsburgh, who studied the cohorts.
My favorite line: “None of this will happen in a top-down manner.”
Yes, top-down will be over, and teachers like me will find a leadership role.
I guess this new union which oversees this contract, is different now then it was when it oversaw the contract of the excellent, professional veteran teachers who were guaranteed due process in the workplace… like all Americans.
YES, I am happy that this happened. Don’t get me wrong.
But the contract that once demanded that the rule of law be applied to the school workplace, and that no one can be slandered without evidence, was enforced by the UFT, and I experienced just how well THAT worked.
I know Mr. Mulgrew.
I know Carmen Farina.
Good folks. I respect them. I also know went before this moment. I was there, Diane!
But I also know how politics and $ work in NYC, and you will forgive me if I am skeptical until I see teachers like Debbie Ryker teaching once again, instead of fighting in court for justice that was missing when the UFT looked the other way.
To The Reformers, a statistical margin of error that destroys the career and lives of a subset of excellent teachers and deprives students of learning is “acceptable”. If certain students fail the new tests, welll, that is just part of the process to improve the overall success of the herd. Of course, The Reformers are above the process and do not suffer the consequences they impose on others. Resonates with so much of past, shameful history of societies gone bad.
Well said. The union in NYC has a shameful history, which is known to those who discovered when they filed grievances which the union ignored. I will never forget the on grievance of so many I filed, that made it to the second step. By the elevator, I heard the assistant superintendent spa kin got my principals, “Don’t worry. The principal is always believed.” He was right.
Buffalo Public Schools has a similar policy via their union – if a staff wants to change the status quo in a school, such as the way classes are scheduled, there is a balloted vote by ALL faculty members and majority rules. The blind ballots are coordinated by the union.
It works.
Yes. It can work, My niece is a principal in a wonderful school In California. There are places where education works, and teachers are part of the process. I read about these schools in The American Educator, but in NYC, it is a different ballgame, and if you saw what I saw, know what I know about the UFT, you would be skeptical, too. A teacher would have to last nine years to see the money, and the benefits that teachers got in the last contract were very nice… but the thousands that were sent packing did not get to enjoy them.
… and there are NO opportunities for employment for teachers targeted for removal.
The devil is in the details, and asking me/us to trust the union which betrayed thousands of us, including me is demanding a suspension of disbelief that is simply impossible.
They talk a good game, but in the end nothing changes for teachers. Until they make the principals accountable not merely the teachers, nothing will change.
Yes Susan,on paper it looks good, but the devil is in the details. I’m sure NYC has their own unique way of getting around the rules. There are lots of grievances in Buffalo that flounder for years because the superintendent is unavailable to meet with union reps to hash things out. Yet, if the union does one thing against the contract, the response is immediate. The Administration can do no “admitted” wrong (which is why so much money is spent on court cases).
Currently, Buffalo teachers are quietly leaving their jobs because they have failed to get permanent certification. Some remain as subs, others just drift away. Many are excellent teachers who are falling through the cracks. Yet we cannot complain because the Board of Ed has the right to dismiss “uncertified” teachers. Yet thirty TFAs are coming to Buffalo in the fall with instant certification credentials. Oh my!
I sympathize. It is definitely not an even playing field.
Diane, I think that Michael Mulgrew and Bill de Blasio may have just hacked into this blog and posted a joint press release. I’d change your admin password asap to be safe.
Can you guys just hang on for 2 seconds while I grab a Super Big Gulp and make some popcorn? I just don’t want to miss anything when the teacher-bloggers arrive and start to weigh in.
I love your sense of humor, and try as I may, because I am in awe of Diane, I cannot understand her blindness when it comes to the unions. Yes, we need them or they would take the teachers out and line them up, and shoo them, because it is lawless in the education workplace as Lorna Stremcha’s story shows.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfNxj-O1DiI
But, the leadership needs to be shown the door, because, like the legislators in our congress, they are only there to ensure their own futures. We need a NEW union, one that negotiates for US, and enforces DUE PROCESS in the workplace. It is not merely about salary or benefits, because a teacher LOSES both when she/he can not defend against slander and lies.
Bravo. And agreed.
Exactly. You see the devil in the details, too.
Diane, 48 hours ago you were arguing that the New York State law putting a cap on test prep was foolish and unrealistic–“what a joke!”
Now you are saying that the DOE and UFT are wise for taking away small-group extended-day tutoring–10 kids per teacher, max, and only 5 kids per teacher for special ed–because it is often used for test prep (a claim that I’m not sure is true, but let’s put that aside for now).
Can you clear up this inconsistency?
I’ll give it a shot. The principle is that under a high-stakes testing regime, there is no effective way to limit the amount of teaching time that teachers spend on test prep. The only way to limit test prep is to limit teaching time. Take a block of teaching time away and reallocate it to conferences and professional development — bam, you just limited test prep.
So someone who would like to see no test prep should lobby for 6.5+ hours of PD daily. Got it!
Only problem is that it is not a good contract for the teachers, either economically or professionally. It “gives” retroactive pay, but not for another 2 years and only then if you still are working in NYC. It doesn’t provide raises for the teachers until a pro-rated raise system kicks in in 2015 so no raises until then, nor do we get the complete amount owed us fully until 2018. Again, what about the people who don’t stay that long? No protective provisions…
I’m with you, Susan. I am still in “wait and see” mode, and the “expedited firing process” is just as fraught with possibility for culling “unpopular” teachers from the herd. ATR’s under the bus.
Tim, the 37.5 minutes was a waste in high schools and most middle schools. Remember the deal was that students needed to be dismissed first and then had to return. One they got older they never bothered to return.
Schools that use small group instruction for good instructional purposes can still do so using circular 6.
Not sure what your other point is about. There is no contradiction in saying that it is impossible to enforce so called regulations limiting test prep in the classroom. The state cant have spies in every classroom every second of the day.
Joe — I don’t know how other schools did it, and maybe my experience is atypical outside K-5, but extended day is — or “was,” I guess I should now say — done in the mornings before school at my kids’ elementary school. And it was not test prep.
I disagree that extended day wasn’t being used by most middle schools, but in any case, middle and high school extended day isn’t the heart of the matter. Taking it away from elementary schools is just plain stupid.
I can’t think of a way that an elementary school could Circular 6 its way to providing 150 minutes’ worth of extended day every week to a half or more of its students, unless you’re comfortable not only with parents running bus duty and the lunchroom, but also with writing curriculum and grading assessments. If I’m missing something here, let me know.
No, we can’t have a constant presence in classrooms to make sure that test prep isn’t happening, in much the same way we can’t have constant monitoring to make sure teachers aren’t goofing off on Facebook or using their students as an assembly line for their Etsy products. The core of enforcing the test-prep cap law will utilize the same immense faith and trust we place in our educators–the trust and faith they have earned by doing the right thing virtually 100% of the time. NYSED will issue some guidelines, superintendents and chancellors will discuss them with their principals, and the principals will make things clear to teachers. Not only is this far from being “impossible,” it’s actually pretty uncomplicated.
Why the jubilation? Teachers will not see any money until 2015. The big 4% is not being paid in a lump sum as it was for the other unions in 2009 and 2010. The $1000 signing bonus is a pat on the head for falling into line. Teachers have families we have to provide for. We need financial rewards NOW. This contract does not even give us a cost of living increase (how did you figure that it does? ). 10% over 7 years is about 1.4% a year! After taxes, you get chump change. We must not be dazzled by the respect finally being given to us. 4% retroactive is due to us immediately and in full – not spread out over 5 or more years. And you can bet the other unions will not settle for 2 years of 0%. Teachers must stop being so grateful for any crumbs thrown to us. This doormat attitude is why we get so little and go years without a contract and are shown so little respect. Yes, professional improvements are welcome and are long overdue, but that shouldn’t be in exchange for our financial health.
Hooray for u New York. Shows you what enlightened leadership can effect, Hooray for the return of collaboration and educator and parent input into public education decision making, I hope we can make these types of moves in Los Angeles,,
Don’t Hooray us Paula!! There are some serious flaws in this contract.
Ms. Ravitch, I’m surprised you consider this contract such a step forward. Obviously, any contract is a step above none, but have you really seen the provisions of this thing? All that bragging about raises and retro pay are misleading, because they are all being deferred for years. Moreover, 200 schools are going to be allowed to “opt out” of the contract and function as charter schools. Of all people on Earth, I’d think you’d be the last to applaud a contract that turns 10% of public schools into charters.
M: The schools that opt to make changes will do so collaboratively with the vote of at least 65% of the faculty and the approval of a joint UFT/DOE panel. They will NOT be charter schools by any means. This is exactly the sort of innovation that public schools and the union should encourage. Anyone who fights such innovations is living in the Dark Ages.
The raises are substantial especially when you recognize that health care is still free for all teachers.while health care costs are increasing by an average 7% a year.
I do not celebrate this contract. Merit pay? Foolish evaluations still in place? Money honestly earned punted down the line. ATR’s left out to dry? Bloomberg must be clinking a toasting glass somehwere.
He is celebrating this contract.
Speaking of Bloomberg, I knew I had heard this line before, but I couldn’t quite place it: “Teachers will continue to receive free health insurance which, in an environment of continuously increasing healthcare costs, represents an additional and significant raise.”
As I have heard this before, “Tax the super rich and corporations who hide much of their profits.”
It’s time to change the argument from “Why do THEY get free health insurance?’ to “Why doesn’t everyone get free health insurance?”
Health insurgence is never free. At best you can get someone else to pay for your insurance.
It could be worse. And free health care is worth a lot.
It’s been over ten years since Buffalo has had a contract.
It could always be worse. That doesn’t make it right.
Exactly. Teachers have to stop acting like we must take anything that is handed to us with a smile. DO THE MATH – we are not getting even a cost of living increase! The $1000 is hush money. Watch the other unions balk at this insulting financial deal.
Lot’s of whining on the comments to the post. They dont represent the voice of the vast majority of UFT members who are happy to once again be treated like professionals. Many of the commentators seem to prefer to be treated like factory line workers. Again the ATRs will only be subject to expedited termination if they are found to engage in unprofessional behavior in two different schools. Note that this isnt merely unsatisfactory performance, it is limited to outright unprofessional behaviors. To quote from a comment on the Perdido Street blog “At my high school, the contract went over well. People just want a raise and some security towards 2018 and hopefully beyond. An ATR was at our school today and he was in the hall right outside the classroom door if the class he was covering. He was on his cell phone and the students were pretty loud inside doing anything they wanted. No one said anything until the AP caught wind of it. He approached the ATR who could’ve cared less. He actually told another staff member on his lunch that he couldn’t believe he’s been making his salary for doing this babysitting and he’d use his cell phone during a class, anytime he wished. It was later on in the day when everyone had basically had it with the ATR’s. The contract will be ratified. No one will be defending the 2% ATR group out of the entire UFT. It’s the truth. People have had it with these ATR’s.”
No profession should defend this sort of thing. ATRs who are good teachers will now be able to land permanent positions since their salaries will no longer count against the school budget. This contract should be celebrated by every teacher who takes pride in their work.
And when did you sign the Unity oath??? ATRs should have the same due process rights we all have. And teachers who do take pride in their work should also take pride in a contract that is not in any way punitive towards another teacher. For one day, we can all find ourselves in the ATR pool.
I too am suspicious of the contract cheerleaders. Why do you equate our right to want our financial due with us not wanting to be treated as professionals? Your argument is facetious. ONE SHOULD NOT BE AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER. This contract is just another I.O.U. to the teachers. Plus, there are many holes and unknowns in this proposed contract, yet there are people eager to blindly sign on for the next four years. We DESERVE better than a post-dated check to be cashed in at some later date. There is no guarantee that money will be around for us in the future. Read up on what happened to NYC teachers in 1975 (post-strike).
I can guarantee that a huge percentage of the teachers will not be around to collect the money on 9 years.
I agree Susan. Waiting nine years is ridiculous. And ALL teachers currently in the system should get the back pay whether they still work and live in the city or whether they are retired. They earned it – it is their due.
I’m shocked at the disrepect shown the ATRs. They should be the first on the list to be hired. Two comment of unprofessional behavior and fired. How is unprofessional behavior define. Someone wrote that not handling out correspondence on time is unprofessional. That leaves too many doors open. They should clean out the admistrators that went to principal school per bloomberg. That would change alot of the atmosphere in the city.
Something smells fishy here. I don’t teach in the city and certainly wish those teachers well. But all the NYSUT officers are ousted with rumors that Cuomo made promises of a contract for NYC if there would be a coup. Entire new crew is now in place, there is a split in the ranks, and, voila, a contract appears. Sounds like “divide and conquer” to me. I love Diane, but I definitely don’t have a pair of those rose-colored glasses she is wearing.
This deal sounds excellent.
I am skeptical, however, when we mistake “a return of educators to the central offices who can support teachers and schools, appointed to positions of influence” as a panacea. When I was teaching in Charlotte, teachers were in places of influence to design non-state summatives and pacing guides.
Whether they had been so beaten up by NCLB or were simply incapable or unwilling to provide good, rigorous materials, I don’t know. But what we were given was remarkably awful: All multiple choice summatives that mirrored the state tests and pacing guides straight from the text book.
There is no better alternative. Surely, educators must be the ones designing curricula. But be wary: some are really awful at it.
I keep hearing about how cash strapped NYC is and how the structuring of our contract is a good way to get around that. If Wall Street is the “driving engine” of NYC and it’s seeing the fantastic windfalls that we’ve all been reading and hearing about (after being bailed out by us), then why are we still in such bad shape?
This from a MORE blog:
“For the seven years from 2011 to 2018, where the UFT will set the pattern for raises that other city unions will now follow, we will be getting a total of 10% in raises for seven years plus a $1,000 signing bonus. That works out to less than 1.5% per year.”
How do you think that’ll play with the other unions?
I’m hearing from some of my colleagues that they’ll vote for it because it lessens the severity of the state mandates. That’s kind of like saying, “At least they won’t be whipping us so hard” when they really shouldn’t be whipping us at all. But I can understand that slant, all the same. I just don’t “get” the small raise when the city should be doing so well.
I can understand the structuring of the retro payback. There’s just too much money involved with all the unions on that account.
It’s the size of the actual current contract raise that I find disturbing. Just above the rate of inflation as it is NOW.
I’m waiting to hear the other union’s opinions (and hoping for accurate coverage in the media on that). I’ll definitely be communicating with my friends in those fields.
I completely concur with the reply asking about what happens if the “mandates” are rescinded during the lifetime of the contract.
I’m fighting it, but I have a nagging feeling that we’re being hosed. I’m sure that’s partly because the Giuliani and Bloomberg years have conditioned me to have that response. But I did not like Mulgrew’s cave on the original teacher evaluation system (at all) and the positive spin it was given at the time. Now we’re being told how terrible that was (you did sign off on it, Michael) and how we’re better off with this “new and improved” version.
If memory serves me right; the Danielson frameworks were developed as professional development tools and they were not meant to be applied to special education, as there were no special ed experts in the developmental team. Yet we’ll still be judged according to these frameworks.
The raises were probably better under Giuliani and Bloomberg.
They were. Yes.
Here’s something to consider: looking at the most recent email from the uft there is the following: “Be assured that all members will receive every penny that they have earned since Nov. 1, 2009 as long as they are in-service, have retired since that date or are planning to retire in the future.”
What I read this to say, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, is that the teacher will only get the retro-pay of 8% IF THEY ARE IN-SERVICE. If a teacher leaves the NYC system anytime before 2020 through a means OTHER THAN retirement: he/she WILL NOT get their back pay owed to them after the date on which he/she leaves.This is wrong.
Remember all those articles recently touting the unusual pattern of mid-career teachers leaving the city system? Here is the solution: you want your back pay? Then they shall hold you hostage to the corrupt and ineffective New York City School system through October 2020.
I feel this is deeply wrong and underhanded: teachers worked hard even though they had no contract. But, if they decide to explore other options anytime in the next six years, they must calculate the fact that they cannot get money rightfully owed to them unless they stay in-service through 2020.
I interpret this statement to mean that the back pay will go to current teachers as well as those who were working in NYC during those years and are now retired. I’m not sure what future retirees means unless it refers to laid off teachers who would qualify for the back pay.
This 8 percent could make a difference to the size of pensions. It will be retroactive.
Been there, done that.
And am waiting to see if it happens again (although I think that ship has sailed).
Consider me experienced in the back pay issue.
Ellen Klock
Buffalo Public Schools
I also have been fined due to the Taylor Law when we went on strike. Since my husband also works for the BPS it was a double whammy, but well worth the effort.
What possible incentive could an employer have to pay *ex-employees* back wages that it’s not legally obligated to pay? What possible incentive would a union that represents current employees and retirees have to negotiate for that? And what kind of mindset would believe that this was even a possibility?
Honestly, not many people here have walked a picket line in defense of teacher rights and pay. I have. I am still working (39 years) because I love it, however, this contract is smoke and mirrors. It kind of LOOKS like we are getting a raise, but in fact, it is making us grab at straws for something all other unions in the city are already getting. Even with their expired contracts, they are receiving the 4% and 4 % at the very least, in every paycheck, that is, everyone else but us. Then, to add insult to injury, they will give us a “signing bonus” (translation, payoff, crumbs) to the very hungry, beaten down, humiliated professionals called teachers, to approve this contract. THEN…..now wait for it……..we will get 2% added to our paycheck once approved. THEN……..wait for it……..raises that drip and dribble into our paychecks. Retroactive money that will not see the light of day until far into the future.
Now, the even more troubling aspect to this is the part about the 200 schools and the 65% of staff voting on it, to throw out union contract rules.
Anyone who has been working in the city knows very well that principals and administrators put huge, subtle, and not so subtle pressures on staff to approve things and go along with policies that are not necessarily in the best interests of students OR staff. They do this by intimidation, evaluations and granting privileges to key staff to “see it their way”. I am very, very leery of this and skeptical that the city will use this in the true fashion in which it is espoused.
Maybe this is just a silly old teacher taking off the rose colored glasses and seeing this contract for what it really is. I am voting NO.
Our union can do better. We need to not be so very hungry for relief from abuse and for a raise that we accept the scraps that no one else would take and say it is good. Abuse is quite powerful, which is what is driving people to say this is an acceptable contract.
Pam, the Buffalo teachers have walked the picket lines on numerous occasions. I can’t tell you how many times we marched around city hall before controversial board meetings.
We also picketed when we went on strike (for two days). It actually was kind of fun – we had a cookout, the Verizon drivers (who had just gone on strike themselves) brought doughnuts, and one of the husbands brought cold drinks. It was a bonding time. Even the substitute teachers and retirees marched with us. Very few teachers crossed the line and none at my school. (To cross the line meant ostracization for the rest of their career – the deed traveled with them, no matter what school they worked at). I had four kids at home, but bit the bullet. There was no way I was going to be a scab. (This was September 2000).
This is out of my depth, from where I sit. I’m not ready to hail a bright new morning, that’s for sure. But I also don’t know that this is just another in a LONG list of Mulgrew corporate collaboration, or DeBlasio selling out his own mandate to defend New York public schools.
It doesn’t work, for me, to say that VAM is required by force of law. So, the state legislature is still in play, and frankly the mandate could be blown away at any moment. The political battle against test-based “accountability” laws is way ahead of every union contract at this time, and the Big Union leaders like Mulgrew turn out to be the last-ditch defenders of the failed system!
My question is, within this contract, what happens when we roll back the legislated mandates? Will the contract still be locking them in? That would be the irrefutable argument for voting the thing down.
Maybe we need a Peace and Justice Reconciliation Commission for the ATRs and the UFT Unity Caucus. My heart just breaks for our brothers and sisters, and as a group they’re saying the contract has no path to justice for them.
According to NYTimes editorial today an ATR who is rejected two times by a principal will be put on a fast track for dismissal. If true this contract is a disaster. Principals will reject high priced veterans for low cost new teachers.
I’m voting NO and here’s why:
1) There is NO accountability in this contract for principals
Principals are notorious for protecting their own interests. Where is the protection for an ATR who lost their original position due to retaliation for whistleblowing and has been blacklisted by the principals? The contract states that if the ATR does manage to land a permanent position, the principal can reject them after a mere one day of service. If 2 principals reject the ATR, they lose their entire livelihood. How is this justice?
2) Principals still control their budgets for teaching salary lines
Where is the incentive for a principal to hire a veteran ATR? Why wasn’t the salary budget line brought back to the DOE central?
3) There has been an increase in hours with no pay differential
We now are required to hold parent/teacher conferences for 2 nights at 2.5 hours each night. This will now double to 4 nights for 3 hours each night. This amounts to 12 hours of work with NO additional pay. Would police officers work for free? I don’t think so. Also, as many of us live too far to commute back home during the “down” hours between the time the normal school day ends and when the conferences begin, we are basically working a 13 hour day. I won’t get home to my own family until after 10PM. Why is this necessary when parents and teachers now have multiple forms of communication such as email, phone, and personal appointments?. This is much more effective than the cattle call during parent teacher conference night. Why would I, as a parent, want to wait in line for 15 minutes to be rushed through a meeting with one teacher when I can easily email them or set up a personal appointment? I thought we were living in the 21st century?
4) 200 schools that don’t have to work under “union rules”? Are you kidding me? People literally lost their lives fighting for better working conditions and our union is now condoning a non-union workplace? The middle class is shrinking as a direct result of stagnating wages and poor working conditions due to decreases in union membership and our union is ok with this? Shame!
5) The $1,000 bribe is an insult to my intelligence
Excellent points. A horrible contract for teachers. It is poor union leadership taking part in the destruction of its constituents and public education, in general.
RL – of course you are worth more, but the raise is a raise is a raise and you still have your free health insurance. The Buffalo Public Schools hasn’t had a contract in over ten years and our salary was frozen for three of them (no step increases). So, after thirty years of service, I still wasn’t at the top step. One reason the teachers haven’t settled is that the give backs are way more than the give tos. I.e. No raises for several years before a 1% yearly raise plus paying for health insurance (which is now free). The old contract is better. Was your old contract a better deal?
As for parent teacher conferences, they go with the job. Parents want to see their children’s teachers, even if only for fifteen minutes. Our contract called for evening hours 2x a year, but I always went to all evening events (not just conferences). I wanted to show the students and parents that I cared. I, too, stayed in my room and worked, but I often stayed after school and worked in my room. I loved my job. Sometimes, on those days with evening events, a bunch of teachers would get together and go out for dinner or order in. Once we had a pot luck meal. It was an opportunity to bond.
On the principal issue – I agree, they play favorites. In Buffalo you can request a transfer if you can’t stand the principal. And if the principal doesn’t like you, he can request you transfer out. However, you are not fired, you just go to another school. In order to be terminated, there is a process with union representation. Only if you break the law or behave unseemly with a student can you be automatically terminated. It sound like NYC does not have enough safe guards to protect their teachers. What you describe is disgraceful.
I wish all teachers in NYC good luck. May we all survive APPR.
If we really want to fight back against privatization of public education we need to collectively take ownership of what happens in our schools beyond our individual classrooms. Diane got it right.
Stop complaining about raises! This is a contract that gives $20,000 raises to teachers who take responsibility for improving the learning culture of the whole school.
As Ed Goodman pointed out as a profession we are all too reluctant to take that step:
“A year ago at a Delegate Assembly Mulgrew asked, “How many people would support peer review (teachers playing a role in assessing other teachers)”? Only a few hands were raised.
Last week at the union’s Spring Conference Mulgrew asked, “How many of you feel comfortable with another teacher in your classroom?” Only again, only a few hands were raised.
Mulgrew continued with what has become a union mantra: “the answers are in the room” – in other words, we don’t need outside experts, the Aussies,’ the Teachers College Writing Project, etc. To his credit Mulgrew continued – we have to get used to working together, observing other teachers and having other teachers observe us.”.
Peer review seems like a strong alternative to other teacher evaluation systems, but it does require that teachers are willing to have hard conversations with each other.
I agree.
It’s called Merit Pay and it doesn’t work!!!
And don’t expect the general public to side with you. They believe you already make too much money for not enough hours of work. And the ATR business will seem reasonable. They trust that the principals will make wise choices. Remember, most of them believe the rhetoric.
Only other teachers will sympathize.
Again, getting raises that actually amount to something has NOTHING to do with improving the state and professionalism in our schools! Why are people “arguing” this way?
Free healthcare??? I bet corporate employees will start asking for that! Oh wait my friends at Citi have health insurance. Wait…. 18% raise !!!! UFT says every dollar of retroactive pay starting from Nov. 1,2009 will be paid by 2020.
So after 11 years we will have been paid 1.63 % a year but the City gets the interest on our money for nearly a decade.
In May of 2014 teachers receive a 2% increase that covers 2009-2014. That comes to 0.3333% a year for 6 years.
In May of 2015 teachers receive an additional 1% . If that covers 2009-2015. That comes to 0.43% a year for 7 years.
Sure it gets better but how many of us can work for payments delayed a decade ?
Health care costs are part of an employees compensation and, as a result, are not free. If the firm did not pay the insurance costs, they would be willing to pay their employees the same amount as salary (what does the firm care if it gives the money to the insurance company or the employee?)
I was talking to a friend who works for a small but high end private company. They serve the upper .01 percent and do very well.
The owner of the company is going to start requiring employees to pay for part of their health care package. This is a first and my friend is very upset about it.
The rationale is that the insurance company that’s covering them is raising it’s rates 28%.
28 percent…
My friend says, why not just pass the new costs on to the customer. I told him because the customer, though able to handle the cost with ease, will still look for a company that will not do this.
28 percent….
Yes…we should be glad to be having free health care. But what in the world is going on here, in this city and this country? Why are the rates going up that much? And, again: Wall Street is booming. What’s with these cries for austerity?
Maybe Diane you should read the fine print first before declaring this a victory.
Furthermore, what this contract does to ATRs is criminal–basically losing all due process rights. Good teachers or bad, we need a fair and balanced mechanism to evaluate all teachers, and the ATR process under this new agreement is criminal. The way you describe it is just one big lie. You basically put the blame on these teachers for not finding positions when it was Klein and Bloomberg who made sure they were not hired and they were given no union protection for the way they were treated at many schools. Now they are without the same due process afforded most teachers. And under this new agreement they can be fired instantly, and you can bet principals will find any reason to label them ineffective.
The payout schedule is also a joke.
I am so disappointed that you will shill for Mulgrew and Weingarten like this without understanding the implications of what you are doing to so many good teachers turned into ATRs through no fault of their own. Shame on you!!! Shame on deBlasio and Farina as well. But most of all, shame on the UFT!!
Schoolgal, the new contract is better than no contract. But more important, it changes the tone that was established under Bloomberg and Klein where test scores were the only thing that mattered. The new contract puts an emphasis on professional development and gives more time for parent-teacher meetings. There is a focus on professionalism and school improvement that was totally lacking for the past 12 years. I consider that a major change. I think it sends a signal to the rest of the country that the nation’s largest school district is on a new path. There are parts of the contract that will inevitably disappoint those who wanted something different. But the difference in tone matters, and I far prefer this contract to anything that would have come from Klein or Walcott.
Diane,
My head is spinning because there is no way you or anyone is really privy to the fine print. You are basically putting a noose around the neck of all ATRs because principals want new teachers they can groom and will be subservient. When you fool around with due process it will effect all teachers down the line and give the next Bloomberg ammunition to get rid of experienced teachers. This is a travesty and you just consider this a part of the contract that we should ignore??
I find it strange that you would even print this before checking out the details. Have you read what the NYC bloggers like Arthur are saying?? Here is just one post on the subject.
http://nyceducator.com/2014/05/uft-contract-committee-votes-up-moa.html
As for the previous contracts, keep in mind that Weingarten had a hand in it as well.
Please, I do not want my respect for you to wane, but before you go celebrating, know what the implications are down the road. Experienced teachers should be very afraid because what is happening to the ATRs will set the precedent for future contracts.
I just wish you would do your own homework before putting out this PR otherwise you are no better than all the other media outlets who celebrate Reform agendas while leaving out the facts. Or, at least give those of us who understand these implications some credit.
I’m not a BDB fan, and I’ve always thought the talk about “new tone” and “how wonderful it is to have an educator as chancellor” was transparent, worthless spin. But I have to hand it to BDB. The new tone wasn’t worthless. Teachers paid for it in these negotiations. Maybe it’s worth it, maybe it’s not. But the tone isn’t free, at least not for teachers. So celebrate your new tone, you earned it!
Diane,
Schoolgal is correct…this is a camouflaged contract. Please reconsider your hasty victory until the contract is absorbed and deciphered.
“But more important, it changes the tone that was established under Bloomberg and Klein where test scores were the only thing that mattered.”
And I think we all appreciate that. But we can’t pay our ConEd bills with tone.
It’s an interesting situation.
In terms of our national movement against what’s being termed “reform”, this is, indeed, a significant moment. Bloomberg and Klein were (and still are) major players in the dismantling of public education. We can’t understate that and I’m in agreement with you, Diane, as to it’s importance. It says something to the nation.
But the fact that the vote was held despite the absence of a memorandum of agreement is disquieting. As are other provisions of the contract.
So yes: it’s of national significance. But it’s also the contract that we, the teachers of NYC, will have to live with for the next 4 or more years. And, therefore worthy of careful review and discussion/debate.
I’d also like to thank you for giving us this forum on which to relate our views, Diane. I hope this discussion remains civil, folks, despite any differences in opinion.
Re ATRs all this contract says is that if an ATR is sent away from two different schools for unprofessional behavior such as talking on a cell phone instead of teaching the class they will have an expedited hearing. This DOES NOT take away their due process rights. They will still have their day in front of an arbitrator and the evidence must be sufficient to prove that they are not behaving professionally. As a profession we should not accept the behavior of any teacher who would fall into this category. We all agree that such teachers are a minority of the ATR pool. But that minority does not belong in the profession and should be terminated after due process. Anything less would show that teachers are not deserving of the respect we ask for as professionals.
Thank you for simplifying the matter. Note to ATRs–stay off the phone because once you are at the hearing you will be leaving with a termination notice even if you are innocent because principals always tell the truth,
With all due respect Diane, you are mistaken about this contract.
Aside from it blessing a ten-year, interest free loan by teachers to the city, it also creates a stealth form of merit pay and, most dangerously, creates a second tier of schools (up to 10% of the total) that will effectively be turned into charter schools with a minimal contract, but with teachers still required to pay union dues.
Combine this with Weingrew’s silence while the new NYS budget directs immense resources to charters, and we are looking at further shrinking of the public school system.
I’m disappointed that your support of De Blasio and Farina seems to have led you to overlook these facts, which stand out even before the fine print of the contract is revealed.
Diane,
I have often found myself cheered by your support for teachers and criticism of the wave of education reforms which have flooded the nation, which were particularly devastating in NY. But you concern me when your views seem to run counter to your otherwise anti-reform stance, like your bizarre embrace and attempt to whitewash the damage done by the grand dissembler, Randi Weingarten, who has done extensive, well-documented damage to teachers/unions with her pro-reform cheerleading and machinations, both in NY and nationwide.
I am likewise concerned that you ONLY wrote positively about the new contract. I think many of those who have looked to you as a true teacher advocate would expect you to give the new contract a more sobering look and realistic critique than it seems you have done. Many of the astute critiques found here and elsewhere (re: merit pay, union protections gone for 10% of schools, ATR unfairness) can point you in that direction.
Diane,
I am very curious what you think about the PROSE schools. It seems like they are renaming charter school to me. They can opt out of 65% of the contract? What does they mean? Which parts? We all need to see the fine print here.
Whoops! Charter schools.
Diane,
I still love and support you, but I think you have entered this realm too hastily and without enough critical thought.
True, the tone is changing, and we should take what we can get, but let’s not call this triumphant by any means. There are a lot of teachers unjustly (not all) thrown into the ATR pool, and good luck to them in getting their jobs back.
Also, a raise spread out until 2020 is specious because there will be many teachers unjustly terminated (to contain costs) who will never realize this raise.
The police and firefigher’s unions would never have accepted such a deal.
10% of schools opting out is like sayiing we are not completely pregnant. Are we unionized or are we not? Do we all serve under the contract for the same city or do we not?
I realize you don’t have to work under the BOE rules and contracts. I don’t hold that against you at all. You are the premier voice of public school educators.
I don’t think labor issues are your forte, at least not in this instance.
Still, we must all continue to band together and not let any of this injustice divide us.
But the unions reinventing themselves through newly elected cuacuses will be one of the most pivotal and best things to happen over time. I have great faith in that.
If you ask a bright, talented, motivated and enthusiastic person – no matter the age – if he/she would want to become a teacher, you almost always get laughed in the face. Why? Is it because they cite overcrowded classrooms? Excessive paperwork? Charter school conflicts? No, it is because a teacher’s salary is a joke to them. They complain about the paycheck. How is NYC (or the country) going to attract the best and the brightest to teach, and to keep the best in its present ranks, when the financial incentive is so low, if not insulting? We as teachers have to stop acting as if we are doing charity work, grateful for whatever money is being given to us. No. WE ARE PROFESSIONALS, and should be treated AND PAID as such!
Dawn, if I wanted to be like Mother Teresa, I would have joined a convent.
I know it’s “for the children”, but what about “my children”, don’t they deserve a decent life? Pay me my due!
Ellen, That is my point. We are not martyrs. We have families to support. We (teachers) must stop acting like we are doing charity work. We must act like professionals and demand our due.
Agreed. But don’t expect the general public to be sympathetic to our plight.
$120,000 for a 10 month work year is a very nice base salary. The complaining must end. Let’s just do our jobs. Let’s thank the UFT.
How many teachers are collecting that salary? I have 12 to go…might not make it to that day. But what I do know is that I can’t afford to buy a home in the city I work in. And I work harder than most of them.
“Educator”, You don’t sound like a teacher to me, otherwise you would understand that exaggeration and hyperbole have no place here. They only serve to add fuel to the teacher bashers. There are very few teachers who only work 10 months per year and even fewer who receive $120,000. I have trust that Diane will eventually look more deeply into this contract and see the harm it will do.
“Shut up and get back to work.”
That’s a great argument, worthy of the Boss.
Let’s put the money aside and look at the truly troubling details in the contract. To me that is giving educators the “option” to give up their union rights in the name of innovation. Who is going to give up their rights voluntarily? I believe that newer teachers will probably be tricked into doing this. Or untenured teachers might be bullied into it by their principals. Which schools have lots of new, untenured teachers? Schools in neighborhoods with high poverty. So teachers that serve the neediest students, will not have their rights protected. And then who will want to work at these schools. No one with any common sense.
you got that right. no one has any idea about the utter disregard fot the rights of a teacher as a human being, let alone aa a professional, that is the way it is in too many schools. Look, I know great principals, evry bit as commteed to learning and to children as the best teachers. My niece is one of them, as the teachers who worked in her schools know.
But, when human beings are given absolute control, when there is not a shred of accountability because the enforceers of the law are complicit, and the propaganda machine is perfected so that the finger of blame is always points at the victims, then the worst traits of failed human beings come into play. I saw it on my own stage, and witnesed if over 2 decades. The NY Teacher has reported the tyranny and lawlessness of principals in NYC. The NAPTA site http://www.endteacher abuse.com, spellls out the trauma for Americans who just happen to be teachers, betsy Combier’s sites chronicle abuse of the law that are beyond merely scandalous. Perdaily, in LAUSD does the same.
And yet, even people as brilliant and informed as Diane, do not see the devil in the details of this contract. I get it. The unions are the only thing between teachers and destructive, top-down managers… but not until the union steps up and enforces the law of the land will this change… and that will not come until teachers send a clear messageto the unions aobut what they expect.
Intimdation, humiliation, bullying and retribution cannot remain in the educational workplace. Lorna Stremcha, in Montana, worked with the legislature to end such workplace lawlessness in her state. 52 states…thosuands of school systems, a media that is purchased by the very culprits who cause the chaos, and nothing changes in most places.
I met a teacher at the gym, yestreday. Exhausted after 8 years of seeking redrss in the courts, so she couuld continue to earn her salalry, she reported what the ATRs go through. Ths former classroom professionals were forced to sub, sent to schools across the city (does anyone know how far some of the boroughs are from each other?) She lives in Rockland, worked in the Bronx, but they sent her to Staten Island. She told me about the despair and desparton of teachers that she meets all the time, good people whose lives are shattered. They know that neither their experience, education or expertise will mke a difference, and that there will be no genuine job opportunities as this contract suggests.
I want to believe in the contract, but it will take a willing suspension of disbeleif tht I once reserved for science iction and fantasy.
I support Diane, but this not my favorite post. The information out there is not good for members or students. We will be voting this contract down.
http://uftcontract.com has more details and elicits an open discussion on the topics.
You got that right Francesco . If Diane or anyone who thinks this contract is what will change anything, had seen what you and I have seen, who know what we know, the shm that it coveers would be crystal clear.
I wonder, for example how many teachers will be working for the 9 years that will be needed to get the benefit of the salary deal.
I wish everyone who reads here would go to your site, or Betsy Combier’s to hear your story. It would put an end to conjecture about what is the observable reality for teachers.
(did you read the comment here, about the “$120,000 for 10 months work” that someone posted here? Stop laughing, Francesco, it is too sad.
I worked past midnight during the school year to accomplish the work, the planning , the performance evaluation, the creating materials. I went to classes every summer to keep informed about my profession, and was usually in my classroom weeks before school began.. in one place, to ensure there were glass panes in the windows and the plaster from the ceiling did not cover the desks.
With a Master’s degree plus 60 credits, I was earning 58k when they decided that I should retire before a longevity raise would kick in.
No professional in any career endues the disrespect and outrageous misconceptions about their profession as we do.
Carman Farina has done nothing to overturn the culture of principals who are concerned more about control and punishment, than they are about innovation and collaboration. Teachers are “gone after” for the slightest perception of questioning authority. How can this group of incompetent administrators be entrusted to award tax payer money deservedly when they lack the ethics and morality to appropriately run a school? Story after story has appeared in the papers about principals who persist in criminal behavior and questionable ethics. What has Farina done about this? Nothing! An independent review board needs to be appointed to investigate principals, superintendents, and networks.
Seriously!! Just the way the retro is structured is an insult. I for one as many of my colleagues are voting NO.
You said it! For those of us who know what is actually happening, this is more that an insult… it is a travesty!
I’m a 6th-year teacher and I could care less about the “cost-of-living and inflation” argument. We have longevity bonuses and salary steps to care of that, and we come off as greedy and petulant when we complain about the delayed repayment plan. It’s standard procedure; they have to budget for these raises first. There are MUCH bigger problems to complain about, and they all have to do with protecting the rights that our predecessors worked so hard for.
– We promised the ATR’s that we would not abandon them. I don’t care what anyone says; this contract does. This turns their fate over to principals, with no checks on their power. Do we protect bad teachers? Of course. But that is the lesser evil. This validates their tactic of closing schools just to get rid of veteran teachers with high salaries. Nothing will stop them from doing that except a contract that explicitly protects teachers in that position.
– This does not protect untenured teachers at all. The DOE can terminate them all just to save money, and nothing can stop them. They won’t be obligated to pay a dime of back-pay that they already earned, nor will they be on the hook for those longevity bonuses and salary steps that are owed. This contract abandons them. With this contract, they have every incentive to terminate all untenured teachers for no reason other than their financial obligations to them. Teachers should not have to look over their shoulders all the time. What talented, ambitious person would choose this profession under such terms?
– It allows the commissioner decide whether student surveys can be used as part of evaluations. What!? Neuroscience 101 teaches us that the part of the brain that controls judgement is not even fully developed in teenagers. Teenagers are, in general, not capable of being objective and fair in such matters. This will simply encourage teachers to water down their lessons in order to give students what they want, because that will result in better ratings. Many of the best teachers are the ones you don’t appreciate until years later.
– We still have standards and curriculum forced on us. We are professionals. Would we tell a doctor to teach every patient the same thing? No, because it should be a question of meeting the patient where they’re at in terms of health. Most of my high school students don’t know how to work with fractions or do basic mental math to save money on groceries; where is the contract that allows me to teach them that?
– 200 schools being able to opt out of the terms speaks for itself. As many have pointed out, that clause will affect schools with young teachers who can’t stand up for themselves. That’s unacceptable. I know there are good intentions at play, but that is a vulnerability that can be easily exploited.
– I assume principals decide who becomes a “master teacher” and who becomes an “ambassador teacher”. I don’t see any possibility of anything going wrong with that; do you? (sarcasm + irony = previous question)
If this is ratified, it is a sign that the union is willing to cannibalize itself. It will be a question of one dominant section of the union, much of which is earning about $100k per year, being willing to throw the next generation (as well as the ATR’s and others that they ostensibly represent) under the bus for $20k more – for it is that conglomerate, i.e. the Unity caucus and all the ones have been too tempted to take an extra $5-10k every chance they get instead of preserving the dignity of the profession, that keeps passing through bad ideas (charter schools, mayoral control, standardized testing, merit pay, the ATR pool) in order to benefit in the short term while crapping on the union in the long term. Public opinion is already against the union; do you think where there’s smoke, there’s no fire? Naturally, I tend to defend teachers and unions, but if this contract is ratified it will confirm much of the criticism in my mind. The union is supposed to be a bastion of dignity and opportunity for the middle class, not a winner-take-all ATM for those who are first in line. I say we should take a stand for the dignity of the profession and stop worrying about money. When we have a union that does that, we will have one that is worthy of the respect teachers once had.
After all principals who were hired under the Bloomberg administration are punished for their crimes against humanity will I consider a contract that offers nothing in the form of teacher protection. Oh the stories I could tell–the heartbreak, the bullying, the abuse of power, the lies, the cheating, the destruction of morale, unhappy students, lower student enrollment, etc., etc., etc.
The contract is TERRIBLE !!!! Thanks Diane for selling teachers out after fighting for our rights. I thought you understand what goes on day to day in a classroom.