True, they've never published the article that they promised about "teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve, including how teachers became part of the ATR." Still, they published some great articles in the latest edition (December 22, 2011). For example:
*(p. 1) a headline stating, "Parents get information and resources from the union" (but not ATR teachers);
*(p. 8) a full-page article about the UFT's participation in the fight for voting rights (which ATR teachers, who do not belong to any local chapter, do not have);
*(p. 13) a half-page editorial by our President, Michael Mulgrew, who writes that "2011 has turned out to be the year that people said 'enough'" (you're right, Mike--ATR teachers have taken enough abuse);
*(pp. 24-25) a two-page spread about the UFT's "Annual Parent Conference" (which means they meet with parents about as frequently as they meet with the ATR teachers);
*(p. 33) a notice about the New York Teacher obituary policy (where someday you might read about a teacher who served 23 years in the ATR).
The piece de resistance, however, came on page 38 of this venerable 48-page publication:
*approximately 1/16 of a page dedicated to a summary of a resolution in support of the ATR that was passed at the December 7 meeting of the UFT's Delegate Assembly.
My writing teachers always taught me to write a conclusion, and I teach the same to my students. In this case, however, I leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions about whether the UFT thinks the ATR issue is particularly urgent or important.