What to do about Hardship Commutes for ATR Teachers

For the teacher who must be mobile,
Here's some advice from Philip Nobile.

Article 18D of the Collective Bargaining Agreement allows grievances for hardship commutes--i.e., one-way travel from home to school via public transportation exceeding 90 minutes.

Unfortunately, the UFT did not put that provision in the ATR agreement. So when I grieved repeated 90+ minute treks from Brooklyn to Staten Island last year, the heartless DOE said tough luck and the Chancellor’s Representative denied at Step 1 and Step 2 (see here).  Showing surprising solidarity, the UFT agreed to take the case to arbitration, which could be months away. 

Pending our sure victory bye-in-bye, you don’t have to lay down and ride out the hardship, especially a six-weeker. Here are some recommended moves that could help.  

►Email Amy Arundell and your District Representative and ask them to call Lawrence Becker, head of Human Resources, requesting a healthier and more humane commute in your case.  Offer Becker, an extreme travel hardliner, a golden bridge of retreat. If Becker says no, you go to the principal. The UFT must get its hands dirty and not leave all the work for us.

►Either the DR or you calls the principal and explains your situation; the principal can overturn your assignment for any reason; maybe he won’t want a tired and possibly resentful teacher in his building. No skin off his nose if you go elsewhere.

►if you prefer less fuss, schmooze the school's ATR person on your circumstances, and say in a nice way that you won’t arrive until second period. At least you won’t lose sleep, the most hateful hardship for me.

Any other suggestions or anecdotes ?

Buyouts for ATR teachers? Anyone Home?

Chancellor Dennis Walcott

Just about two months ago, 974 readers saw an article in this blog  about Chancellor Walcott's plan to offer retirement buyouts to ATR teachers.  The UFT, though, doesn't seem to know anything about it.  Here is a message from an anonymous ATR teacher:

No offer.  I called the UFT and spoke to a nasty woman who said, "We don't have a buyout."  I asked about the negotiations and where they stand and she repeated, "We don't have a buyout." Does anyone know what's happening? 

Does the UFT leadership betray its members?

Sheikh Abdulaziz al-sheikh, the
 Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

It's really none of our business what UFT President Michael Mulgrew may have done with a female guidance counselor on a drafting table at Grady H.S. (click here to see the allegation).  What does concern us is the possibility that Mulgrew promoted his paramour to an important union job for which she was not qualified, and that he may have been compromised by his scandal when he negotiated with the DOE.

Leave it to NYCATR's ace commentator Philip Nobile to formulate the issue with just the right mix of clear reasoning and biting cynicism.  Here's what Nobile wrote as a comment to a Gotham Schools report about the scandal:

Would our UFT leaders betray members to protect their own interests? Is the Grand Mufti Moslem?

Click here to see Nobile's full comment.  

Mulgrew to ATRs: You are second-class UFT members

Marjorie Stamberg reports:

At the Wednesday, May 16 meeting of the UFT's Delegate Assembly , I raised the issue of the union's cynical "solution" to the UFT's disenfranchisment of ATRs in the union elections. Many ATRs had no place to vote in the union elections as they trudge from school to school on a weekly basis, where they are treated as non-people until they move on the next week. This week-to-week trek was agreed upon by the union and the DOE last spring, as part of the deal that there be no teacher layoffs. Last fall, I and others put forward motions that the ATRs be accorded their full voting rights with their own chapter. We have been fighting for this for several years, and it has always been brushed off with the excuse that their situation is only "temporary."  

Last week, the UFT leadership announced a "solution"--with chapter elections upon us, they decided that ATRs would vote at the school where they are for the week the elections are held. This is outrageous--how can ATR teachers effectively advocate for their needs when they are "here today, gone tomorrow," and the chapter representatives are not accountable to them? 

UFT President, Michael Mulgrew

Yesterday, when I raised this issue in the question period at the delegate assembly, Mulgrew refused to let me get a sentence out, interrupting me, harassing and yelling, "What's your question," "Make it a question," "That's not a question!" Following his lead, a passel of Unity delegates obediently picked up the jeer. Over the din, I was finally able to get out, "My question is, how do you justify this outrageous cynical disenfranchisement of the ATRs' right to vote?" and saying "the ATRs need their own chapter."

The Artful Dodger

Mulgrew answered with a time-honored evasion: The union is in arbitration, he said, because the DOE has not kept to its commitment to place ATRs in open positions and long-term vacancies. Until this arbitration is settled, the union is doing the "best it can" to give ATRs voting rights. He was silent on the fact that the weekly trek of ATRs is happening with the consent of the UFT leadership, which agreed to it as part of the deal on layoffs last spring.

Don't worry, I will keep on raising this issue. With more schools closing than ever, there will be a huge swelling of the ATR pool next fall. As we all know, "If you're not ATR, you could be soon." The fight for rights of ATR teachers is everyone's fight.

Good News, Bad News

DOCTOR: I have some good news and some bad news.

PATIENT: Okay, Doc.  Let me hear the good news first.

DOCTOR: The good news is that your chances for survival are much better than we thought.

PATIENT: That's great, Doc. So what's the bad news?

DOCTOR: The bad news is that you were only seriously ill in the first place because of my poor diagnosis and criminally negligent treatments. 

No, that is not very funny.  But it is an accurate metaphor for a good-news story that appeared in Monday's New York Times SchoolBook.  The Old Gray Lady reported that the number of teachers in the ATR (Absent Teacher Reserve) has fallen to its lowest point in several years. A year ago, there were 1,139 teachers in the ATR; this April, there are only 831.

Both the DOE and the UFT credit the decrease to the agreement, reached last summer, under which ATR teachers are reassigned each week to a different school.  As the Times puts it, "the game of musical chairs" has allowed teachers to meet a wide range of principals, thus exposing them to a larger variety of job opportunities. 


So what's the bad news?  That none of this was necessary.

*It was not necessary to remove so many teachers from their original positions.  Most of them lost their positions because the Mayor decided to close their schools due to poor performance--performance that has much more to do with mayoral neglect than with teacher incompetence.

*It was not necessary to sentence these teachers to the ATR Purgatory. The Collective Bargaining Agreement--signed by the Mayor, the Chancellor, and the UFT--stipulates that teachers in excess "must be placed in vacancies within [their] district to the fullest degree possible" (see Article 17, Rule 4).  With both class sizes and teacher attrition rates rising rapidly, the DOE (and its frequent accomplice, the UFT) could have killed three birds with one stone by placing the vast majority of excessed teachers in vacancies within their districts.  

*It was not necessary to subject teachers to the indignity of weekly reassignment in order to acquaint them with a wide range of principals.  The DOE could have relied on the job fairs that it held for several years, and it could have made them meaningful for experienced, excessed teachers.  Instead, those who attended these fairs saw many empty tables that should have been occupied by principals, and many young Teaching Fellows, who should never have had a chance for a job as long as qualified, veteran employees were still looking for positions. 

And so, dear colleagues, we congratulate those of you who have found new positions.  Best wishes for a long and healthy career.  And take our advice: find a better doctor. 


Picture credits:
     
http://www.geninv.net/wp-content/uploads/dorsopathy-caused-oxygen-deprivation-diseases.jpg




https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAqg0NYTzYmW-Zqkf7aEw__IHfLxic1eSwQFJJ7AY_aDg095be4c1iF51M-xX-NqBI1fIAOSMChVEiYp1NZkmJrsJWk3CXPGu9s-wZI1inj_QpyUAuDdGKNt6FZdsJihGJCJ6XLekB7u4U/s1600/purgatory.jpg

Mike Bloomberg Wants You!

NYCATR has never hesitated to criticize the UFT for its mistakes, despite the great amount of good work that it does for teachers and students.  So too, we will not hesitate from giving credit to the UFT when it hits the bull's-eye, as with the cartoon below. 

http://www.uft.org/files/photo/mike_bloomberg_wants_you_1.jpg

I had a dream

http://media.brainz.org/uploads/2011/01/400martin_luther_king_jr.jpg

I had a dream a few nights ago.

I had a dream that I was together with hundreds of teachers at a Professional Development day required by the DOE.

I had a dream.

I had a dream that before lunch time, a UFT rep announced that there would be a union meeting in Room 204.  We all got up and headed for the staircase so we could go to Room 204. 

I had a dream.

I had a dream that as I climbed the stairs I was thinking of some things I would like to say to the UFT up there in Room 204.  I would like to tell them about my three years of frustration as a member of the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR); I would like to tell them how present ATR teachers are being shuffled around their districts on a weekly basis; I would like to tell them how ridiculous it is that these teachers are now being evaluated by some macabre creation of bureaucracy called Field Supervisors; I would like to tell them that ATR teachers have been disenfranchised from voting for a chapter leader because they do not belong to any chapter; I would like to tell them how I once mentioned all this to a UFT rep who visited my school, and his answer was to repeat, like some automaton, "But we saved their jobs." 

I had a dream that my blood pressure was rising as I climbed those steps.

We all had a bit of trouble finding the room, but finally we were there.  There must have been about a hundred of us, all standing in a classroom.  A UFT representative began to speak.  She told us that we shouldn't complain about the difficulties of "differentiating instruction" because the idea was first proposed by John Dewey in 1911.  We also shouldn't complain about excessive observations or unfair evaluations, because nothing in the Collective Bargaining Agreement limits the number of times that a supervisor can observe a teacher.

Then the UFT rep began to show us a video on the classroom's SmartBoard.  

http://www.instablogsimages.com/1/2011/11/03/flying_saucer_by_
michigan_man_vovrh.jpg

In the foreground, a man stood and babbled some kind of motivational psychobabble.  In the background, there was a huge circular object, sort of like a giant Frisbee.  As the man in the foreground babbled, workers began loading hundreds of oranges into a hole in the center of the Frisbee.  

And then the man announced that the flying saucer would now take off.  There was a loud noise which seemed to emanate from somewhere underneath the huge pile of oranges and then the oranges were sucked into the saucer.

A few seconds later, streams of orange juice began to squirt out of hundreds of little holes in the sides of the flying saucer.  The orange juice created a jet stream that pushed the flying saucer up into the air and far away.

The announcer on the screen gushed with enthusiasm.  And then the dream was over, and the meeting was over.  

Comrades, what does this dream mean?  Does it mean that my mother diapered me incorrectly?  Does it mean that I lust after orange juice?

Or does the UFT Orange-Juice Flying Saucer video represent the union's tactics of distraction?   

http://www.uft.org/seeing-believing/attacks-voting-rights-
unraveling-our-democracy

Does my dream mean that I am frustrated with the UFT for publishing big colorful pages about American citizens losing their voting rights, but nary a word about members of their own union who have lost those same rights?

Does it mean that I am frustrated with the UFT for promising continued meetings with ATR teachers to discuss their concerns, and instead gave them Professional Development sessions, to which only some of them were invited? 

How do you interpret my dream?  Do you dare to try?

Do you trust the UFT?

Here is the image that graces the front page of the latest edition of the UFT's New York Teacher:

Brothers and sisters of the ATR: Are you howling with laughter? Are you cringing? Vomiting? Smashing your computer?

We at NYCATR have decided to leave the comments about this image to you, the readers.  Please send us your thoughts by commenting on this blogpost.  We recommend that you use the following format:

I do not trust the UFT because... 

Picture credit:   http://www.uft.org/files/photo/in-uft-we-trust.jpg

How important is the ATR issue?

You really gotta hand it to the UFT's "newspaper," the New York Teacher.  

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.  

     

  

ATR teacher has never been used in his content area

An ATR teacher known as Every ATR has some interesting thoughts about the DOE's new plan for evaluating him and his colleagues in Brooklyn.



A substitute teacher dodges paper airplanes.
I am a HS ESL teacher. So far none of my ATR assignments have used me in my content area. I am troubled by the DOE's position that ATRs who are not covering classes in their content area will be judged on their classroom management. skills. When students in high school see a substitute (and that's what we are to the school's administration and to the students) the students see party time. Students won't sit still for a lesson. If absentee work is left students may or may not bother to do it. The UFT's advice to "teach what we know" just doesn't fly with high school students. These students, teenagers, will complain that what the sub tries to teach is not what the class is supposed to be. 


I understand from Amy Arundel, that the UFT has sent to the DOE a protocol for how principals should be utilizing ATRs.  It seems to me that until a protocol is in place for how ATRs are to be used, no one should be observing any ATR, particularly if they are being used out of their license area. By the way, aren't observations only supposed to be done when a teacher is actually teaching a class in his or her content area? 


By the way, as I've moved from high school to high school in Brooklyn, I've noticed that these new mini-schools have pretty much the same level of student as the school I was phased out of--low academics and high behavior problems. The only difference I can see is that these mini-schools have far fewer students and far, far more technological resources. I've also noticed that they are following administrative and pedagogical models that seem strange and useless. Exactly what is "ADVISORY" ??? 

Keep the faith.

Photo credit:

      https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLRItiEX3T_0zmNr6mdeYMUcbD5gA11SHpbyRdl-DNzISiPc4cpl_QyOXX65HUrEqH5s4FrLGFGqRYeFW77D3ADK_MK7QutG9Yzh_FGc-wRhJ3GLMasAfDFDUDUNUQXTCEEMZk44c-C20/s400/substitute+teacher.jpg

Mendel mollifies; ATRs react

A teacher (?) in perm

An ATR teacher who goes by the name "ATR in Perm" forwarded to us a letter that UFT Secretary Michael Mendel sent to ATR teachers in Brooklyn Districts 13-23, 32, and 73 (the Brooklyn high school superintendency). 

Mendel's letter is a follow-up to the DOE's recent announcement that a group of administrators called "Field Supervisors" will begin evaluating ATR teachers.

Below is Mendel's letter (with a few key points highlighted by NYCATR). Following the letter is ATR in Perm's response; he who forwards the message gets first dibs at trashing it. 

Dear colleague,

The UFT has been informed that the DOE will implement a new supervisory system for ATRs in Brooklyn community school districts (Districts 13-23 and 32) and Brooklyn high school superintendency (District 73). They have labeled it a pilot, though they did not indicate how or when the pilot would be evaluated; nor have they indicated if or when they would extend this system to other ATRs. We were informed about this plan, but had no input into it. I am writing to assure you that the union will continue to make sure that your rights as a UFT member are not violated and your professionalism as a teacher is respected. 

The DOE has created a new position, that of field supervisor, with the intent that field supervisors will provide some measure of evaluative continuity to the members whom they observe and to whom they provide professional feedback. They have done this because state law requires that all teachers must be evaluated and rated. 

As always, the UFT will monitor the implementation of this new system carefully to make sure that it is implemented appropriately (e.g., that members are observed on things like classroom management, and not on things like content when they are teaching out of license — in other words, things that make sense). We will address concerns that come up with the DOE immediately. Above all, we will continue to hold the DOE’s feet to the fire on the main tenet of the June ATR agreement, which is to fill all long-term absences and leaves with ATRS and to help members in the Absent Teacher Reserve find permanent positions. 

We know that you play a valuable role in virtually every city school, under often challenging circumstances, and that your contributions are often unrecognized. We are committed to ensuring that ATRs are treated like professionals and are working to make sure this new supervisory system does that. 

If you have questions or concerns, please contact your district representative or Amy Arundell at aarundell@uft.org.

ATR in Perm: The UFT's Michael Mendell issued a letter on the UFT's position on the ATR teacher evaluations. Shockingly, the area that visiting teachers routinely have the most trouble with, classroom management, is an area that Mendell thinks is fair game for evaluating teachers.

"We are committed to ensuring that ATRs are treated like professionals . . ." Yeah? Well, why are you letting us get evaluated on handling kids who we've just met minutes ago? School tone, set by administration, as to whether they discipline students in a timely fashion or whether they coddle them, is the greatest factor (aside from home upbringing) in how kids will react to even the sternest and most confident Classroom-Management-minded teacher.

NYCATR gadfly stings horses and lipsticked pigs

Philip Nobile, our resident gadfly, has been corresponding with UFT officials again. NYCATR is proud to present Nobile's stinging messages to the UFT, and not so proud to present some of the UFT's responses.

MESSAGE #1:

December 2, 2011

From: Philip Nobile

To:  Thomas Bennett, Basis HS representative; Amy Arundell, Special Representative; Howard Schoor, Brookly Borough Representative; Cc: Michael Mulgrew, President; Michael Mendel, Secretary

Dear colleagues :

You have not responded to my email query of November 12 quoted below:

"According to Tom [Bennett], the UFT is talking to DOE about insane ATR commutes. I urge all deliberate speed. I just got my 3rd S.I. order in four weeks [Nobile lives in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn]. Please update. When did the UFT last speak to DOE on this matter and what was the conclusion?"

As you know, ATRs are discontented with their plight, especially considering that we are barred from the committee reviewing the agreement. This is typical of how Unity leadership operates. The top tells the bottom (ATRs) that they are unworthy of chapter representation or access to DA or chapter leader meetings. And topping off our disenfranchisement, you deprive us of basic information like the above.

Please answer my question. Thanks for your consideration.

Philip

MESSAGE #2:

From: Thomas Bennet

To: Philip Nobile

Dear Philip:

I said we are talking to them. By that I mean we had hoped that the DOE would see that a more sensible approach to the Tottenville-Bed-Stuy shuttle would be in everyone’s interest. I haven’t heard much from ATRs in the last few weeks, so I’m wondering if DOE has started keeping people closer to home? 

Your assertion that all ATRs are disconcerted with their plight, and their lack of equanimity arises from their ignorance of “secret” bargaining sessions, access to DA, and separate chapter representation is not borne out by my experience, and I speak with a lot of ATRs. 

Naturally, if I hear anything about a change of policy, I’ll let you know. And please keep me informed about any changes you experience in the field.

I’m still looking for you at Staten Island Tech. Perhaps we can team-teach my Global class one of these weeks.

T.B.

MESSAGE #3:

From: Philip Nobile

To: Thomas Bennett

Tom,

Apparently, we talk to different ATRs. I've never met a contented one.

Mulgrew's lipstick has worn off this pig. The ATR situation is akin to the rubber room fiasco, and the UFT's hands are all over it. How would you like to sub in a different school every week? Silly question.

Anyhow, why won't somebody tell me:

 (1) who from the UFT has talked to DOE about ATRs and when;

       (2) what was on the agenda and what was the DOE's reaction
       to commuter complaints, and the UFT's counter-reaction; and

       (3) why are no ATRs on the the UFT review committee?

These are basic questions. We need to know if you're fighting for us. In the name of transparency the UFT owes ATRs an explanation.

On the other hand, only co-teaching with you could carry me back to S.I. 

Philip

P.S. Howie promised future ATR meetings at the October fest. Do you have a date in mind?

Image credits:


     https://encrypted-tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSahLVwPtYHgF-ELDgOL68q9D3iZQsUnHrD1dwDywEVAhuoSz13UA

     http://strategichighperformance.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/lipstick-on-a-pig.jpg

UFT Chapter Leaders leave Gypsy Teacher feeling lonely

NYCATR's Gypsy Teacher recently spent a week at Brooklyn Tech High School.  She enjoyed her work (yes, ATR teachers work) but she has a disturbing report about the treatment she has received from UFT Chapter Leaders.  

A lonely Gypsy

These past 8 days I have been at Brooklyn Tech High School in Fort Greene, Brooklyn. This school is mega big! It covers 9 floors and one long city block. Since I do not take elevators, I called the school to voice my concerns. They assured me they would try to keep me on lower floors and for the most part they did. The students are wonderful and did ALL the work that the teachers left--and every teacher did leave a real assignment. Why is it that in the better schools assignments are left when in other schools you have to hunt for sub lessons? Is it because the teachers in the less than stellar schools know that the students won’t do the assignments anyway? I don’t know the answer. 

I was given my daily assignments by aides. One was a bit rude but I ignored her. I never saw an AP or the Principal. And I never saw the UFT Chapter Leader. Neither did the other ATRs. Isn’t that supposed to be part of the agreement, that the Chapter Leader of each school greets us? I have never been greeted by a chapter leader! Why can the UFT break their promises to the ATR teachers and get away with it? 

There were two other ATRs at the school with me and we spoke about our frustration and feelings of anger. One is actually interviewing attorneys for a class action suit. Anyway, I spent most of my time in the classroom I was assigned. 

One day I went out for lunch. There are many restaurants and delis around the area but since I had to pay for parking almost every day I brought my lunch. Yes, parking is ridiculous. I was lucky a couple of times to find people pulling out of a space but I had to spend $15 a day to park most of the time. This along with gas and tolls turned out to be a very costly assignment. 

It would be nice if ATRs could be issued DOE parking passes to park around the schools they are assigned to. But why would they make things easier? 

In conclusion, great school. Terrible parking.

Photo credit: http://image57.webshots.com/157/4/85/93/488448593OymtjT_ph.jpg

The UFT keeps its promises by publishing them

I would like to believe in the UFT.  I would really love to feel in my heart that they stand behind me and all other New York City teachers with all their strength.   Alas, I find myself feeling like Winston Smith in Orwell's 1984--I desperately want to believe that a man holding up four fingers is really holding up five, but I can't deny the reality in front of my eyes.  

On November 9, the UFT posted on its website a resolution regarding the teachers of the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR).  It included the following:

RESOLVED that the New York Teacher will run an article on teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve, including how teachers became part of the ATR.

Has the UFT kept its promise?  Only in the measliest sense of the word.  Yes, an article was published, on page 3 of the November 24th edition of the New York Teacher.  It consisted of a very brief summary of the resolution mentioned above, including the promise to publish an article about the ATR in the New York Teacher.  In other words, the UFT is keeping its promise to publish an article about the ATR by publishing its promise to publish an article about the ATR.  Does that sound like Orwellian doublespeak?  You bet it does.

I'll bet I know the answer to a few other questions, too:

* Why was this article on page 3, and not on page 1 or 2?

* Why did this little four-inch report on the ATR have to share space with news about four other UFT resolutions, none of which relate to the ATR issue?

* Why did this article get the headline "ATR measure breezes through," as if the ATR is not a contentious issue that has inspired hundreds of teachers to attend raucous meetings and has inspired one UFT official to deliver a  "demagogic rant" in opposition to a resolution that was proposed on behalf of ATR teachers? 

* And, finally, why didn't this article contain--as promised previously by the UFT--any information on "how teachers became part of the ATR"?

Could it be that the UFT wants this little ATR nuisance to quietly fade away?  Could it be that the UFT has nothing meaningful to say to a group of over 1,000 teachers who were sold like a mess of pottage so that King Bloomberg wouldn't lay off any teachers?  Could it really be that the UFT leadership believes that their job begins and ends with saving jobs, but the quality of those jobs is none of their business? 

What do you say, dear readers?

Picture credits:  https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZ36SCx6enSEvpoWJSkfBHqNIf2QLNzgm_70ID6ZxIlHRhxJYXdZN26Iws2YsK0Vw1XFBoWTpvKYkFUv1jaAyTRxllxrZj8n0lJ3qkwKm1AdeE1TMAor-eigLoZbsMzY9npn0HykAdRRY/s320/vlcsnap-2011-06-19-10h01m16s168.png


http://barkersandrubes.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/king-bloomberg.jpg?w=480&h=558

Need a REAL teacher? Call an ATR!

A fourth-grade class at PS 68 has been covered for weeks by per-diem substitutes.  When parent-teacher conferences came along last night, however, the principal realized that he needed a real teacher to speak to the parents.  He didn't call in the Marines.  He called an ATR teacher, named Rod,  who tells the story below.

Today I was asked to cover parent/teacher conferences at PS68. Their regular 4th grade teacher is out for five weeks on medical leave. The class has had day-to-day subs since then. Today, they needed a "real" teacher to deal with parents, report cards, explanations of test results and, of course, a work schedule that extends beyond the time required of a substitute. 

Well, the parents are upset. Their kids are falling behind, they claimed. Why aren't they putting a regular teacher like me in until the leave is over? They haven't had homework for three weeks. I think they confided in me because the kids who came with their parents were really excited about their day with me, reading and doing some fun school work for a change. They also saw a teacher with experience and a concern for their kids education.

I told them to speak to the AP. There are options…Oh, like me. I asked the Chapter Leader and he said the administration is too busy to deal with it and takes the easy way out. Too busy to run the school?

How sad for the kids, parents and me. I felt good, like a real teacher today, the first time since last year, teaching this class, getting them to shape up and talking with their parents. I would gladly stay, unlike some who suggest we don't want the responsibility . The DOE needs to look into poor management of schools like this. Stop blaming us. The UFT, too...Someone, please speak up!

Photo credit: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgki_NJ7vewDmDuq8Jqt0S4vLJolEM6FA6VABYKo9uDTN6zGtkuOHAwfNNtgMtFLqQeGdIoey_qU8t43UNbri2N2kQNMs_FYU_fCfr-WPdn924iQxr4CDgXzaGtmj0bYr0JJT-oot8uuR5N/s1600/teacher.jpg

Gypsy Teacher gets the cold shoulder

As I was walking to cover my classes-of-the-day at my school-of-the-week, I saw a familiar face smiling at me. I couldn't place him at first but I smiled back. He introduced himself to me and when I introduced myself I saw his smile slipping. He is the man that I begged to help me through emails and phone calls when they sent me to a school more than an hour from my house. After he failed to help me, I never heard from him again or had any contact with him until today. 

Anyway, I began to talk about the plight of the ATRs and how we are being sent to schools far and wide, most with no vacancies. He agreed that the plight of the teachers in District 76 was appalling. When I asked if a remedy was near, he heed and hawed and said that it would mean an informal agreement between the UFT and the DOE.

As I prodded him further he seemed to close down and look for an escape. "I have to teach my class," he said to me, as I continued to question him on what the UFT was doing to help the ATRs.  He just threw out something about Mulgrew playing politics which I didn't understand.

Then somehow we approached the topic of a class action age discrimination suit against the DOE and he stated we would never win and it would crumble in court. "Why?" I asked. He mentioned something about statistics; again I didn't understand. Maybe this ATR business is making me dumb but I just think he wasn't making much sense.

Anyway, he was inching away as I brought up the fact that principals are still using long-term or day-to-day subs to fill vacancies.  A case in point is my grievance, in which a day-to-day sub is working a full position that should be mine.  "Did you email Amy Arundell?" I told him the UFT was told by me AND others of subs in positions and still NOTHING is being done! 

Finally, he escaped into the men's room. I waited for him and asked him point blank why he was avoiding me and he just said he had to go teach his class, as he left me standing there frustrated and angry! Seems I feel this way a lot lately!










Picture credits: http://mychinaconnection.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/give-someone-the-cold-shoulder1.jpg
                                                                                                http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_momsatwork/files/2010/01/mensroom.jpg

The UFT 1% turns a deaf ear

Remember the letter that Philip Nobile wrote to all the UFT bigwigs about the two-hour commute from Brooklyn to Staten Island that the DOE was subjecting him to?  You forgot?  It seems that the UFT forgot it about it also, since none of their top leaders chose to answer Nobile's plea for help.  Here is Nobile's post mortem on this sorry story:

Sad to say, but no surprise, none of the UFT 1 percent responded to my plea re ATRs condemned to hardship commutes. Apparently, Mulgrew et al. have other things on their mind. 

Thomas Bennett

Still, there is light at the end of the tunnel. BASIS rep Tom Bennett says that our complaints have not gone unheard:

"I certainly agree and echo your sentiments. The District 76 situation is a disgrace. We are certainly making this case in conversations with the DOE, and we’re hopeful that there are a few sane people left on the other side. I’ll let you know if I hear any good news."

Bennett told me later on the phone that some S.I. principals have been accommodating. So on Friday I called the faraway McCown Expeditionary School on the Island, this week's assignment, and said that I would be unable (i.e., adverse) to make the monastic 7:45am start. 

"Could you make it by 8:30?" I was asked. That I could do. I urge ATRS to follow the same route for the time being.

Photo credit:  http://www.uft.org/files/photo/thomas-bennett_0.jpg

Michael Mendel's "Hissy Fit"

NYCATR is proud to present yet another account of the UFT Delegate Assembly meeting that took place on November 9, 2011. This account was written by a representative of Teachers for a Just Contract, a group that presented a resolution to "solve the ATR Crisis."

All three accounts of the meeting agree on one point in particular: UFT Secretary Michael Mendel is not in a hurry to help the members of the Absent Teacher Reserve. 

The big news was Unity’s response to the GEM-TJC resolution. Megan Behrent, a delegate from FDR High School, who is active in several rank and file groups, made a motion for the body to put this resolution on the December agenda for discussion and a vote. As she read each demand, there was applause from some of the delegates. 

Resolution to Solve the ATR Crisis 

Resolved: The UFT will mobilize all members to rally at Tweed & City Hall at the earliest possible date, to demand: 

1. Until Every ATR within a license has a position, no new hiring in that license. 

2. ATRs with arcane licenses, or licenses in which there are few positions, be allowed to recertify in new licenses without loss of tenure or seniority. Those who have comparable and valid state licenses should be grandfathered into those state licenses.  

3. Audit principals’ hiring for possible race and age discrimination. 

4. Restore the contractual right of excessed teachers to the closest vacancy in their license.

UFT Secretary Michael Mendel

President Mulgrew then recognized UFT Secretary Michael Mendel to speak against the motion. 

Mendel’s performance could be described as a hissy fit, or of following the adage that “the best defense is a good offense.” He charged that the resolution was full of untruths and inaccuracies. He picked on the fourth demand, claiming that excessed teachers had never had such a right. His delivery was so excited and disorganized, that some listeners thought he said that before the 2005 contract, excessed teachers could be sent anyplace in the city. Others thought he meant something else.

Before the 2005 contract, there were many provisions of Contract Article 17 - Retention, Excessing and Layoff - that gave teachers the right to be placed in nearby vacancies. For example, in the 2000 contract, Article 17B, Rule 5 states, “To minimize the movement of personnel, excessed teachers shall be assigned within the district to appropriate openings and vacancies.” Rule 6, which applies when there is no vacancy within the district, states, “Where possible, the wishes of the teacher will be taken into account in his/her placement by the Central Board.” 

The fourth demand of the resolution summarizes the complex of rights that existed before 2005, expressing the essence and gist of these rights: teachers had the right to be placed in the nearest vacancy. Before the 2005 contract, when excessed teachers were placed, they automatically became appointed to their new school. (However, they retained a “right of return” to their former school if a position opened for them within a year.) 

(To complicate this issue, similar provisions still exist in the current contract. But they have been rendered void by the June 2011 agreement. But even before June 2011, the introduction of the “open market” system for filling vacancies (Article 18) in the 2005 contract had changed their meaning. Excessed teachers were no longer appointed to the school where they were placed. They remained ATRs unless the principal chose to appoint them: only through the open market system of hiring could they be appointed.) 

Mendel’s attack of apoplexy was not caused by semantics, by the resolution saying “closest” instead of the lengthy jargon of the contract. Mendel is one of the UFT’s most knowledgeable about the contract. He knows very well that, in practice, these provisions indeed gave teachers the right to the nearest vacancy. 

He also attacked the second demand, saying that no one had ever had these rights. Which is a strange argument: a labor movement that does not fight for new rights is a dying movement (which, not coincidentally, is exactly what the U.S. labor movement today is). He also said that a demonstration at Tweed would be inappropriate for such a demand, since these are state rules. However, many times the union has gotten changes in state law, for example, in pension contributions, by winning City support for them in negotiations. 

So Mendel’s substantive criticisms of the resolution are, upon examination, at best weak and at worst picayune. So, what’s up with the hysteria?

Mendel’s hysterics were an attempt to make up for the weakness of his arguments. He was successful. Even independents in the assembly were swayed by the show of emotion, even though they couldn’t follow exactly what he was saying. They assumed it was based on deep feeling, not a calculated move to distract from lack of substance. He was, figurative speaking, jumping up and down yelling “Look out! Watch out! Don’t vote for this! It’s terrible! It’s full of misinformation!” His goal was to defeat the resolution, because it meant the UFT would have to lead a struggle on behalf of the ATRs, and the UFT leadership lacks the will for that. At the risk of being simplistic, no one in the UFT leadership is an ATR, or even runs the risk of being an ATR. The leadership has nothing to gain from undertaking this battle.

But it goes further. Mendel wasn’t just intent upon defeating this resolution. His cries of “wrong!” and “not true!” were meant to discredit the opposition as unreliable, people whose ignorance is dangerous to the union. That’s meant to distract members from whose policies really are dangerous to the union.

Photo credit: http://www.uft.org/files/uft-sec-michael-mendel-thumb.jpg