GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Re: Joel Klein argues that city students have made “undeniable progress.” (Education Gadfly)

Even Bloomberg must realize that he’s about to go down in history as the man who set NYC up for the major modernization of education that would come after his reign but wouldn’t or couldn’t acknowledge the extreme limitations and fallacies of his own administration re education post BoE. 

In other news, Joel Klein has said the sun rises in the west, the sky is green, and underwear gnomes are real.

I truly hope the fur does fly through this UFT vs, Callaghan issue.  When you think about the support and fight a union is supposed to provide for its members, it is just strange that…

A union would not openly defend ATR’s.

A union would collaborate with their DOE antagonizers to get more non student/teacher funds through RttT.

A union would not parry, fight back, and protest every disparaging affront by the DOE.

A union would invite an anti-public education, anti-public school teacher antagonist to be its main speaker at its convention.

Not endorse a union-friendlier mayoral candidate. 

Be silent about fraudulent test scores, that benefited those who oppose the UFT and its members.

What’s the deal?

Nice to see you KS. 
If a union has differing points of view and different parties where does the line get drawn in terms of a union sticking together? There were claims that just running against the president was divisive and that is where Randi bought off the opposition to get them not to run. The claim was the bigger enemy was BloomKlein. I see that argument as analogous to saying that it was divisive to be critical and run against George Bush when terrorists are the real enemy. The argument has been used forever to keep opposition people down.
If a union doesn’t even allow real internal debate to take place then things will spill out. 

Philip,
Re-post exactly the same thing and let’s see what happens.

Philip: I wouldn’t read too much into the silence. It’s the weekend. It’s probably a technical glitch, like the sidebar of Recent Comments has all readers commenting hours ago.

The give and take, the variety of opinions within the union is healthy, the thousand delegates, selected by members in each and every school gather monthly, debate is wide ranging, and usually strongly supportive of Weingarten, and now Mulgrew.

Mulgrew and his slate won with an overwhelming majority.

The several hundred of us that debate back and forthon the net are a very thin slice of union members.

Michael and I served together on the UFT Governance Task Force, we debated, sometimes agreed, sometimes disagreed, ultimately union policy should reflect internal debate. We may disgree on strategy and tactics, most of us understand the importance of the union as a powerful voice for members and for public education.

au contraire … delegates and chapter leaders are elected by members at their school sites, they may or may chose to belong to a political party within the union. Most delegates are not involved in internal union politics. Speakers at the DA are pretty evenly divided, suporting and opposing union leadership.

90% of voters in the last union election supported Mulgrew, those of us who post on this site r not a representative sample.

Peter,

You are of course correct that 90% of the members who voted elected Michael Mulgrew. And while elections are rightfully determined by those who vote, it should be pointed out that most members did not vote. Most of those non-voting members were (un)motivated by apathy, but some of that apathy is attributable to the fact that they are totally disillusioned with their representation (or lack thereof) by the UFT.

It should also be pointed out that prior to the vote Mulgrew struck a bogus militant pose that is totally at odds with his actions since the election (tying teacher evaluations to test scores, remaining silent on charter invasions, supporting Bill Gates speech at the AFT convention, etc.) which have further entrenched the enemies of teachers and public education.

All things run their course, and as a one-party state for more than fifty years, the Unity Caucus dominance of the UFT appears to be facing a crisis. So, while, yes, Mulgrew received 90% of the vote, it’s also true that dictatorships (and, despite its faux democratic facade, the Caucus is led by the nose by the President, and is a dictatorship) appear invincible up until the moment they collapse.

Solidarity is a two-way street. When the Unity regime betrays members it deserves blowback. Unfortunately, owing to Unity’sl stranglehold hold on UFT mechanics, there is no way to hold Unity accountable. They censor The New York Teacher, control the DA, and restrict open mike at Executive Committee meetings. Unity has jumped the shark.

Interesting, Peter. Verbatim from the Unity application, members agree:

To express criticism of caucus policies within the Caucus;
To support the decisions of Caucus / Union leadership in public or Union forums;

Are you saying you never signed that agreement?

Why are my comments not appear?

Peter:

Your statement should say “90% of the 30% who voted, voted for Mulgrew.

This 90% win for Mulgrew that many are using is misleading. It reminds me of the “16% raise” that Unity was advertising in the 2005 contract. (Disregarding the additional work load).
In my view, half-trues are lies.
Of course, the bottom line is, we have the leadership that we collectively deserve.

I was a delegate for a year. This was many yeas ago. The DA met in the auditorium at Fashion Industries HS. I don’t know if it still does? But it certainly was not democratic. Weingarten and Unity leaders controlled the agenda, and topics debated. Everyone who spoke basically touted the Unity line.

Delegates were given colored cards to hold up when voting on resolutions. Maybe 500–1000 people would show up for each assembly. When voting we had to hold up the cards. If a resolution was close, Weingarten would say “the yeas” are in the majority. I marveled at how she could “count” all those hands in less than 30 seconds. What really made me laugh is when the the NY Teacher would report an actual number like “932-241″ for the resolution. The UFT DA is about a democratic as the Soviet Politburo.

Needless to say, I grew disillusioned and told my CL to find someone else. I agree with the previous posts that feel the membership is apathetic more than supportive of the leadership. Unity has a “choke hold” on this union and most people feel there isn’t much they can do about it.

However, I haven’t seen the members this angry since 1995. When the “double zero” contract was put up of a vote. If another miserable proposal such as the 2005 contract is foisted on the members, you may actually see change in this union. People are very scared, and if Unity agrees to a contract proposal which would result in people losing their livelihoods (something like Washington DC) It would be hard to see how the status quo would be maintained in this union.

Next Peter will deny that the Unity Caucus Speakers Bureau doesn’t meet the day before the Delegate Assembly to plan how to control the meeting – Peter is a member of the Speakers Bureau. They decide who will speak on each issue and who will call the question. There are specialists to end debate – like Beach Channel’s Dave Peccoraro is one of the best “Call the question” people when the signal is given.

District reps and UFT/Unity staffers are placed in the audience to hoot and holler critics.

Almost every new chapter leader is recruited into Unity and then silenced.

Unity doesn’t have to meet at all since all decisions are decided at the top and people expected to follow. If Unity itself were democratic then at least there would be some forum to open discussions. But Peter must think that no one in Unity talks to us. Reports filter out about the meetings when they are held. See the one before the AFT convention where the 800 Unityites were told how to vote in Seattle.

Peter once had the audacity to say at a Al Shanker book forum a few years ago when Debbie Meier and I talked about how undemocratic the UFT was – “I could go into Al’s office and disagree.” I laughed out loud. Maybe Peter could but he wouldn’t dare disagree at a public forum and in fact has supported every single policy over the 30 or more years I have seen him operate in the union.

By the way Peter, why not explain why Eli Broad – chief ed deformer – was so deep into backing the Kahlenberg Shanker book.

Norm:

I could recommend some political science books ….

legislative bodies, whether the Congress or the British Parliament, or the Delegate Assembly divide themselves by political philosophies into political parties, or caucuses. The purpose of the caucus is to internally debate points of view, craft legislation, assign floor leaders, designate effective speakers and to ultimately prevail in getting their particular policy approved by the body.

If a member of Unity, or NAC or ICE has a particular idea or strategy they discuss/debate within their caucus.

If a newly elected Chapter Leader or Deleate is wooed by one caucus or another they can either join or not.

The DA has over 2,000 members and most delegates don’t belong to a caucus.

As a regular attendee of DA,s over the last four/five years the membership has been strongly supportive of the union leadership. I’ve agreed/disagreed with Shanker and union leadership and discussed/debated at the appropriate forum. Once a decision is reached I support the position, just as democrats would support Pelosi or Reid.

Policies grow and coalesce as discussion emerges, Norm, you’re pissed because you’re not part of the discussions. You’ve chosen to be the gadfly, fine, that’s a role you have chosen. Others have chosen to be part of a particular caucus, we all have choices.

The dozen of us who debate union politics on this site are a tiny slice of union membership.

I believe 60% of teachers are age 30 or younger, they don’t read blogs, their focus is on their classroom and their school, and, from what I see like Mulgrew and enthsiastically supports him.

Peter,

Your recommendation that Norm read some political science textbooks is incredibly patronizing.

Your description of the mechanics of political parties/caucuses conveniently omits the underlying reality that these bodies represent specific interests and power bases, and function to further both. While that is a reality of the fallen world of politics and power everywhere, there is a spectrum in which this all takes place, a spectrum that ranges from the imperfect (but superior to the alternatives) to the toxic and pathological.

In a healthy democracy, there is a feedback loop that enables other voices and interests to be heard, and constitutional mechanisms that provide an opportunity to have some effect on policy. In a dictatorship or one-party state, policy is determined in the echo chamber of the leadership’s mind and chosen circle of advisors, who in the most degenerate circumstances are nothing more than yes-men and toadies. Under these conditions, nothing is allowed to interfere with the self-serving impulses of the Great Leader. Eventually, this self-selected group becomes so inbred that their narrowly-conceived interests, appetites and narcissism overwhelm their grasp of reality, and they collapse. We may be witnessing the early stages of this process, sparked by the firing of Jim Callaghan and the eruption of discontent, expressed anonymously through Ednotes, that is oozing out of Unity Caucus.

As for your claim that the knee jerk support for Presidential/AdComm/Unity Caucus policies at the Delegate Assembly represent the will of the membership, that is patently untrue, all the more so when the manipulative behavior of the Chair (filibustering by taking up most of the meeting with the President’s Report, leaving virtually no time for questions or resolutions, calling on known Unity members to function as mouthpieces for leadership policies and to call for shutting down debate, etc.) is taken into account. Unlike the auditorium at Fashion Industries HS, where the DAs used to be held, the hall at 52 Broadway cannot even fit all the delegates and chapter leaders (assuming they bother to come; many don’t, and with good reason) who are eligible to attend. The meeting is dominated by the Caucus, and filled with officers, staffers and hopefuls/wannabes who know they’re being observed and that their plum jobs depend on being there and voting the right way. On days when controversial votes are to be taken (for example, the catastrophic 2005 contract that Randi Weingarten negotiated) Unity suits march up and down the aisles, wearing serious expressions, eyeballing people and making sure they vote as they’re expected to.

You and I were both members of the Governance Committee that dealt with the issue of school governance and mayoral control. While other members of the committee and I opposed the committee’s final report, and co-authored a minority report, the committee worked hard and came up with a proposal that would have been a big improvement over what we have now. Randi Weingarten then proceeded to unilaterally throw it in the trash and endorse the continuation of the Bloomberg’s dictatorship of the schools, which was then supported without a peep of open dissent from Unity Caucus members (loyalty oaths, anyone?). When, in a pretense of real debate, I was allowed to speak in favor of the minority report, I was followed and the party line layed out by Michael Mulgrew. Sadly, even the committee report, which supported the continuation of mayoral control, was unacceptable to the “collaboration” (Weingarten’s term, not mine) policies of the leadership.

This was a betrayal of the interests of teachers, students and parents, and of genuine democratic procedure, and which has served to continue the fraudulent and destructive policies of the mayor and chancellor.

That you would be the public voice for such distortions of trade unionism on these pages is unfortunate.

“Provisions of the governance did result in the courts overturning the 19 school closings and the PS 188 co-location.”

Some of those 19 schools will be dying a slow death because the DOE controls student registration. As for co-location, it was parental involvement rather than UFT involvment that was the catalyst.

Vinicius

The local 2 president, Michael Mulgrew was a high school English teacher for many years, began his career as a union carpenter.

Peter,
It has come down to DRs not having a voice or choice when it comes to the districts they serve for fear of losing their positions. Unity ties to Klein, Bloomberg and Rhee and now Gates have made it difficult for any real voice.

As for teachers under 30 liking Mulgrew, I really doubt that. They are just as upset over the workload of paperwork and test-prep just to get a principal their bonus. Retention rates for new teachers is not strong, and seeing how senior teachers are now being forced out is making them see what’s in store for them. Morale around the city is down. They didn’t expect Bloomberg to win a third term with the (silent but strong) support of the UFT . They are not happy with the new evaluations and don’t trust the UFT to make sure anything is run fairly. The Open Market didn’t work for ATRs even though CitySue promised it was the best thing since sliced bread. Mulgrew stood behind the lawsuit to stop the closing of many schools, then turned around and made a deal with Bloomberg to create smaller schools without any input from the schools, parents, teachers and communities. The man has proven himself to be a thug by firing those who dare to have a differing opinion. NYTeacher is no longer a paper of information, but dis-information.

Randi changed the rules to suit her agenda making sure that no other ideas but her own would rule knowing that to have a difference of opinion could lead to firings.

The bill was introduced by Joanthan Bing, who received a $1,000 campaign contribution from Joel Klein … the UFT is supporting his opponent, Gregg Lundahl, a teacher at Washington Irving High School … if u want to make a contribution to Gregg or work in his campaign go to his Facebook page.

You mean Greg “Call the question” Lundahl? We know the role he is given at the Unity Speakers Bureau before Delegate Assemblies. He can do the same if he is elected.

Norm

So, your disdain for Unity is so great that you’d rather see the primary author of the Do Away With Seniority bill remain in office … just wan’t to make that clear.

Gregg is a fiery chapter leader leading his school for years … but u guys would rather support the “Abolish Seniority” guy … we all make choices.

Greg is a swell fellow and a heroic chapter leader. He saved my job at Washington Irving when Principal Bob Durkin fired me for flunking too many kids in my Latin classes. But I was dismayed by his subservience to Unity and particularly Leo Casey, his stuffy seatmate at Delegate Assemblies. The last time I spoke to Greg was at a May Executive Committee meeting. I criticized Mulgrew at open mike for refusing to meet with rubber room teachers who were unhappy with his secret agreement with Klein. We were alone in a side room getting refreshments. I asked my old friend if he would intervene with Mulgrew. He refused, saying that Mulgrew was too busy. Holding back my contempt, I said that I was disappointed by his lack of solidarity. “You wouldn’t say that if you knew what I was doing,” he replied, probably alluding to his then unannounced run.