GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

human capital

Teachers group mirrors city recommendations for layoff reforms

A teacher advocacy group supported by prominent opponents of the law requiring seniority-based teacher layoffs has unveiled one of the first detailed proposed alternatives to that law.

A task force of 11 members of Educators 4 Excellence, the group of teachers critical of many union work rules, presented their recommendations to Mayor Michael Bloomberg earlier this month. The group is financially backed by the Gates Foundation and is linked to the advocacy group Education Reform Now.

Much of their proposal is composed of recommendations that are already being pushed by Bloomberg and Chancellor Cathie Black. In speeches and editorials, the Bloomberg administration has strongly advocated scrapping seniority-based layoffs. Instead they propose laying off teachers whose principals have rated them as unsatisfactory or who currently lack full-time teaching positions in schools.

E4E’s proposal goes one step further, arguing that teachers who have racked up high numbers of unexcused absences during the school year should also be among the first to lose their jobs. Under the plan, teachers who were absent more than 22 days last school year and this one without a doctor’s note would be laid off first.

Still, the city could be forced to lay off far more teachers than who might be covered in E4E’s proposal. The most conservative recent estimates indicate that the city may be forced to lay off more than 6,000 teachers if severe state budget cuts go through.

Last year, principals gave 1,813 teachers unsatisfactory ratings, and city officials estimated today that roughly 1,200 teachers are currently in the Absent Teacher Reserve pool, which teachers enter when they lose full-time teaching positions at their school because of budget cuts. Those teachers remain on the city’s payroll and many continue to work in schools working as substitute teachers or doing administrative tasks.

Data on how many teachers have accrued high numbers of unexcused absences is murky. Last school year, 7.1 percent of the city’s roughly 80,000 teachers took more than 16 absences, though city officials cautioned that those numbers include teachers who had doctors’ notes and could also include teachers who took all of their remaining sick days before going on leave. Overall, teachers provided doctors’ notes for about a third of all absences.

Under the E4E proposal, if city officials are forced to lay off more teachers than those covered in their core recommendations, layoffs should be spread evenly across city schools. For example, the city might determine that each school would have to lay off 5 percent of its staff. Principals would decide which teachers should be laid off, though they would be required to provide documentation defending their choice.

The amount of discretion that the plan gives to principals — who currently also have the sole responsibility of assigning “unsatisfactory” ratings — could raise concerns among those who worry that principals already have too much unchecked power over teachers’ careers. Last month, the city allowed a Bronx principal to keep her job after an investigation concluded that she instructed her aides to give teachers unsatisfactory ratings without ever observing their teaching.

A union spokesman also said that the city already has the authority to remove teachers who have racked up extremely high numbers of absences and should not rely on layoffs to do so.

In the face of the city’s ramped-up campaign against seniority layoff rules, teachers union chief Michael Mulgrew has frequently responded that the city should be able to make cuts to administrative and contractual expenses rather than lay off teachers.

Though the proposal relies heavily on principal’s determinations — and do not include data based on student achievement — E4E co-founder Sydney Morris today characterized E4E’s proposals as being based on objective criteria. She argued that following the group’s proposals would cause far less instability to the school system than seniority-based layoffs would. Critics of the current layoff rules worry that seniority-based dismissals would hurt schools in high-needs areas with high teacher turnover and thus greater numbers of new teachers far more than it would richer schools.

“We recognize that our proposed system is not perfect and that ideally we need a very comprehensive teacher evaluation system before we can truly evaluate who is an effective teacher,” Morris said. “However, our formula is far less likely to negatively affect students than the current system.”

The roll-out of E4E’s plan today follows the introduction on Friday of a television ad attacking seniority-based layoffs from the well-funded advocacy group Education Reform Now, which is chaired by former Chancellor Joel Klein. E4E and ERN are affiliated (ERN paid for E4E’s website development, and an E4E board member appears in ERN’s most recent television ad opposing last-in, first-out). Both are represented by the same public relations group, SKDKnickerbocker, which was founded by Micah Lasher, who went on to become Bloomberg’s chief lobbyist in Albany.

A spokeswoman for the mayor did not return a call inquiring if Bloomberg would soon release his own more detailed proposal of alternatives to the current layoff rules.

  • http://www.accountabletalk.com Mr. A. Talk

    Why is this nonsense being given any credence by GS? Is it really news that an organization bought and paid for by the Gates foundation came up with exactly the recommendations that another billionaire, Bloomberg, wanted?

    What would be news is if any of the so-called “reform” groups showed any backbone whatsoever and stood up to their patrons.

    What next in breaking news for GS? “Bloomberg orders corned beef sandwich for lunch, and his staff brings it to him”?

  • Mark

    Man, you guys need to learn to read between the lines. The fact that they are explicit about E4E’s ties to the Bloomberg administration signals criticism. If you want to only have news that tells you everything you want to hear, read your friendly union newspaper.

  • Valentine’s Day

    Another GS Production.

  • exteacher

    Hi E4E. As a former teacher who now works for social services, please allow me to formally introduce myself. I am sure that once you get your way on LIFO reform, I will be seeing you guys around my office quite a bit. Ya’ll stop by and say hi when you’re done filling out your PA forms.

  • HM

    Why not further explore this “high turn over rate”. Why are so many teachers leaving these schools, apparently in droves. This must be explored and perhaps “turnaround” these schools. 

  • Jeff S

    These people don’t have a clue.

  • Pogue

    Educators 4 Ageism

  • http://www.accountabletalk.com Mr. A. Talk

    For the record, E$E doesn’t have 1400 members, and they don’t represent any teachers whatsoever. What they have is 1400 people who have “liked” them on Facebook. I just visited their page, and quite a few of my FB friends have “liked” the page so they can keep up with what E$E is doing.

    For reference, Captain Kangaroo has more than twice the number of likes, and he’s been dead for 6 years. Perhaps the mayor should ask his opinion, as well.

  • Vote NO

    “Critics of the current layoff rules worry that seniority-based dismissals would hurt schools in high-needs areas with high teacher turnover and thus greater numbers of new teachers far more than it would richer schools.”

    If there is so much teacher turnover, then LIFO may actually benefit these schools as veteran teachers are placed in the schools to replace the teachers who are laid off. Since the young teachers all seem to leave anyway, veteran teachers who have given years of dedicated, and loyal service to NYC may actually help these schools by providing them with classroom knowledge, experience, and stability.

  • insiderknowledge

    Tear their cards up and leave the traitors with nothing. Since they currently belong to the UFT shouldn’t that grant money from the Gates foundation go to the UFT and not the select few sellouts?

  • SickofBloomberg

    I’m writing a white paper, too. It’s called, “Increasing the Millionaire Tax to 50% Since They Have Too Much Money and They Can’t Spend It All Before They Die: Paying For Public Schools and Social Programs With The Profits of Insider Trading”

  • Proud E4E member

    As a proud member of E4E who was a member of the policy team, I find this article to be the most dishonest thing I have ever read.  I went to meetings every two weeks for over three months to write this piece and know that this was not the product of anyone but real NYC teachers who actually care about kids more than protecting teachers who are 1) not showing up 2) not teaching or 3) are one of the 2.5% of teachers who are rated unsatisfactory.

    This article is the product of the lunatic conspiracy theories that I used to think were limited to the comments section.

    Poor attendance clearly damages students. I heard Leo Casey himself say that any teacher who can be shown to have taken more than 10 days should be fired on the spot – if you do not have doctors notes, and not the fake ones the teachers in my school brag about getting from their friends, but an actual illness, then get to school.

    In terms of U-ratings.  The DOE should have fired the principal who was not evaluating, just like it should not take 3 u-ratings to dismiss a teacher.  Three years of failing kids is three years too many.

    Finally, the ATR was a mistake in 2005.  It is a mistake now.  Gotham schools even demonstrated the number of teachers  who have been in the ATR pool since 2006.  I would post the link, but then I would have to wait for it to be cleared.    

    This article is pure lies and is clearly a group of weak journalists caving to the pressure of constant complaining from the comment section.

  • Proud E4E member

    Pogue, do I need to point out the hypocrisy of your statement?  I have been teaching ten years, am a member of E4E, and a union member. 

  • exteacher

    How would the absences issue be handled when teachers use up the sick days left in their bank/borrow sick days before going on maternity leave? This is the way such leaves usually commence, so there would have to be some provision to protect teachers who use sick days in this manner (provided that they give ample notice to the school, of course.)

  • Proud E4E member

    Absolutely, teachers who have a real documented illness (maternity leaves count) would be exempt from this.  But, the data shows that there are a lot of teachers who are taking days off.  Another senior member on our policy teams calls them monday friday teachers because they take one or the other off.

  • Proud E4E member

    tear up their cards?  the union should be a democracy.  Shanker himself fought for the right of union members to speak up.  We know that this law is unfair to the great young teachers (who do exist) and more importantly this law is unfair to students.

    How can you really defend teachers in these three groups?  And please do not give me the high salary bit, that we all know weak given the past incentives to hire ATR teachers regardless of salary.

  • exteacher

    I believe that issues such as absences and apathy can be addressed without venturing into the dangerous territory of surrendering seniority rights. Dock them the time, send inspectors to check up on those believed to be abusing sick days, but whatever you do, do not give up hard won rights like LIFO. I have no interest in this, as I have long since left the DOE and am settled into a new career. But I do care about the rights of employees in this country. If we continue to allow our protections to be eroded, it will effectively destroy the middle class. That includes you guys at E4E.

  • Proud E4E member

    I am not sure how LIFO protects the middle class.  What about the rights of great young teachers who are doing amazing things and lose their jobs to protect teachers who have been deemed ineffective.

    Also, we always end up talking about adults, what about kids?  We need to think about our students who are not getting the education they deserve and now they might lose great teachers over other teachers, regardless of age, who are not doing as good of a job.  These policies would also result in young teachers losing their jobs.

    Finally we no longer live in the 60′s and 70′s we have other legal protections that defend us from bad management and we also have protected class laws to defend older teachers.

  • Mustafa 2: Electric Boogaloo

    Proud E4E member, if you’re so proudof your report, why not reveal who you are?

    Mustafa can’t be banned. I know all about Proxy IPs.

  • Bronxactivist

    Now Bloomberg is worried about racism in the schools is this a joke. He has perpetuated racism at such a high level as the Jim Crowe south. When the Black codes were created they were created to keep minorities down but at the same time they claimed: look everyone we are helping them. We are giving them “separate but equal” facilities, human resources, and everything else. Wow Mr. Bloomberg and ms. Black fix the racial achievement gap before you stop calling teacher layoffs racist. Look in the mirror buddy. If the Irish joke was a indicator of this mans stereotypes I could only imagine what other stereotypes he has.

  • exteacher

    You really do not get it, do you? OK, so if we end LIFO, you young, talented teachers will have jobs. For now. Live in the moment. Don’t worry about tomorrow. Don’t even worry about those wonderful kids that you care so much about. It’s OK for them to end up working in white collar sweat shops so long as you amazing young teachers sell out not just your own rights but also the rights of all future generations. I hope that you are living frugally and putting lots of money aside, because they’re going to show you the door the day you reach $65,000. Labor rights, including LIFO do not merely “help” the middle class; they BUILT the middle class.

  • Proud E4E member

    ALL of our names are on the last page of the report! read it.

  • Rose

    I noticed that the E4E member pointed out that the great teachers are young. Hmmm. Are there no great older teachers? Why is it that these great young teachers leave hard to staff schools at such alarming rates. Outside of layoffs, these schools lose young teachers at rates not seen by other schools.

    I learned everything I know from older teachers who were masters. I find the young teachers in my school work hard to create the appearance of working hard, but their teaching lacks the substance of the older teachers I looked up to when I entered this profession. Spark Notes is their go to guide for teaching literature, not hard work and research. Again, I speak for my department. These teachers are praised for “engaging” their students because that is apparently what they need –not a solid education.

    I must also say that there are seniority protections in the police and fire departments. E4E member, are you for getting rid of those too? Or only for teachers?

  • An Effective Teacher says…

    “real NYC teachers who actually care about kids more than protecting teachers who are 1) not showing up 2) not teaching or 3) are one of the 2.5% of teachers who are rated unsatisfactory.”

    There is a contract which was agreed upon that defines the method to get these few teachers out of the system in a fair and just way.

    There are plenty of REAL NYC teachers who are stuck in the ATR – these teachers have full time teaching positions and many are highly effective & caring about their students. However, since a school is not required to hire them to their staff and can legally keep them as assigned ATRs they do so in order to save money from their own budget. These ATRs should not be fired for doing their jobs.

    LILO is the only way to protect against this type of discrimination which we see demonstrated in the ATR pool of hard working teachers who are not given permanent positions even though they’re teaching full-time. Anyone who assumes otherwise is naive.

    “But, the data shows that there are a lot of teachers who are taking days off. ”
    Love it when people cite “the data” – please provide links to your “data” before making these statements. Teachers get sick. In my school I never hear of someone who just takes a day off because they can. We’re committed towards providing a quality education to our students – both new & experienced teachers.

    And when it comes down to it – it’s the experienced teachers who help the new teachers adapt to a NYC teaching environment which is filled with a “variety” of students of different academic and behavioral problems. It’s not the summer Teacher Fellows or Teach for America programs that makes quality teachers – but experienced teachers who pass down their life lessons.

    What we all should be unified against is layoffs. Not who gets layoffs – but ALL layoffs. NYC needs all of its teachers – it needs to hire even more teachers – NYC needs to lower class size!

    NO LAYOFFS! something we can all stand behind!

  • exteacher

    After re-reading E4E’s last comment, I have a hunch that he should be hiding under a bridge harassing billy goats, if you catch my drift;)

  • Jeff S

    Proud E4E Member……The problem is that so many of the Principals are not true educational leaders….many of them lack the experience to properly evaluate a teacher….so many are products of the failed Leadership Academy. I would hate to think some Principal who doesn’t have a clue can just run around giving out U ratings without any rights of appeal. As part of the recommendations regarding U ratings, what protections are you building in for these Principals? Believe me, there was a time that becoming a Principal depended on having a good deal of experience and spending some time working as an Assistant Principal. You hero, the inept, incompetent lawyer who masqueraded as an educator for 8 years decided that he didn’t want experienced educational leaders. He used the same corporate mentality the Emperor has to decided a Principal should be not a Chief Instructional Leader but just another CEO. Too bad if he lacks supervisory experience.

    As far as the ATR’s are concrned, for years the school system had an obligation to place excessed teachders. But to make the insane policy of closing the so called failing schools, once again the inept incompetent lawyer who masqueraded as an educator decided the system which served the school system too well did not jive with his unsubstantiated ideas regarding education. In order to get what he wanted, with his own free will, he made a deal with the UFT. Now he wants to go back on it. Most of the teachers in the ATR are very competent, satisfactory teachers, no worse than your E4E teachers. Why haven’t they been hired? In many cases it’s the same Principals who know how incompetent they are who fear that hiring an experienced teacher who is not afraid to talk back when they pull their garbage pm tyjem,. just don’t want to take them on.

    Finally, don’t think that only your people are for kids. The line “it’s for the kids” has been uttered by almost everybody who has had something to do with education for decades. What makes you think you are for the kids and others are not? And you guys can put out all the documents you want. LIFO is not going anywhere until a fair evaluation system is in place and we can be sure that a U rating is truly based on objective standards and the Department of Ed properly places the ATR’s back in schools after jerking the schools out from un der them.

  • Smith

    This is kind of a non-story. Nothing new or interesting that I can see. It certainly didn’t live up to Ruben Brosbe’s billing.

    We all know that U-ratings are given arbitrarily. We now know that many ATR’s come from schools that were set up to fail or, in some cases even exceeded expectations despite being set up to fail.

    Is there a reason we should care what E4E people think? Does taking money from Gates give them a legitimacy that the rest of us don’t have? It’s amazing that with all the help our schools could use, they’re fixated on this issue.

  • Jeff S

    Sir or Madam E4E teacher…let me leave you with one other thought. You guys are trying to protect your jobs at the excpense of others. In a way that is understandable. But please, don’t play the we’re doing it for the children card on us. You’re doing it for your own selfish reasons. For years, no matter which side of an issue people have stood on, usually administrators or people like the Kleins and the Emperor, whatever insane ideas they had, it was for the children. Yet today Cathie Black’s PR people are spinning the same garbage, she’s in it for the children. In the end, you’re going to lose on this issue and rightly so. Many of you guys have no intention of making a career out of teaching. You’re just trying to tide yourselves over until something better for you comes along. And again, in a way, one can’t blame you. But you’re doing it, or at least you’re trying to do it, on the backs of people who have given 15 or more years of their lives serving the children of this city and the vast majority of them have done it well, otherwise they would have either left or been discontinued during their probatonay period. There may be a few bad apples there. What profession doesn’t have a few just like there are a few bad doctors, lawyers, airline pilots, cops, firemen, governors, chancellors, mayhors, etc. But the vast majority because of their experience are better than you and your young TFA members. I don’t wish ill on you guys and you should be working with the UFT to see that there are no layoffs not trying to bow down to the mahyor and others in their obvious attempts to destroy the public school syste. I look forward to your response to these excellent points being made here.

  • Jay

    I also wonder what these ‘young’ teachers are thinking. As another poster commented, when these ‘young’ and ‘talented’ teachers get 5-10 years under their belt and feel they are at the pinnacle of their career, with no LIFO rules, the principal will run them out of the profession in favor of another fresh-faced rookie. The protections that were instituted by former generations for a reason will no longer be there. Then these ‘children first’ activists will lament and say it’s not fair. Well, boo hoo. You are being used by rich guys to bust the unions. Why do the rich guys want to bust the unions? To lower their taxes because they hate supporting education for the masses, especially since most of them send their kids to private school. If only these young activists wouldn’t be so short-sighted.

  • Michael Fiorillo

    Jay,

    Don’t forget that the overwhelming majority of these people have no intention whatsoever of staying in the classroom; they’ll be working for Goldman Sachs by that time, which has announced that along with a multi-million dollar donation to TFA, it will hire ex-TFAers after their missionary/union busting service is over.

    The founders of E$E couldn’t even wait to receive the tenure they claim is too easy to get before leaving the classroom, although by some bureaucratic alchemy they have been able to score part-time jobs at their former school. It’s amazing what obstacles can be removed when you carry Bill Gates’ water, and pant and wag your tail before Wall Street.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

2 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031