GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

guest perspective

Our Experience Proves Tenure Is Not Obsolete

Mayor Bloomberg’s comments on his Friday radio show that tenure “may have been necessary in the McCarthy era” but is now a relic of the past highlight how out of touch he is with the current realities of the school system.

Bloomberg argued that protection for academic freedom was not necessary for public school teachers because we are “not writing papers about things that are very controversial.” However, in some schools, advocacy for students or for the employment rights of teachers can result in witch-hunts from school administrators that can border on the McCarthyesque. Tenure is meant to shelter teachers from the whims of these administrators.

As two New York City teachers who have both been targeted with unsatisfactory ratings because of our union activity, we know from firsthand experience that tenure is one of the few protections for whistleblowers and teacher advocates.

One of us, Rachel Montagano, as a union representative at MS 216 in Queens, experienced a repeated pattern of being scrutinized for her teaching practices immediately after conducting union activities. For example, after she refused to sign off on a safety plan that was written without teacher input, she was accused of insubordination. That began a pattern that has resulted in Montagano, a veteran reading coach who helped develop curriculum for the school, receiving her first-ever unfavorable reviews and facing incompetence charges. Administrators entered union meetings, or stood outside, sometimes writing down who showed up; a clear force of intimidation with the message, “we are watching you.” Without tenure due process, Montagano and some of her colleagues would already be facing unemployment because of her willingness to stand up for the safety of her students and for the rights of her colleagues. Meanwhile, their principal, Reggie Landau, set fire to his office with an illegal hotplate but has not faced sanction from the Department of Education.

The other of us, Peter Lamphere, as a union delegate at the Bronx High School of Science, participated in a harassment grievance along with 19 other colleagues from the mathematics department. Shortly afterward, he received unsatisfactory ratings for the first time in his career, and other teachers were subjected to various forms of harassment. A neutral fact-finder later supported the grievance and found that administrators’ belief that Lamphere was a ringleader of the grievance played a role in the harassment. Without tenure rights, Lamphere would have been fired long before the grievance was heard. Five of the six untenured teachers who signed the math department grievance had left the school within six months, either after being fired or fleeing before their careers would be destroyed.

We join a long list of educators who have been targeted because of their union activity or for aspects of their identities.

At Fordham School of the Arts in the Bronx, Principal Iris Blige was found by the DOE’s Office of Special Investigation to have ordered her assistant principals to rate teachers unsatisfactory before their teaching was observed, in at least one case because the teacher participated in union activities. Unfortunately for many of the teachers and APs involved, many had not yet received tenure and permanently lost any hope of a job in the New York City school system. (Blige was fined a small amount and remains in her position.)

Independence High School UFT chapter leader Michael McPherrin was smeared by his principal after making a series of recommendations about the direction of the school. In return for his professional input and acting in the best interest of his students and staff, the principal turned around and tried to fire him, charging him with “unprofessional conduct.” Without the tenure protections, a strong advocate for teachers and students like McPherrin would have been removed at a whim.

Chapter leader Kimani Brown was removed from the classroom after he blew the whistle on special education practices at his school, Frederick Douglas Academy IV in Brooklyn. He was eventually cleared of all of the trumped up charges (except one — calling his principal a liar).

And at Opportunity Charter School in Manhattan, where teachers are not automatically part of the UFT, more than a dozen teachers were fired this year after they tried to unionize, showing what can happen without tenure protection.

Tenure also provides protection against other forms of discrimination, beyond attacks on whistleblowers and union activists. Homophobic students accused Stuyvesant High School librarian Chris Asch of inappropriate touching, a charge that a judge recently dismissed, saying that Asch’s suspension was the product of discrimination. The false accusations caused Asch a three-year legal nightmare that included being called “pervert” in the press. But if Asch had not had tenure rights, they would have cost him his job and pension immediately. Without those due process rights, the protections of antidiscrimination law are often meaningless because few are willing or able to go through lengthy court battles after their jobs have already been taken away.

The stories detailed here are only a few cases culled from recent local headlines — a small selection of incidents that the mayor should already be familiar with before he proclaims that tenure is useless. And those situations that receive public attention are a subset of what must be countless stories where school workers have been harassed because of their willingness to advocate or, perhaps more shamefully, because of who they love, what God they worship, or the color of their skin.

The history Mayor Bloomberg cites as justification for eliminating tenure actually supports an ongoing need for the practice. Contrary to what Bloomberg has asserted, New York’s first tenure law of 1917 predated both this century’s Red Scares, and was primarily a Progressive Era reform aimed at protecting teachers from the whims of political patronage machines and from corrupt and arbitrary employment practices. It actually served as little defense for the hundreds of New York teachers dismissed in the 1950s for suspicion of membership in the Communist Party (none of whom, as Baruch College history professor Clarence Taylor documents in his excellent new study, were ever accused of unprofessional conduct).

Far from being a relic of a bygone era, tenure is a crucial line of defense against discrimination, whether based on identity, union activity, or political affiliation. Contrary to what Mayor Bloomberg says, tenure does not guarantee a job for life. Instead, it simply provides right to present a defense against allegations from an administrator. Since the DOE rarely questions the accounts of principals (even from those completely discredited like Blige) it is crucial to have some kind of neutral procedure for evaluating charges. The continued weakening of tenure rights would return us to days when teachers would be unable to speak up for their schools, their students or their colleagues for fear of McCarthy-style retaliation from administrators. This already happens too much in New York City — destroying tenure would make it rampant and would be a disaster for public education.

  • NYC Public School Supporter

    Outstanding article. The clear cut facts mentioned above demonstrate that tenure is crucial to maintaining fair and balanced treatment for teachers. Tenure is simply a process to provide due process rights for teachers to avoid malicious firings. Too bad the UFT does not have a couple of extra million dollars to place this statement in the NY Post/Daily news. 

  • I noticed that…

    Thank you Peter and Rachel for an amazing article about the truth of having tenure.  Without tenure, all teachers would be at-will employees.  It’s important for the public to know that administration tends to attack chapter leaders for speaking the truth and tenure is the shield that protects them from the abuse. 

  • Anonymous

    this is a great piece; thanks to these two courageous teachers for standing up for their rights; and following up by writing about how they were targeted by their principals afterwards.

  • http://www.anurbanteacherseducation.com James Boutin

    Great piece! I appreciate all of the concrete examples from New York City. It’s hard to argue that tenure is obsolete when you’ve worked in these kinds of school environments. Did anyone send this to Bloomberg?

  • http://Parentadvocates.org Betsy Combier

    Great post and absolutely true that we need tenure in our schools. Principals are running the schools into the ground as they put “getting people out any way possible” above teaching and learning. Children Last has to end.

  • Jfarrell22

    I too as Chapter Leader have undergone very similiar treatment by the administration. It got to the point that other administrators would call my classroom when they needed the principal because he was always in my classroom. The principal spent more time in my room than any other class. It was like the old Keystone Cops but it is really not funny and as a teacher for over  15 years  I felt humiliated and outraged. We as teachers have to watch the administrators so that they spend the money correctly and order the correct materials and do not lie to the parents. Tenure allows us to stand strong against inexperienced administrators who have graduated from the leadership academy yet have no real leadership skills other than creating climates of fear and intimidation.  

  • Vdzaleha

    “Bloomberg argued that protection for academic freedom was not necessary for public school teachers because we are ‘not writing papers about things that are very controversial.’”  Is he unaware of issues surrounding abstinence based sex education versus comprehensive sex ed? Does he not know what it is like to teach evolution theory in some rural school districts?  Has he ever been told told by a principal to “tell the other side of the story” when teaching climate change science?  Out of touch is putting it mildly!

  • @TeacherReality

    Wow. Thank you for telling your stories. It is amazing what teachers go through. I hope to see  more teachers speak out about their experiences. The public needs to know, and through these stories the public will become more informed as to why we need to have tenure for teachers.

    Kelli Reyes

  • Lycophidion

    As a former nyc high school teacher and current CUNY adjunct I can tell you that tenure is never “obsolete.” With no contractual job security and due process protection, you’re livelihood is at the whim of management. You can — and I have been — fired for any reason at all.

    Collectively, this atomizes us and renders us impotent as a union. Our union misleaders know this, but are wedded to their sinecures (based on our dues), and their revolving doors to management and the political establishment. In the PSC/AFT, your sister union, the dynamic is presently somewhat different from that in the UFT. Our misleadership rests on tenured faculty, while using the 60% faculty majority of adjuncts as bargaining chips with management. They claim to champion “parity” and make sounds to that effect at contract time, but deliver crumbs that never challenge the institutional arrangement.

    But, as union bureaucrats tend to be, they are shortsighted. As the neoliberal juggernaut rolls on, and tenured faculty comes increasingly under attack in our public universities (and all universities), they will find themselves in an ever weaker position. There are already several universities that don’t have tenured faculty. Eventually, they will find themselves in the same position as NYC teachers. But, will the PSC leadership try to rectify? Take up the banners of their weakest, contingent, members? No, they will probably choose the same route as the current UFT leadership. Concede, concede, concede…

  • Fedynad

    Please send this article to Student’s First, Michelle Rhee’s group that touts doing away with seniority and tenure to eliminate Last In First Out. They insist that no one would ever be let go unless they were an unfit teacher. There is no reason for teachers to fear for their jobs. This needs to be posted on their face book page!

  • I noticed that…

    As a chapter leader with over 18 years in the system, I was u-rated for asking the principal too many questions, for ensuring that she abides by the chan regs, for asking to see the budget, and for not allowing her to roughshod through the members’ rights.  If I didn’t have tenure, I would’ve been terminated long time ago.

  • Pingback: Larry Ferlazzo’s Websites of the Day… - The Best Articles For Helping To Understand Both Why Teacher Tenure Is Important & The Reasons Behind Seniority-Based Layoffs

  • Pingback: Larry Ferlazzo’s Websites of the Day… - Today’s Round-Up Of Good School Reform Posts, Videos & Articles

  • skibby

    This is an OUTSTANDING article!

  • John Elfrank-Dana

    Many thanks to the authors for explaining the need for tenure. If there’s one thing that was good about Chancellor Klein’s approach was that he was responsive to email queries about the operations of the schools on pothole-type issues. This, at least was my experience. Twice our Internet went down at Murry Bergtraum at very critical times- end of the term. After no results from the DoE’s tech staff I emailed the Klein. Action was immediate. Likewise, with our telephone system, after a grievance was ignored, I emailed Klein and issued a warning of the security implications when a teacher cannot reach security. We had a new phone system in the school within a month.

    My upshot on all of this? I told Chancellor Klein that without tenure I wouldn’t have been able to alert him to these problems in the school. He shrugged it off. 

  • John Elfrank-Dana

    Many thanks to the authors for explaining the need for tenure. If there’s one thing that was good about Chancellor Klein’s approach was that he was responsive to email queries about the operations of the schools on pothole-type issues. This, at least was my experience. Twice our Internet went down at Murry Bergtraum at very critical times- end of the term. After no results from the DoE’s tech staff I emailed the Klein. Action was immediate. Likewise, with our telephone system, after a grievance was ignored, I emailed Klein and issued a warning of the security implications when a teacher cannot reach security. We had a new phone system in the school within a month.

    My upshot on all of this? I told Chancellor Klein that without tenure I wouldn’t have been able to alert him to these problems in the school. He shrugged it off. 

  • John Elfrank-Dana

    But, does tenure matter anymore if the DoE will be giving it to fewer and fewer teachers?

    Was the UFT the deer in the headlights on this loss of tenure? I know teachers still have it who are members of the UFT but far fewer will be getting it. This has been the case in the suburban districts for years now; about one in five get tenure. The rest are just temp employees. You can’t have a union with most of the teachers having no long term stake in the job. The UFT will claim that tenure rules are not subject to contract so “whatcha gonna do?” 
    I believe the political universe is such that the UFT could have and should have headed this one off at the pass. Calling in the Vote Cope chips for some preemptive action could have prevented this rationing of tenure. But, it’s hard to do when your union was supportive of mayoral control; without which more teachers would be getting tenure. Contractual language to set a system of granting tenure should have been demanded. But, we were too busy giving back core rights to think about this one. 

    Some speculate the UFT is morphing into a member benefits management/public relations firm, and away from being a union. It may come to completion soon. The UFT is here to stay because the un-tenured pay the same amount of union dues as those with tenure.

    So, what’s the UFT’s plan to stop the rationing of tenure?

  • John Elfrank-Dana

    But, does tenure matter anymore if the DoE will be giving it to fewer and fewer teachers?

    Was the UFT the deer in the headlights on this loss of tenure? I know teachers still have it who are members of the UFT but far fewer will be getting it. This has been the case in the suburban districts for years now; about one in five get tenure. The rest are just temp employees. You can’t have a union with most of the teachers having no long term stake in the job. The UFT will claim that tenure rules are not subject to contract so “whatcha gonna do?” 
    I believe the political universe is such that the UFT could have and should have headed this one off at the pass. Calling in the Vote Cope chips for some preemptive action could have prevented this rationing of tenure. But, it’s hard to do when your union was supportive of mayoral control; without which more teachers would be getting tenure. Contractual language to set a system of granting tenure should have been demanded. But, we were too busy giving back core rights to think about this one. 

    Some speculate the UFT is morphing into a member benefits management/public relations firm, and away from being a union. It may come to completion soon. The UFT is here to stay because the un-tenured pay the same amount of union dues as those with tenure.

    So, what’s the UFT’s plan to stop the rationing of tenure?

  • Shiva

    I think a good comparison with the new tenure situation is how NYC deals with issuing concealed pistol carry permits. The law says that a law-abiding citizen with no criminal record is legally entitled to a carry permit if “good cause” can be proven. But who decides what “good cause” is? It is the NYC police department who is the sole entity who makes that decision. But in reality only those with big bucks or political connections are the people who end up getting a carry permit. (Trump, Howard Stern, etc.) The point is that there are countless folks out there who are decent people who should be able to have a carry permit but are denied having one at the whims of the NYPD. The same is now happening with tenure. The city is arbitrarily refusing to give tenure to those who truly deserve it. I predict in a few years that the only teachers who will be getting tenure are those with “political or inside connections” to the DOE. I know this comparison may seem far-fetched but it goes to show what can happen when so much power over so many people is controlled by a select few. 

  • John Elfrank-Dana

    Interesting analogy you use.

    You can’t privatize education unless you bust the teachers unions. Get rid of tenure and seniority, then you got them. Teachers have to become flexible labor, cheap, temporary and will no real benefits, then private schools can make a profit. The UFT dodged a bullet this year with the threat to seniority in Mayor4Life’s (thanks NYC educator) trumped up layoff controversy. If it wasn’t for the other unions saying no way on seniority, Bloomberg may have succeeded in hammering the final nail in the coffin of our union. Also, if it wasn’t for Bloomberg’s crappy poll numbers (the Cathie Black debacle playing a major role here- no thanks to the UFT’s no position on her) he may have gotten his layoffs. Instead the UFT’s ATRs will bear the brunt by being shuffled from school to school on a weekly basis to cut down on substitute costs. 

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

10 comments so far today

Archives

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