GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

state of the union

UFT grapples with change while staying a political powerhouse

stateoftheunionlogoFor decades, the United Federation of Teachers, the largest teachers union local in the nation, held the city in its sway. The UFT’s powerful get-out-the-vote efforts influenced mayoral elections. Its political power kept Albany legislators on a tight leash. And the city’s education policies sometimes mirrored the union’s agenda.

But in recent years, that power has been under threat, both locally and nationally.

Across the country, local teachers unions have been fending off attacks against basic labor rights, such as laws that repeal collective bargaining, and trying to defeat or water down scores of state-level bills that would tie teacher evaluations to student test scores, establish merit pay, or abolish tenure.

And in New York City, a billionaire mayor with no need for union dollars or endorsement has reshaped the city school system and picked fights with the union over its top priorities, including teacher tenure and job protections based on seniority.

Continuity and change

Together, the attacks have cut into the formidable might the UFT has wielded since it began representing all city teachers in 1962.

“The union was for many years seen as the 800-pound gorilla, and recently they have certainly not been the 800-pound gorilla,” said Diane Ravitch, a historian and former U.S. assistant secretary of education who has criticized Bloomberg’s education policies. “The mayor, I don’t know that he’s beaten them, but he’s certainly not afraid of them.”

But as the tides shift nationally and the city prepares to elect a new mayor for the first time since 2001, the UFT remains incredibly powerful. “They have had to give up things they had in the past, but they’re not going away,” added Ravitch. “They’re still a major power player.”

Democratic mayoral candidates, no doubt eager for the union’s endorsement and financial support this year, regularly call the president, Michael Mulgrew. The union invited each of them, along with the state education commissioner, John King, to Cincinnati to view that city’s network of community schools—an idea the union thinks should be replicated in New York. Each of the candidates, along with King, has since called for reforms based on the Cincinnati model. After the mayoral election is held this fall, union influence will most likely grow again.

“They continue to be enormously powerful as an organization when it comes to education policy in New York City and New York state, and that’s no different than it was 5 years ago, or 10 years ago, or 20 years ago,” said Dan Weisberg, executive vice president for TNTP, an advocacy group and teacher training organization, who served as the chief labor negotiator from 2003 to 2009 for former chancellor Joel Klein.

“The union has had to adapt,” he added. “But I would say in general, it’s been remarkable, particularly when you put in the national perspective, how little change there’s been.”

The national perspective

Nationally, teachers unions find themselves at a crossroads. Once, it would have been unthinkable for Democrats to defy teachers unions, who have poured donations into campaign coffers and recruited doorknockers to get out the vote. But many Democrats, including President Obama, are now leading the charge to overhaul the teaching profession. Public opinion and membership rates of labor unions are at an all-time low.

There are some signs of hope for unions. The American Federation of Teachers, the UFT’s parent organization, has kept its membership steady. The UFT has actually gained members, adding to their already considerable resources. The AFT and National Education Association are rethinking their strategies to adjust to the new normal of education policy. They’ve compromised with district officials on new teacher evaluations across the country from Los Angeles to New Haven, Conn., and have overturned some education laws in Idaho and South Dakota.

And unions are still embracing the old ways to flex their political muscles. They lobby heavily at the state level and contribute in political campaigns. Their mobilization efforts remain unmatched by groups like Stand for Children or StudentsFirst, both of which have emerged to serve as a political counterweight to unions and to promote education policies that unions hate.

A 2012 report by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education think tank, ranked New York ninth in the country in terms of teachers union strength. The results were unsurprising, though. “New York is where the teachers union movement began,” said report co-author Dara Zeehandelaar. She noted that New York has near universal participation in teachers unions and the state itself has traditionally been liberal and pro-labor. At 23.2 percent, New York has the highest union membership rate in the country.

The state is unique because of the presence of the UFT. It’s rare for a local union to have such a large influence at the state level, Zeehandelaar said, adding that the only possible comparison is the Chicago Teachers Union. With education policy, what happens in New York City often has a direct bearing on the rest of the state. The UFT’s ability to hold on to power and remain a major player in city and state policies is important nationally, too. Its presidents tend to become presidents of the powerful national union, and its booming membership helps to buoy the rest of labor movement.

Yet even if the UFT isn’t fighting for survival, lately it has found itself under attack like never before.

The New York City story

The relationship between the union and the Bloomberg administration was, until recently, a roller coaster with a mix of highs—like when Joel Klein gave Randi Weingarten an unexpected kiss on the cheek—and lows—like the times Bloomberg has compared the union to the National Rifle Association.

In his first term, a cozy relationship allowed the mayor to wrack up a series of victories — including mayoral control, an overhaul of the school system bureaucracy, and the closure of numerous schools that fell short on student achievement measures — with little union opposition. The union walked away with unprecedented wage increases and convinced the mayor to implement merit pay only on a school-wide basis. Frequently, those victories were seen as mutually beneficial.

But in the mayor’s third term, the relationship has become almost uniformly acrimonious.

The UFT attributes the change to a speech Bloomberg delivered the day before Thanksgiving in 2009, weeks after he won a third term in an election the UFT sat out. In the speech, Bloomberg announced he planned to use student test scores in tenure decisions, push the state to eliminate the cap on the number of charter schools, close the so-called rubber rooms for teachers put on administrative leave, and end “last-in, first-out” layoff policies.

“We went to war three years ago, when Bloomberg went to D.C.,” Mulgrew said.

Yet Bloomberg was echoing the ideas of a national movement that has put unions everywhere on the defensive. Obama had recently announced the rules for the Race to the Top competition, which encouraged states to overhaul tenure, teacher hiring and firing policies, and evaluations in exchange for federal money.

After New York won in the second round of the competition in 2010, with Mulgrew’s support, the UFT had to adjust. Its current dispute with Bloomberg over new teacher evaluations assumes, as state law now requires, that a significant portion of the ratings will be based on student achievement. The cap on charter schools, whose teachers typically are not represented by a union, was lifted (but not eliminated). Charter schools still educate a small minority of students in the city as a whole, but in Harlem—which would be the size of a full-sized school district anywhere else in the country—charters now have a third of the market share.

But the union has been more successful in New York than elsewhere at blocking some Race to the Top proposals. For example, it prevented the end of the last-in, first out layoff policies. And public opinion of the UFT has escaped the downward pull that other unions have experienced: New Yorkers consistently say they trust the union over Bloomberg.

Toward the future

Still, the UFT’s future is anything but assured.

“They’re in for a tough time in the long run unless they’re able to re-imagine their value absent fixed compensation standards for members,” said David Cantor, former spokesman for the Department of Education. “Which is really hard.”

How has the UFT maintained its power and influence—and even grown in size—in the face of new attacks and as unions elsewhere struggle? How has it been forced to change? Where does its influence come from and how does it cultivate its power? Who does the union represent, and what do they think of the changes (or lack thereof) happening around them in the union and in their schools?

In a multi-part series, Gotham Schools and The Hechinger Report will take a look at these questions. We’ll look at how the union spends its money to help understand its strategies and policy priorities. We’ll talk to the people who make up the union to learn about their concerns—and whether they match with those of the union as a whole. And we’ll find out from experts, educators and union officials what the future likely holds for the UFT.

  • http://twitter.com/edintheapple Peter Goodman

    This Report is off to a weak start – quoting Dan Cantor? The UFT has probably never been more politically active and more unified. The steady attacks by the Mayor and the (de)formers have driven the members together. Each month about a thousand school-based elected delegates convene – diverse by age and gender and race and ethnicity. The unifying factor is a dislike bordering on hated directed at the mayor. As the mayor demeans teachers and demeans the union members get more involved. Teacher “feet on the ground,” in local communities is now commonplace. The union has converted from a classic service model, responding to member questions and filing grievances to an action model, involving members around the city. The negotiations committee is now a 300-member committee representing all factions within the union. In the recent election for an open City Council seat in Queens – with seven candidates – the union endorsed candidate won. Union endorsement is not just a letter to members and a financial contribution – it now means active involvement.
    The union is currently endorsing candidates for the upcoming citywide elections. With 26 open City Council seats the 100,000 plus union members, scattered across the city, willing to work in elections, providing the “boots on the ground” is the essence of politics.
    Ocassionally the union has had to lead recalcitrant members – the union negotiated a teacher evaluation plan with the governor, and in spite of opposition from the mayor the plan will finally be approved. Some members are not happy, the union could have simply opposed the plan – union president Mulgrew has argued that the plan actually protects teachers – he led rather than following.
    Over the months ahead a fact-finding panel will produce a report and the union and the next mayor will negotiate a new contract, and, it might be a hard sell to members.
    Around the city, local electeds, community leaders, parents not only respect the union they work with the union on scores of issues. The union probably has never been so tied to communities that ever in its past.
    Yes , the diverse membership, especially the younger teachers and the senior teachers look differently at the future – these are challenges – and a plus. The vibrancy of the union, the involvement, makes the union strong.
    The future of public education is at risk, charter schools, the possibility of vouchers, a transitory Teach for Ameria model, the union is at the head of a broad-based coalition – teachers no longer teach classes and go home – Mayor Bloomberg has created a vibrant union that understands that their porfession is not just teacher – its teacher-unionist.

  • http://twitter.com/ceolaf ceolaf

    >“They’re in for a tough time in the long run unless they’re able to re-imagine
    >their value absent fixed compensation standards for members,” said David
    >Cantor, former spokesman for the Department of Education. “Which is really hard.”

    Complete and utter garbage.

    Unions stand up for their members’ rights. They do this even when the members do not know their rights. They do this even when the member does not feel secure enough to complain for themselves.

    Ever had a boss/supervisor who broke the rules? Ever had one who was completely unfair or irrational, but you feared going over his/her head to complain because you were concerned about long term blowback?

    Hell, who hasn’t?

    Well, unions take care of the complaining for you. And because they do so without you even asking them to do it, you don’t have to get blamed for it.

    Is there value in that? Of course there is. That’s just the most obvious thing.

  • vanna

    God bless the UFT

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tommy-Calderon/100000263260717 Tommy Calderon

    Only in America are teachers viewed with disdain. Never has this country been worthy of so much shame. Ignorance and greed rule and intelligence and knowledge are seen as worthless.
    When incompetents such as Bloomberg, Rhee, Duncan and Klein are allowed to influence educational policy the end is near. The damage that has been done to the students of this country by this group of fools will come to light in about 10-15 years and be written about in history books. It will be one of the major contributing factors to the decline of the American economy in the world stage.

  • Larry Littlefield

    You failed to talk about one the one thing that matters: soaring pension costs. And here, the NYC and US situations are the same — but radically different.

    Since the late 1990s, there has been a significant increase in per student funding, locally and nationally. States kicked in more. The federal government kicked in more. Here in NYC, where it was lower to start with, it has been a huge increase, with the city raising taxes and cutting other services to kick in more. So people were lobbied to pay more, agreed to pay more, did pay more, even if other things are sacrificed.

    And yet everywhere in the country, those people who are paying more are now being faced with one budget reduction after another. They are paying more for less. Even as most Americans are being squeezed in their own workplaces. The attacks are a reaction to this. People feel rightfully ripped off. All the “reform” is based on “we gave them more money and it didn’t work, so we need to demand more.”

    Where is all the money going? To soaring pension and other retirement costs, all over the country. There has been no budget cut. Just shift in budget priorities. And just the shift the UFT worked and lobbied and cut deals for, and lied about the consequences of.

    In that sense the national and NYC situations are similar, but here is the difference. At the same the UFT was gaining retroactive pension enhancements for teachers, even as most had better retirement plans than most Americans, taxpayers were shorting pension plans all over the country. Using the 1990s stock market bubble as an excuse for both the pension increases and the funding cuts. And then they continued to short the pension plans after the bubble deflated, rather than face the consequences, and the hole got bigger. It has been 14 years of not admitting the situation and taking the sacrifices to avodi even greater sacrifices later.

    But in other places the teachers themselves contribute huge amounts to the plans. And they do not get Social Security. And they pay taxes on their pensions. In New Jersey, Illinois and elsewhere it is taxpayer underfunding for tax cuts that caused most of the problem

    But not in NYC. Here the teachers get Social Security, do not pay taxes, and (unless they are the screwed young) do not contribute that much to the pensions. The retroactive deals were bigger. And NYC taxpayers, which have among the highest tax burdens in the country, have contributed more than anyone else to the pension funds. Far more. If the price and quality of service at a business reflected the kind of costs NYC residents are paying right now, UFT members and retirees would not go there, and everyone would be out of a job.

    So in NYC, the UFT’s power has been used for higher class sizes, lower pay and benefits for younger teachers, and worse schools, despite high spending. But since everyone with influence had a hand in it, no one wants to talk about why. So they have these stupid fights instead. Because they don’t want to tell the serf’s it’s game over. Until the next time the stock market corrects back down closer to fair value, again.

    A little tidbit in the Mayor’s budget. After “smoothing” past losses to pay off the shortage over 22 years, because gee it’s long term and we should smooth, the city (presumably with union approval) did a “market value restart” when the stock market went up, taking all the gains immediately. As a result of just ONE YEAR of the resulting below planned returns, NYC will have to pay an extra $500 million per year into the pension funds starting a couple of years from now. (Well actually it should be now, but they smoothed it again).

    But if anyone dares, dares, to bring this up, they get shouted down by those who not only want the benefits but also the rationalization.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Yes, they seek to get the most and provide the least in return. But

    a) That isn’t what all, or even most, teachers want.

    b) They pretend that isn’t what they are doing, and lie when they succeed.

    c) There is no one on the other side on behalf of the vast majority of New Yorkers, and future New Yorkers. Just others negotiating for their share of making others worse off.

    d) They’ve already gotten it, irrevocably. So it’s all about blame now.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Oh, and by the way, it isn’t only teachers who have come under attack after successfully working the system to become better off (in retirement benefits) at the expense of others becoming worse off. Look what happened in Switzerland.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/03/switzerland’s-vote-executive-pay

    Good thing for various people with power that we don’t have initiative and referendum in the U.S., eh? And in the NY State legislature, except for a few districts, for the most part we don’t even have elections.

  • MrKotter

    So teachers should pay into Social Security and not get it? You conveniently leave out that teachers had to buy into 25/55 (also consistently you overstate the #s of people who were able to take advantage of that), and that Tier IV teachers also paid into their pension for a decade until vested in the past. Step into the average NYC classroom for 30 years and see if the deferred wages provided by a pension are not merited. You haven’t a clue, and what is worse, you could care less. Teaching is not a business, and children are not widgets produced on an assembly line. Your ilk want to assault teachers all day long, refuse them a decent wage and benefits, then leave your kids to their care and mentoring. You should revisit Moby Dick; perhaps you will see something of yourself in one of the main characters?

  • Larry Littlefield

    “So teachers should pay into Social Security and not get it?”

    No, they should get it. And they should have been in the system elsewhere. And people should get the pensions they were promised when they were hired. What do the serfs deserve? They were told all the addition deals would cost nothing, to the extent they were told anything.

    “You conveniently leave out that teachers had to buy into 25/55.”

    I estimate that if a teacher had been required to pay the extra 1.85% for their entire careers, and investment returns had been earned on that over that time, it would have covered about one-fifth of the real cost of the retroactive pension deals since 1999.

    In the DC37 deal for 25/57, employees at least had to “buy back’ 1.85% of pay for all the past years of their career, though there was no way that money could earn past interest. The teachers weren’t required to do that — just pay an extra 1.85% from 2008 on. Any able to walk out the door at that time didn’t pay an extra dime; those a few years away only had to pay for those few years.

    It is FUTURE teachers who will have to pay 5.85% into the pension funds their whole career, not 1.85% from 2008 until retirement. And they’ll (maybe) retire at age 63. Again.

    “Consistently you overstate the #s of people who were able to take advantage of that.”

    I’ve heard that some teachers eligible to retire at 55 are working longer, because they had planned to get another job. But if their “full” retirement age was 55 they get higher benefits for each year they work, do they not?

    “Teaching is not a business, and children are not widgets produced on an assembly line. Your ilk want to assault teachers.”

    Again, the phony issues, the phony fights. You and the “deformers” are right on the same page, with regard to what not to talk about.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tommy-Calderon/100000263260717 Tommy Calderon

    We don’t “work the system” you clown, we work hard for the system.
    Congratulations, Littlefield, you are living proof that the “Ugly American” is alive and well.

  • MrKotter

    You also left out that in 25/55 teachers collect 10% less than if they went to 30 years. So under this great deal, that many paid into as insurance against the very real possibility that it would be a mentally and physically unsustainable option to continue, they would have gotten less money, and it would have cost the taxpayers less money annually. And even so, many of these people have continued teaching, because to many (unlike you), it’s not about the Benjamins, it is about children and making a difference. The deformers want to end teaching as a career and replace them with temps who teach until they get a big boy job at an investment or law firm – your ignorance of this is telling. All people deserve a decent wage and a comfortable retirement. You for some reason want teachers to live on cat food in their retirement. Why don’t you call for the 1% to have one less private jet or mansion abroad, instead of taking it out of the hides of middle class people? And for your information, teachers are the serfs, we pay the same taxes everyone else does!

  • Larry Littlefield

    It isn’t the 25 that’s the killer financially, it’s the 55 — and one year in retirement for each year worked. That makes it a killer, particularly since it wasn’t pre-funded.

    “Why don’t you call for the 1% to have one less private jet or mansion abroad, instead of taking it out of the hides of middle class people?”

    Read the link I posted. The Swiss have a great idea. The serfs seem to have some power there.

    “And for your information, teachers are the serfs, we pay the same taxes everyone else does!”

    While working. In New York State the retirement income of public employees is exempt from all state and local income taxes, no matter the age of retirement and no matter how high that retirement income turns out to be. The first $20,000 of retirement income of private sector workers is exempt after age 59 1/2, down from age 62 fairly recently. That $20,000 is not adjusted for inflation. There is no such break for retirement income at the federal level, although the first $20,000 in Social Security income is exempt from the federal income tax.

    At the federal level, there is an ultra-low income tax rate for investment income, including the “carried interest” of hedge fund managers. No such tax distinction for investment income in New York State and New York City income taxes. The one percent control the federal government, not NYC and State.

    So is it pro-union or anti-union, pro-teacher or anti-teacher, when I say the city needs to put in $1 billion-plus more to the NYC teacher fund, and $3 billion plus to all the pension funds, to get those funds out of the hole, starting RIGHT NOW? And where do you suggest that money come from?

    And meanwhile, what do you think of Governor Cuomo’s plan to put off required pension contributions for teachers in the rest of the state for up to 75 years? Their pension fund was pretty well funded — until now.

  • philip nobile

    I pray your series will report on dissidents within
    the UFT who lean toward abominating Mulgrew and his Unity crew as much as the
    Mayor’s DOE. If Mulgrew had not shamefully betrayed Thompson by speaking
    against a DA resolution endorsing our Dewey Award winner v. Bloomberg, teacher
    troubles might be far less today. Free speech is almost impossible in official
    UFT venues because its anti-Jeffersonian leadership censors its newspaper,
    website, the Executive Committee’s misnamed “open mike,” and the show
    DAs. Dissent is outlaw. Just last week one of Mulgrew’s boys. Brooklyn District
    Rep. Tom Bennett ,went nuts at a School for Legal Studies chapter meeting and
    verbally abused an anti-Unity ATR, calling me a “f—–g pile of
    manure” and saying, “I’m gonna get Mulgrew to come down here and
    he’ll beat the s–t out of you.”
    Will Mulgrew discipline this vulgarian? I
    asked. Still waiting for an answer.

  • http://twitter.com/MrPortelos Francesco Portelos

    What the UFT needs is change. Mulgrew out…Julie in. Listen to get on the John Gambling show this morning. Why won’t Michael agree to a debate? http://www.wor710.com/go/podcast/single_page.html?more_page=1&podcast=johngambling&selected_podcast=the_john_gambling_show_4_1362411691.mp3

  • Norm

    If Evan or Sidney from E4E were on a major station like WOR and the Gambling show it would have been blasted all over the place.

  • Norm

    Gotham needs to distinguish between the Unity Caucus which has run the UFT for over 50 years and the UFT as a whole. This is a real story where a relatively small band of people have controlled the entire policy of the largest local in the nation. And through that control also control NYSUT and the AFT. Unity is not the UFT and when you look at what the future holds for the UFT you must separate what the future holds for Unity vs the UFT as a whole. And if you ignore the constant ideological strain going back to the very beginnings you will miss a lot. The UFT supports mayoral control because it always has supported mayoral control back to Mayor Wagner. There is no room for any local control in its ideology. And to understand the ties to ed deformers go back to Shanker’s support for Nation At Risk in 1983 and his partnerships in the 80s with both Reagan and the Clintons.

    You can’t just look at the UFT as it is today without digging up the roots. And if you ignore the fundamental lack of democracy you are missing the big story. They function like they do because their major mantra is holding onto power and everything stems from that. If they were a democratic organization with real member voices they could not function the way they do — ie, supporting mayoral control or spending dues money to support a charter occupying space in a public school. Or supporting politicians who favor closing schools. Or any number of things.
    As for Goodman’s “action” committees, totally dominated and controlled by Unity. Note that the Governance “action comm” made some good recommendations in 2009 to curb mayoral control all of which Randi ignored and made her own deal without a word of protest — except from ICE which published a minority report. Or their “action” committee on testing which they also ignored. They now have another governance committee which will shape a report pinning the blame on Bloomberg and not mayoral control as they recommend some tweaks — like terms of office for PEP members who will still be appointed by the mayor. Soon we will be seeing them say “Only 8 more years of Quinn or Lhota.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/david.cantor.50 David Cantor

    Of course that’s valuable. Please. But pretending there aren’t major changes and challenges ahead is idiot wind. The percentage of American workers in unions is at its lowest point in a century. That’s a huge problem. And while Mayor Bloomberg may have re-invigorated the UFT, an institution that elects its leader by 90+ percentage points isn’t likely characterized by the open, innovative give-and-take and iconoclasm that keeps institutions healthy. This seems obvious.

  • http://twitter.com/edintheapple Peter Goodman

    Many members see the “top of the slate,” voting for Michael Mulgrew as a vote against Mayor Bloomberg. Within the union, within the 1600 schools, teachers vounteer time to demonstrate, to organize parents, to lobby elected officials, to exercise their democratic rights. While the labor movement nationally is struggling it is alive and well in NYC … I suspect with the election of the next mayor, a mayor who reaches across the table – the union members will be challenged on a range of issues – which I agree – is healthy – the diversity within the union – by experience, by race, by gender, by ethnicity, is both a challenge and a strength.

  • MrKotter

    I don’t think Obama or Romney debated the endorsed candidates of the New Whig Party or Socialist Workers Party either.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

0 comments so far today

Events Calendar

Archives

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