MORE is fighting an uphill battle every day. Unity/UFT continues to try to swat away MORE but MORE is here to stay.
With that being said, The Crack Team reached obtained the contract demands MORE is presenting to Unity/UFT tomorrow night at the exec board meeting. Today, right now, will be the first public airing of the demands and it should put Unity/UFT on notice.
Notice: Some names have been redacted.
1. Real raises: Set a pattern or follow a city pattern with raises that are equal - to uniformed/sanitation workers-
We
expressed that HS members were especially upset during the
last contract with delayed retro and raises that did not follow the
pattern of other union workers in. UFT acknowledged this and said the
first thing the city negotiators will argue for is "increased
productivity"
2.
Do away with C-6/professional assignments so HS teachers can have two
full preps to prepare, especially those that are in ICT/ESL co-teaching
situations
IF
C-6 cant be totally done away with then pedagogical related assignments
only (no lunchroom duty)- (this also addresses the proliferation of
teacher teams)
UFT claims reps go to high schools through-out the
cities the prevalent complaint from faculty is the lack of time teachers
in co-teaching situations (Sped/esl) have to work with each other, if
c-6 cant be done away with they would like to see something to address
this using c-6 and PD time
3.Class size violations - with the proliferation of oversized classes we need some type of accountability for DOE/principals every day that a class is oversized the contract.
3.Class size violations - with the proliferation of oversized classes we need some type of accountability for DOE/principals every day that a class is oversized the contract.
UFT will meet with xxxx to come up with a joint reso and action on
this. XXXX has worked closely with class-size matters on this and has
argued several grievances on class-size violations in his school. UFT agreed that class-size is a priority.
4.
Unit pricing (stop the so called fair student funding formula-which
"charges principals more for veteran teachers)- XXXX says they were
at least able to get this to the negotiating table last time
This would solve many problems from class-size, ATRs, to inequities in schools
This would solve many problems from class-size, ATRs, to inequities in schools
UFT said
we did bring this up in the last round and the city answered it is not an item that can be bargained, but its worth bringing up again
5. Regents grading in schools- same as unit pricing, UFT can bring up, but not something we will necessarily bargain
6. Transfer system -seniority/sbo- at least a partial return to seniority transfers"
seems highly unlikely this will happen
7. 2 observations for tenured teacher- this is the state minimum
We brought it up, UFT hears us, but they (uft unity( have a different take which they
expressed at ex bd and DAs (the current system protects teachers)
8. teacher diversity and school integration - can we collectively bargain actions to address this?
UFT said it takes two willing partners, UFT has been aggressive on
both fronts but hasn't found the same commitment from DOE. They would
like to expand the para-professional to teacher program, they can bring
it up in negotiations and do something like they did in the last round.
paras have a higher percentage of people of color than teachers.
9. DOE PD'S that occur in schools will be accredited towards CTLE hours
UFT spoke about how long it has taken DOE to receive proper
certification to even be a provider, we pressed that UFT members with
families, childcare, elder care, grad school can not be expected to fulfill these requirements-the PD time in school ought to count for CTLE
10. Due Process for UFT members under investigation or Exonerated (UFT will look more into this- but this is what we offered:
A
small adjustment for the type of outside complaints described would be
for a parent to have to come up and sign a complaint in writing that was
made by a student. Those things don't currently happen and would filter
out a fair amount of capricious complaints.
Another
small adjustment would be to require the investigation process to
consider the intent as part of its process. This would compel all
parties to consider context of any action in their decision.
Investigators' final report should have to state the apparent intent
behind the act in writing in their final report. This would absolutely
lighten the burden for those who go through the process. It's a small
shift but it has powerful consequences on all levels. The DOE is the
only district in the state with a bureaucracy to support investigations
like what we have. The local CBA (our contract)
needs reflect that uniqueness with fairness protections (many of which
that haven't yet been though of yet) That do absolutely account for
that.
A
larger shift would be to advocate for a written schedule of fines or
punishments for infractions reflective of progressive discipline and for
that schedule of fines/punishments to be made public.
In
general, significant efforts should be made to make the discipline
process more fair and more predictable. This would take that process out
of the hands of a vindictive administrator and protect teachers and
students.
11 comments:
Please elaborate once again.
How does our current evaluation system and Danielson protect teachers ?? Thousands of us living it need to be reminded as to why such working conditions are necessary for our own protection. Against what???
Please do tell.
Read again. It’s Unity/UFT that is claiming Danielson protects teachers.
Let’s see how it protects the UFT.
Having Danielson protect used to evaluate Unity/UFT? That can be interesting.
Interesting leak. My understanding is that those on the committee are sworn to keep everything secret. I really hope nothing gets messed up due to this being released. 2 observations for tenured teachers is my #1 priority. MORE better keep pushing for this. (I voted for MORE in the last election as did most teachers at my school)
These are MORE's contract demands, not the UFT's. As the post says, MORE will be presenting its demands at this evening's Executive Board meeting; the UFT's demands have not yet been made public.
The UFT has only one demand - continued mandatory dues taken from the pay checks of the down trodden demoralized rank and file.
#10) 3020a is a punishment in and of itself. You shouldn't have to wait till 3020a to address phony letters to file.
You’re right. Remember, these demands are rough draft. In no way shape or form is this a static document.
Mulgrew’s using it to ingratiate himself with the reformers and take over Randi’s job when the witch retires.
Anyone know the history of the “C-6?” I thought the “C” stood for “circular,” meaning it was a memo from the chancellor, and wasn’t actully in our contract. But, it does now appear in the ‘05 contract under a section called “professional duties.” If I’m not mistaken, it was not in the contract before, because we certainly didn’t do this crap when I started.
Post a Comment