When a UFT Victory is Not Really a Victory

 We are hearing the word "victory" bandied about quite a bit, in the last several days since Friday's arbitration hearing. The UFT is claiming victory for defending our earned retro pay that is owed us from 2009-2014. Yes, I am happy that we will be getting it. Though not quite as happy receiving two payments as opposed to one. This is a victory for the city and a loss for the UFT and the rank and file. De Blasio knew exactly what he was doing. 

It was no coincidence that DeB notified the city a week before our we would have received our retro. DeB and the city knew over the summer they were going to try to pull this off. But if they announced it in the summer there would have been talks first. Talks drag on. That would not have benefited the city. 

What to do? Take advantage of the clause in the MOA that anything concerning the retro would go straight to arbitration. Yes, the rank and file should be grateful that the UFT made the clause was part of the MOA. But guess what? That clause was taken advantage of by the city as well. In fact they were hoping for it to be invoked. They got their wish.

Why did the city wish to go to arbitration? Think of this old saying; "You never know how a jury will rule." In this case, an arbitrator. The city had nothing to lose, the UFT everything to lose. There's already a doo-doo storm (The Crack Team had informed me that in the last blog post there were too many naughty words) over the retro being split in two payments. Imagine what would happen if the arbitrator found for the city? 

pyrrhic the UFT was forced to negotiate from a defensive posture. It had no choice but, and for lack of a better word, to cave. James Eterno made a good point on his blog that the arbitrator did not decide this. But rather,  the case was settled between the parties. It was a consent degree. The city had Mulgrew by his proverbial goodies (Again, no naughty words). 

I do disagree slightly with James about that if we didn't get our entire payment in full we should have gone right to court. Again, using the old adage, there is no assurance how a judge would rule. But that's a chance we would have had to take. 

The city wanted something in return, and they got it. After my initial shock on hearing the news Thursday night I figured that out. But what did the city want? My guess was that we would have to furlough 5 days. I was wrong. But no one gets something for nothing. And it is always the UFT giving something for nothing. 

This stunt the city pulled never would have been attempted with the cops, the firefighters, sanitation workers, corrections officers, or any other city union. Again and again the teachers and the UFT are used to go #2 on (again, no naughty words). 

There are many teacher's that adjusted their TDA's and now are screwed. There are many teachers that were counting on this check to catch up on bills and now are screwed. But again, the perception is WE DON'T MATTER. 

This is nothing but a pyrrhic win by the UFT and they are backslapping themselves whilst sipping champagne. This was a gimme putt an inch from the hole.  

What should be done? Openness to begin with. Make public the transcript between the parties and the arbitrator. Put it up on the UFT website. We should demand it. Show us proof there was some negotiations. Show us proof what the UFT had to offer and/or say. Same with the city. These time demand clear candor on the part of the UFT. It is time. 

And the UFT must answer these questions post haste: 1)What is the status of the upcoming per session retro pay and, 2)what of those that are in my situation that will still be owed a payment in October 2021?