SOUTH BRONX SCHOOL: SBSB EXCLUSIVE!!!!! MORE Caucus Presents 2018 Contract Demands

Sunday, February 25, 2018

SBSB EXCLUSIVE!!!!! MORE Caucus Presents 2018 Contract Demands

With it being 2018, the contract is up this coming November. The MORE Caucus being in control of the Unity/UFT's executive board has not only a front row seat to the upcoming negotiations, but is not on the outside looking in and has established contacts within the UFT to be heard. Yes, it is nice to show how technological adept one thinks they are in posting nice little online polls on Facebook with "cool" graphics. But that gets one nowhere.

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.
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 
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. immigrant liaison- UFT passed a reso on this- can we collectively bargain training for UFT members, add this to comp-time menu and c-6- UFT asked how do we envision this- we said offer training for members and like the respect for all and sustainability coordinator- have it be someone that is trained and listed throughout the building. Also possible offer it on the SBO comp-time position and/or C-6. UFT said they will follow-up 


Anonymous said...

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.

Pete Zucker said...

Read again. It’s Unity/UFT that is claiming Danielson protects teachers.

Anonymous said...

Let’s see how it protects the UFT.

Pete Zucker said...

Having Danielson protect used to evaluate Unity/UFT? That can be interesting.

Anonymous said...

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)

Michael Fiorillo said...

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.

Anonymous said...

The UFT has only one demand - continued mandatory dues taken from the pay checks of the down trodden demoralized rank and file.

Anonymous said...

#10) 3020a is a punishment in and of itself. You shouldn't have to wait till 3020a to address phony letters to file.

Pete Zucker said...

You’re right. Remember, these demands are rough draft. In no way shape or form is this a static document.

Anonymous said...

Mulgrew’s using it to ingratiate himself with the reformers and take over Randi’s job when the witch retires.

Anonymous said...

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.