Why in the era of Newtown and Parkland are ATRs denied keys for locking their room?

Last week 17 people, students and staff, have lost their lives to gun violence on campus.

One key way that teachers helped many students to survive in the Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Connecticut and the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida was to lock the classroom doors.

A lesser well known ugly truth is that in members of the Absent Teacher Reserve are often not given keys that allow them to lock the classroom doors. ATRs know why this is done. ATRs are treated as pariahs. Neglecting the needs to equip with them with the essential tools to do their job is another way to ostracize and demoralize them. However, declining to give ATRs classroom keys is a serious safety problem. The NYC Department of Education has done a cruel thing in failing to see that ATRs are fully equipped. The DOE and the UFT have known that this is an ongoing problem. They are both failing in a duty of leadership and rectifying this.

ATRs, in a conundrum of being stuck in the DOE hustle

An ATR weighs in on our potentially disastrous future.


The concern at this point is that unfortunately, ATRs are EERILY still in the same... position, conflicting scenarios, stigmas, intrusions, undermining schisms, and disadvantaged investigations. 

Clearly, by ATRs not unifying, demanding their UNION rights are lead consistently down a rabbit hole - ALL FOR A PAYCHECK, which has not put everyone into an end of the year conundrum.   

That being, RIGHT BACK WHERE ATRs STARTED - same place, same position. 

However, this fall, in 2017-2018, all the rugs will be pulled from under everyone's feet, and these fighting gloves will not have padding for knuckle protection. They will HIT RAW and HARD!!!  

WE'VE been reading, watching and listening to "gossip" from various sources whether colleagues or from those who have access to UFT meetings, and suddenly, while reading over the ATR BLOGS lately - NOTHING HAS CHANGED - just more "positioning and posturing" for reliable rhetoric.  Sadly, some reputable ATR blogs have even folded because of reasons that are understood and reflective of the current climate for being outspoken or dismayed by not seeing progress, as expected.

When an opportunity to strike with a lawyer was offered, a VAST MAJORITY went into hiding, and the few who were willing realized that the numbers were not their for a CLASS ACTION. 

So now, here ATRs are AGAIN - finishing 2016-17, with NOTHING NEW and no battle won. 

While our complaining to AMY and MIKE only proved futile or mixed in reaction, the funny part, the DOE somehow listened by extending ATRs' rotations, as the ATR supervisors became savvier on how to write ATRs up with even more "precision", whereby, many have now come to realize, their only option is FORCED RETIREMENT before their justified 2018 raise and retro.  HHHMMMM..... 

Wouldn't this seem counter productive - THE DOE LISTENING, and then "pushed" their agenda by sending out "hatchets" by ATR supervisors.

So here ATRs are sitting and waiting, sitting and waiting, sitting and waiting, as the 2017-18 contract is being negotiated, and WILDLY ENOUGH during this waiting, ATRs were offered a 'SEVERANCE PACKAGE" that ATRs WERE HOPING WOULD BE OFFERED, but only finding, it was worse than the one offered in 2014.  Contemplating this, ATRs WILL SIT and now twiddle thumbs, because this was meant to throw a bone to those complaining for a way out, but only got a LAMB DUCK for their final ouster.

As many laughed and many just screamed at their reps... AND GUESS WHAT??  

ATRs found out that NO ONE WILL LISTEN TO COMPLAINTS because UNITY doesn't see you as worth their effort - hence, aka "2nd Class citizens" - and it's effectively the NEW NORMAL for ATRs to be circulated as a "SECRET COMMODITY," never mind the ones that will be joining the flock this SEPTEMBER 2017, following their getting excessed last week.  

Those teachers who received their EXCESS LETTERS are in bewilderment because they know of their fate. and they realize that the OPEN MARKET IS A SHAM for any teacher over 12 years (OHHHH BTW this is not AGE DISCRIMINATION because "excessing" is part of downsizing).

IMPORTANT NOTE:

https://www.nysut.org/news/nysut-united/issues/2017/june-2017/severe-teacher-shortage-looms-for-new-york-state

With this now known, and put into the news over and over again, as teachers wait for "retirement" after 2018 (double increase raise), ALL SCHOOLS' BUDGETS will no longer be able to handle SENIOR TEACHERS over 15 years (102K) because their school budgets are being reduced again, and many schools are turning to TITLE 1 to fill in for these severe cuts which means ALL SCHOOLS will face new challenges with "under performing" students who are "dragging" many schools into RENEWAL REFORM, and as you've read in the news recently, this, too, has become a SHAM under the DEBLASIO/FARINA regime.

On top of ALL THIS, COMMON CORE is receiving backlash and may be reformed again. It's getting a new name in NY this year. So what does this mean to our learning curve... GUESS WHAT... 

NO ONE HAS AN ANSWER... WHYYYY??? 

This is because we are in another election year. and both, DEBLASIO/FARINA have to RESELL THEIR OLD RENEWAL PACKAGE as "NEW AND IMPROVED"!!!   Funny, WHO will buy it....???        Notice, CUOMO isn't....

Moreover, if you look at the next contract negotiations this year and going into next year, ASK THIS: will it be ANOTHER (9) YEARS??  HHHMMM...  If so, then ALL TEACHERS (other than newbies) at this point in time will be in jeopardy because SCHOOLS' BUDGETS will not match these drastic increases or reforms. MIND YOU: Small schools are going to "hire and fire" newbies, like slaughtered cattle as "aging teachers" will not have many choices because the LARGER SCHOOLS who could handle bigger budgets, will only wait until their SENIOR TEACHERS RETIRE (freeing up money for the "2 for 1" teacher trade off). It's not rocket science for any APO or PRINCIPAL. 

BTW - knowing the ATR scale (free 1st year / 2nd year 50% / 3rd yr trade off onto school budget), this still hasn't proven an incentive for HIRING SCHOOLS - ATRs who are in the pool either have to step up their "interviewing skills" or the "rotations" will just become more demoralizing and/or cataclysmic. 

Meanwhile, some NYC teachers will flock to charters only to maintain a paycheck, then only realizing that they can be potentially "fired" because they are not "ROBOTS", or they REALLY EXPERIENCE that there is NO UNION PROTECTION (even though you had it but didn't see it in action). Hence, another dilemma for any one teh who teaches in a public/private sector and find themselves caught between a failing career or assed out!!!

Now, the new trend for ALL TEACHERS is reinvent their "certifications" and becoming more valuable with added Content Specialties to make you more "marketable" because NEWBIES are capitalizing off of this trend - i.e. ELA with Sp-ED Cert / Math with Sp-ED cert / Math with Science cert. (Multiple certifications are NOW the new "golden tickets").  

See this little 'secret' is being withheld when interviewing in this current climate, that more principals are looking for "ADDED VALUE" in certifications where they get more value from a teacher with SEVERAL certifications rather than just ONE single Content Specialty.

With many ATRs not staying in one position, one vicious cycle and one conundrum after another are being picked up by some schools which begs these questions:

1) Should ATRs go outside their districts to be recognized for their talents?

2) If ATRs are not being picked up with the new incentives, why isn't the UNION 

   coordinating with the CSA on the benefits of these "new incentives"?

3) Can ATRs truly survive further degradation, and not have anyone "empathize or 

    sympathize" as colleagues?

4) As Union factions are "listening" and "pushing for reform", their efforts are 

    materializing, but when will their "solutions" start taking effect, as ATRs are 

    waiting in hidden fear and isolation?? 

Just know, advocates / lawyers / public scrutiny are constantly willing to fight for ATRs cause and plight BUT in 2016 / 2017 the DRIVING MOMENTUM HAS RADICALLY CHANGED TO THE POINT OF "SILENCING OF THE LAMBS"... Could it be that ATRs screams are seemingly ONLY heard when they are "SILENT" .... BTW, isn't this another "conundrum", too???

In the season of ATR liquidation, some sobering realities of how excessed teachers in other cities are much luckier

The DeBlasio-Farina liquidation of the ATRs via U ratings by field supervisors for ATR performances in subbing settings within student strangers, is in full swing, accelerated over the rates seen in Bloomberg's last term, as we've analyzed this month (for instance, here) and as the Chaz blog has reported here. The UFT? It is completely silent. As we've pointed out, its leadership backed observations as soon as rotation started in fall, 2011. Remember, Weingarten, yes, terrible for agreeing in 2005 to the end of the seniority transfer and agreeing in 2007 to Fair School Funding (aka Fair Student Funding), at least sued the DOE for age discrimination, and spoke forcefully of our worth as educators. Words you'll never hear in public from Michael Mulgrew or Leroy Barr.
Clearly, life is far worse for ATRs today, compared to the first two terms of Bloomberg.

The UFT loves to allude to excessed teachers' find a job in a few months or get terminated condition in Rahm Emanuel's Chicago. UFT really must thank their lucky stars that Chicago teachers are just a few months to "find a new job" after they get excessed from school closings or other causes. But the UFT is a just employing a deception that deflects from the rosier status for excessed teachers elsewhere in the nation. As you see from this linked comparative study of excessing nationally, the trend is that districts place teachers and that SENIORITY HELPS teachers.
This Thanksgiving, be conscious that even though you might "feel happy you have a job," keep in mind that the trend in many other U.S. cities is towards placement. This ultimately links with the observations issue, because is that there is NO parallel situation of veteran teachers observed out of license or in subbing situations and losing their licenses over this. Take time to carefully read this survey of over 100 cities and their teacher excessing practices. Visit the original site at the National Council for Teacher Quality to see the graphics. And remember: the NYC DOE places excessed paraprofessionals; so why can't the DOE return to pre-2011 practices? Have DOE outcomes really improved since the DOE adopted the rotation policy?
Remember; the U ratings for subbing performances are real: they are sending teachers into 3020a termination hearings.

From the NCTQ site:

April 2015: Transfers and Excessing

Welcome to the Teacher Trendline, NCTQ’s monthly newsletter designed just for school district officials (subscribe here). Each month we use data from NCTQ’sTeacher Contract Databaseto highlight the latest trends in school district policies and collective bargaining agreements nationwide. The database contains teacher policies from 118 school districts and two charter management organizations, including the 50 largest districts, the largest district in each state, Broad Prize winners, Gates investment districts and members of the Council of the Great City Schools. State-level teacher policies from all 50 states are also included.Send feedback to teachertrendline@nctq.org.

Whether by choice or circumstance, teachers change schools within districts regularly. This month's Teacher Trendline will examine what teachertransfers and excessing looks like in the 118 districts in the Teacher Contract Database.

Transfers

Voluntary transfers are often initiated by teachers for personal or professional reasons. Teachers may want to transfer to another school for a wide variety of reasons, such as philosophical differences with a principal or a desire to teach in a school closer to home. For most teachers, there's little risk in seeking a voluntary transfer: until a transferring teacher has been assigned to a new position, he or she does not give up the old one.

In some districts, teachers who voluntarily transfer are given priority during the hiring process. While about half of the districts in the Teacher Contract Database do not address this issue in contract and/or board policy, 41 percent of districts give priority to internal transfers for vacant positions. 

 [See original article for chart.]

The eight districts that do not formally prioritize internal transfers over new hires for vacancies are Burlington (VT), Dayton (OH), Fargo,Fulton County (GA), Nashville, Newark, Prince William County and St. Paul.

The 49 districts that do give preference to internal transfers for vacancies sometimes face criticism around this practice because this prioritization can have the unintended consequence of prolonging the hiring process, pushing potential new hires out of districts’ human capital pipeline. Some districts try to avoid this challenge by getting a head start on the hiring process and/or limiting the time in which transferring teachers receive priority.

Boston, for example, provides a limited window of 10 days in which permanent teachers who are transferring can have priority in applications. Duval County (FL) gives priority to internal transfers until May 1. Voluntary transfers in Los Angeles only receive preference until April 15. In San Diego, internal transfers receive "priority consideration" for vacancies; however, in priority schools, positions not filled by February, relatively early in the hiring cycle, are opened to outside candidates.

Excessing

As opposed to voluntary transfers, excessing is a process where teachers are involuntarily forced to move schools because they no longer have a position in their current school. Teachers are excessed when a school has to cut or change the composition of staff due to any number of issues including, but not limited to, a drop in student enrollment, budgetary cuts or programmatic changes.

Districts negotiate a number of ways to identify teachers for excessing, but the most common method found in collective bargaining agreements is still seniority. Of the districts in the Teacher Contract Database, nearly half (48 percent) use district-level seniority as the primary factor for excessing teachers. Another 16 percent use seniority in addition to other factors, like school need or teacher performance.

Only 13 percent of districts do not use seniority as either a primary or significant factor when excessing; of these districts, five percent use seniority as a tie-breaker if all other characteristics between two teachers are equal.

 [See original article for chart.]

West Ada (ID), one of the districts that use seniority to identify teachers for excessing, utilizes both school- and district-level seniority in the excessing process. In cases where there is a surplus of teachers within one school, West Ada teachers are identified for excessing based on building seniority; district seniority is used as a tiebreaker if all other factors are equal.

Placement after excessing

Usually, excessed teachers are not out of a job, as the district is contractually obligated to find them a new position.

Mutual consent, a process in which teachers and principals mutually agree on a teacher’s placement within a school through an interview process, is practiced in 12 districts in the Teacher Contract Database. Of those, Douglas County (CO) and Boston allow only tenured teachers to be a part of the mutual consent process.

In 14 districts, excessed teachers are placed in schools in order of their seniority based on their preferences. In the five districts where excessed teachers are placed in schools based on multiple factors, four of those districts (Cleveland, Jefferson County (KY), Kansas City (MO) andOklahoma City) use seniority as one of the factors for assigning excessed teachers to new schools.

 [See original article for chart.]

 When mutual consent is used to place excessed teachers into new positions, as it is in 12 districts in the Teacher Contract Database (Boston,Denver, District of Columbia, Douglas County (CO), Harrison District Two (CO), Minneapolis, Newark, Palm Beach County (FL),Polk County (FL), Providence, San Francisco and Seattle) there are times when teachers are left without a match. The policies for what happens to those teachers at that point in the process are listed in the table below.

 [See original article for chart.]

The field supervision program deceives on its pledge to help place teachers, so why does the UFT support the DOE's program?

The United Federation of Teachers backs the New York City DOE's observation program of teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve. Read this 2011 post which reported the UFT's Secretary Michael Mendel's endorsement of observations of ATRs in rotation. Yet, the UFT ignores the fact that the field supervisors do not help ATRs find jobs, in spite of the script that field supervisors recite on their first meeting with ATRs under their supervision, “my job is to help find you a position.” The DOE and Unity-UFT cannot point to any evidence of how the field supervisor's work contributes to ATRs' finding positions. All together, the UFT is complicit with the DOE. Given the facts of the observation program in actual practice, the field supervisor's function is to harass veteran teachers into quitting. It is no wonder that ATRs are coming together for class action lawsuits.

If field supervisors are finding teachers to be satisfactory two, three, four years in a row, why are they not taking these assessments and using these judgments to help refer ATRs jobs for positions? As there are no sincere efforts to place ATRs, it is inherently evident DeBlasio-Farina are continuing Bloomberg's attack on senior teachers. Thus, term one of mayor DeBlasio's administration is to the right of the first two and a half terms of Mike Bloomberg's administration (that is, 2002-2011), when that mayor placed excessed teachers, guidance counselors, librarians, etc. 

So, the question is, why is the UFT so adamant about backing the field supervision program? It has never criticized the program in principle. The closest it has come to criticize the program has been when Amy Arundell has complained in yearly ATR informational meetings of a few bad apple field supervisors. The UFT has not sent to every ATR notice of their rights to be observed under the conditions of "Teaching for the 21 Century." The UFT has not posted notice of this on their website. True, the UFT has posted the document but it has failed to give the link the prominence that it warrants. Is it any wonder that the ICEUFT blog in "Queens UFT to ATRs: We'll Fight YOur Unsatisfactory Observations Only When Admin. Tries to Terminate You," called the observation program a colossal fraud? As the ICEUFT blog pointed out these observations violate the spirit of Article 8J of the contract. (Note that since that March 12, 2014 post it has become evident that the DeBlasio administration DOE has increased the rate of U-ratings based on observations. Furthermore, the DOE has initiated 3020a termination proceedings against many victims of these pedagogically unsound observations, with not a peep of protest from UnityUFT.)

It could be that the UFT is trying to play nice with the sister union, the supervisors' union. If the program field supervision/observing ATRs under substituting situations is eliminated, then the roving administrators stand to lose their positions. The UFT is known to play friendly with the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators (CSA). See, for example, this notice of a UFT/CSA District 26 social. The UFT's support for the field supervision program gives critical support for this jobs program for excessed and retired administrators. Shouldn't the UFT advocate for ATRs first and play chummy with the CSA second?

Tired, old, excuses

  Yesterday was the last day of the school year, 2014/2015.  It was the year that all of us had longed for, after 12, long, agonizing years.  Finally we were to be made whole once again.  We had a mayor [sic] who ran on being the mayor that would reverse the Bloombitch/Klein reign of terror.  What did we wake up to that September morning last fall?  Were we to go to our permanent schools and start to clean, arrange and decorate our classrooms?  NO!  We as the Walking Dead were "forced" to report our ATR assignments.  Later that month, we were "forced" to go on "mandated interviews".  After our first rotation, we were again "forced" to go to a new school, were we were "forced" to be substitute teachers and "forced" to have to endure the indignities of both students and staff, the latter of which were, in some cases, 30 years our juniors.  

  Today I was supported by the entire 7th grade class of the school I was lucky enough to be "forced" rotated into.  The question arose while I was on my way home, should I let our union [another sic] know and could they put in a word for me?  My answer to that is "forced placements have been eliminated!"  But "forced" rotations, interviews and assignments are permitted by our holier-than-thou union.  

 

  The answer to this problem would simply be "vote the bastards out!"  But how can we when the newborns are "forced" to vote for the one party that will "force" them out of teaching and "force" the greatest kids in the universe to a mediocre education.  Keep your dues coming, suckers!

Anonymous

NYC DOE Job fairs, ATRs need not apply, only inexperienced preferred

An ATR writes:

The Department of Education has been holding job fairs this month. But invitations have only been sent to new teacher recruits.

When ATRs contacted the DOE about the fairs they were told that there would be opportunities at the end of the summer. Of course, only the least favorable schools will still have openings at the end of the summer. None of this is surprising. This is a repeat of past years. The special problem this year is that chancellor Farina sounded off in recent years about ATRs' obligations to find positions for themselves and gave veiled threats to eliminate them. Her moves to "thin the pool" this year suggest that she could be pursuing this goal. The DOE & UFT have repeated the line that we need to retool, we need to get more 21st century appropriate licenses, we need to work on our resumes. Yet, constant word that ATRs are hearing is that principals can't or won't hire ATRs because they cost too much.

But why can't the UFT make the case for the value of experience over inexperience? Read the Chaz blog's latest entry which lays out the case for hiring experienced, licensed teachers in specialized subjects, such as Earth Science. As he points out, in scoring Regents exams it is clear that the Bloomberg-de Blasio policy of keeping experienced teachers out of class vacancies has a negative impact on Regents test scores. Read also the comments, which provide numerous testimonials about administrators passing over experienced teachers for novices.

Beyond personal testimonials, research backs up the case for experience over inexperience. Numerous studies indicate that teacher effectiveness increases with the number of years of teaching. See here and here. A 2005 study reported findings that teacher effectiveness increased with five years of teaching.  A 2007 study found that teacher effectiveness rose not just in the first three years, but in subsequent years as well.  

Yet, the supposedly progressive de Blasio administration continues the Michael Bloomberg era New York City school bias for inexperienced teachers over experienced teachers. In its adherence to Fair Student Funding the city is maintaining strong disincentives against experienced teachers getting picked up. All of the elements of deformer Bloomberg's war on teacher professionalism are being continued unchanged: massive denial of tenure, refusal to place veteran teachers, breaking of tenure and the pension system through the sort of bogus, frivolous observations mentioned earlier this week.

Where is the UFT on the recruitment fair issue or Fair Student Funding?  What happened to the hiring freeze that existed under some Bloomberg years? Any protests in the media or in back channels? We're waiting.

Field Supervisors, the proverbial DOE Sandmen vs. ATRs

Teacher ratings for the year are out and the DOE is giving career jeopardizing evaluation ratings that arise from teaching in substituting contexts. New York City excessed teachers, ATRs, if you haven't gotten your rating yet, click to this link.

As being covered well at the Chaz blog and the ICEUFT blog, the DOE has been giving U ratings to ATRs in substitute assignments. Read the blogs. Are there any ATRs writing comments defending the DOEUFT's status quo, defending the UFT's performance?

The observations of ATRs in rotating assignments is unprofessional and unacceptable on several counts:

*The ATRs often don't know the students.

*The ATRs often have been covering a class out of license, with or without the regular teacher's lesson plan.

*The ATRs are told to differentiate lessons for the students, but they have not met them or have not been provided their IEPs or other personal data such as ELL status.

*The people tolerating or designing these policies from De Blasio, on down to Farina, to ATR central, to the field supervisors are forgetting what they probably observed from their own childhood experiences – students do not consider substitutes worthy of respect, and the older the students, the less likely that they are to do the classwork.

*The ATRs are being evaluated on factors that are not sanctioned by the DOE-UFT contract: Common Core and Danielson, when the ATRs are supposed to be evaluated under "Teaching for the 21st Century."
*Many ATRs are getting their first stream of U ratings and letters in the file in 21 years. Doesn't it seem like Farina's DOE is trying to beat the clock to prevent teachers from collecting full pensions. 

We ought to recognize the bigger picture of what is happening. Just as with the Sandmen in the film "Logan's Run," who hunt down people for termination the Runners, those people over 30 years of age that refuse to submit to euthenasia, this U-rating process is feeding into larger societal trends of deprofessionalizing, of ending careers of people over 45, of accomplishing the effective breaking of tenure, of evading paying full pensions due, all goals of reformer politicians such as Cuomo. Age discrimination is rampant in the employment field. The DOE is accomplishing the introduction of the larger social trend of terminating or harassment of workers over 45. On the latter, see the report, "Is 45 the new old age in the workplace?" which references "Logan's Run." 

The DOEUFT: The DOE can do all of this, unimpeded because the Mulgrew (Unity & New Action endorsed) and Barr led UFT does not and will not make priorities out of protecting ATRs and abiding the contract. Instead, the UFT continuously refuses to allow ATRs to have their own true representatives. See for example here and here.

Violation of union obligations to ATRs is the by-product of the UFT's dogged refusal to allow true, accountable representatives. While it may not be actual collusion, in end result: allowing the destruction of professional lives, the effect is as though there is collusion.

Things were better under Cathie Black: The UFT actually gains from the absurd system of ATRs in rotation, and playing along with the fraud that ATRs just need to try harder to find jobs during the Open Market Transfer period. From a budgetary perspective it would make sense to place ATRs. However, the UFT goes along with the rotation system, one of the early innovations of Chancellor Walcott. Here's how the UFT benefits: the UFT draws in full dues for the ATRs in rotations plus it pulls in dues from those teachers in positions that the ATRs could have otherwise filled. So, the UFT benefits by getting two dues income streams. It is curious that the UFT treasurer is in a group message to ATRs. Are the DOE and the UFT coordinating on certain levels that ATRs should know about but do not? See the latest post at atrnyc.blogspot.com 

What the UFT says about unfair observations

The UFT has sent word that any ATRs that feel that they have unfairly received U ratings should contact Amy Arundell [aarundell@uft.org] or Mike Sill [msill@uft.org].

And also remember that it was the UFT's Secretary, Michael Mendel, that said it was all proper for ATRs to be observed in subbing circumstances in Fall 2011, when the UFT agreed to the change from placement of ATRs to rotation of ATRs. Many ATRs are now facing termination after observations in these inappropriate settings. In a new precedent: ATRs are receiving termination letters well in advance of the end of the term in June.

The author at the Chaz blog wrote a very good analysis of Mendel's tenure in the UFT leadership. He took important steps that have been important setbacks for veteran teacher in general and ATRs in particular, on issues ranging from the seniority transfer, to Fair Student Funding, to dealings with the DOE.

Here is Michael Mendel's 2011 letter sanctioning the "trial" program of ATR observations in certain Brooklyn districts. Notice how the slippery slope of trial allowed this program to progress, with no review as to how the observers operated.

An ATR teacher who goes by the name "ATR in Perm" forwarded to us a letter that UFT Secretary Michael Mendel sent to ATR teachers in Brooklyn Districts 13-23, 32, and 73 (the Brooklyn high school superintendency). 

Mendel's letter is a follow-up to the DOE's recent announcement that a group of administrators called "Field Supervisors" will begin evaluating ATR teachers.

Below is Mendel's letter (with a few key points highlighted by NYCATR). Following the letter is ATR in Perm's response; he who forwards the message gets first dibs at trashing it. 

Dear colleague,

The UFT has been informed that the DOE will implement a new supervisory system for ATRs in Brooklyn community school districts (Districts 13-23 and 32) and Brooklyn high school superintendency (District 73). They have labeled it a pilot, though they did not indicate how or when the pilot would be evaluated; nor have they indicated if or when they would extend this system to other ATRs. We were informed about this plan, but had no input into it. I am writing to assure you that the union will continue to make sure that your rights as a UFT member are not violated and your professionalism as a teacher is respected. 

The DOE has created a new position, that of field supervisor, with the intent that field supervisors will provide some measure of evaluative continuity to the members whom they observe and to whom they provide professional feedback. They have done this because state law requires that all teachers must be evaluated and rated. 

As always, the UFT will monitor the implementation of this new system carefully to make sure that it is implemented appropriately (e.g., that members are observed on things like classroom management, and not on things like content when they are teaching out of license — in other words, things that make sense). We will address concerns that come up with the DOE immediately. Above all, we will continue to hold the DOE’s feet to the fire on the main tenet of the June ATR agreement, which is to fill all long-term absences and leaves with ATRS and to help members in the Absent Teacher Reserve find permanent positions. 

We know that you play a valuable role in virtually every city school, under often challenging circumstances, and that your contributions are often unrecognized. We are committed to ensuring that ATRs are treated like professionals and are working to make sure this new supervisory system does that. 

If you have questions or concerns, please contact your district representative or Amy Arundell at aarundell@uft.org.

ATR in Perm: The UFT's Michael Mendell issued a letter on the UFT's position on the ATR teacher evaluations. Shockingly, the area that visiting teachers routinely have the most trouble with, classroom management, is an area that Mendell thinks is fair game for evaluating teachers.

"We are committed to ensuring that ATRs are treated like professionals . . ." Yeah? Well, why are you letting us get evaluated on handling kids who we've just met minutes ago? School tone, set by administration, as to whether they discipline students in a timely fashion or whether they coddle them, is the greatest factor (aside from home upbringing) in how kids will react to even the sternest and most confident Classroom-Management-minded teacher.

An ATR's letter to Mulgrew on phony mandated interviews

A letter to UFT president Mulgrew, whose union represents also paraprofessionals, who get placed when excessed from a school, but cannot ensure the same for excessed teachers.  Remember that this president has been reported as using WNYC's phrase "unwanted teachers" referring to ATRs while on the station, when the fact is that ATRs have higher salaries which principals will avoid in favor of new recruits. Fair Student Funding creates this incentive to hire new teachers. This is why ATRs will very rarely stay in a position beyond June. Somehow Mulgrew cannot bring it to himself to utter these facts.

To: Michael Mulgrew
Cc: Amy Arundell; Michael Sill
Subject: Mandated Interviews

Michael, 

    I have just returned from my "mandated interview" at A. Phillip Randolph H.S.  I was told by the secretary that all of the interviews had been cancelled last week.  We were all given letters, by the principal, to this affect.  This is not what I am writing you about.  It is the blatant effort of Tweed to paint all ATRs aka, The Walking Dead, as unhireable and therefore need to be terminated.  

   To back up this statement, a rash of senior teachers, in the pool, in the outer boroughs are being hounded and setup by supervisors for "U" ratings.  I have also learned, in confidentiality, that we are being deliberately sent on interviews that are nonexistent, which is a violation of Art. 16, paragraphs 2 & 3 of our contract.  

    You need to fix this now. Not in 2 months or 2 years, but now.  We have dedicated our lives to the children of the City of New York and we deserve better than this.  We are tired of hearing that the union can't demand that we in the pool (ATR) not be terminated.  You are the president of the UFT.  If they don't want to budge then there should not have been a contract until the city did come around and negotiated a viable, honest and respectable solution to this madness.

   I hope to hear from you concerning this latest in a very long history of abuse of the senior teaching staff in the city and union.   

Why the stakes are high in veteran teacher terminations: 'Retirement' without quality pensions

Harper's Magazine had a sobering August, 2014 article, "The End of Retirement," in which Jessica Bruder reported on retirees that had inadequate pensions. She encountered roving "elderly migrant workers" who work at Amazon warehouses or on farms.

Many of the points from the Harper's Article: Many of these workers were actually former members of the middle class, with management jobs in corporate America. These new migrants often travel in RVs, moving from job to job. The work is often too taxing for people their age, people in their 70s or 80s. Corporate America's shift from traditional pensions to 401(k)s has meant that workers have lost in the long run.

Some of the main points were earlier published in U.S. News & World Report, "A Disturbing Look at the New Retirement."

ATRs, and other teachers threatened with termination-- This is your future if the DOE field supervisors or other administrators. 

Notice how many ATRs with between 20 and 25 satisfactory rating years in the system and are suddenly getting U ratings? Termination before 25 years will keep these teachers away from getting full pensions necessary for a quality retirement. The opportunity to "hold down runaway pensions" is likely what is driving the effort to terminate teachers, whether by observation of ATRs in substituting situations or by Danielson-style teacher evaluation. Tenure remains, but states have an opportunity to evade their pension obligations. 

And where is the UFT on this threat? As field supervisors inappropriately give unsatisfactory ratings in subbing performances, ATRs are feeling abandoned. ATRs felt sold out by the Contract on Educators. Now they feel betrayed, as members report hearing UFT president Mulgrew buying WNYC's rhetoric and calling ATRs "unwanted teachers" on NPR, when the reality is that their salaries prevent them from being hired.