The Baltimore Sun Falls Victim To The Brill/Klein Propaganda

OP/ED from Betsy Combier:

Here we go again. In July, the Bloomberg/Klein/media machine empowered Steven Brill, (a well-known pusher of "you must pay for your information" - see his new venture Journalism Online) to misinform the public on the subject of the worst teachers of NYC sitting in "rubber rooms." I believe that Brill's goal was to support Mike Bloomberg and Joel Klein in their battle to end tenure for teachers. I am referring, of course, to the Brill article published in the August 29, 2009 New Yorker magazine. This article is an extreme example of issue advertising and is not good journalism, in my opinion - this is an op/ed on my blog, after all.

Steven Brill actually did me a favor by writing about teachers who I know, and whose stories of how and why they were thrown into a rubber room I am familiar with. I wrote a response to his article - The NYC Teacher Re-Assignment Rooms, Called "Rubber Rooms", and The Ambush of 'The Gotcha Squad'. Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Brill are leading the public down a very dangerous path indeed, if we are to believe that all New York City rubber rooms are filled with lousy teachers, "dead wood", who harm children by being in a classroom. This is baloney. How does Steve Brill know that all the people stuffed into dingy rooms and trailers are the 'worst' teachers, and must be summarily fired as soon as a principal says "Get out of my school". It was only 70 years ago that people got off of cattle cars in various locations in Germany, and were told to go to the right or the left, as determined by a commandant given the power of god to say who lives or dies. We do not need to repeat history, we need to learn from it and learn about it.

The question that remains unanswered is, "what are the characteristics of a 'good' teacher?" Mr. Brill, can you answer that question? Or, when you looked at Lucienne Mohammed's file without her approval or knowledge and saw one "U" rating, and you neglected to mention in your article that Lucienne had filed special complaints and grievances against her Principal at PS 65, Ms. Daysi Garcia, (pictured at left) for harassment, you "knew" that Ms. Mohammad was lousy at her job of teaching?



The Baltimore Sun picked up on Brill's theme of how tenure harms the public by paying incompetent teachers to sit in rubber rooms doing nothing (see article below)...therefore, end tenure and these worthless educators can simply be fired outright, just like everyone else in the labor market. The end of tenure would be, therefore, the beginning of efficiency and streamlining public finance so that only "good" teachers would be paid and remain in our nation's public schools. Mr. Jonah Goldberg in the article below calls Steven Brill's "worst teachers" article a blockbuster, and then repeats the same misinformation. Sadly, read the Baltimore Sun anti-tenure propaganda:

Easiest fix for schools: Get rid of teacher tenure
Jonah Goldberg, The Baltimore Sun, September 10, 2009
LINK

Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Ms. Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.

She's a New York City public school teacher who, like about 600 fellow NYC teachers, has been removed from the classroom; allegations against those removed range from incompetence to charges that include being drunk in the classroom or molesting students.

Ms. Scheiner, who makes more than $100,000 per year, nonetheless insists she is a prisoner of conscience forced to spend her workdays in the rubber room - at full pay - until the system can adjudicate her case. She cannot be fired, at least not without the school district spending gobs on legal fees, because she has tenure and her union, the United Federation of Teachers, would rather protect 1,000 lousy teachers than let one good teacher be fired unfairly.

So Ms. Scheiner and her rubber-roomies report for duty every school day and do nothing. They all get the usual vacations, including the entire summer off. This is all according to Steven Brill in a blockbuster article in the Aug. 31 New Yorker about New York City's efforts to reform the public school system.

Ms. Scheiner says that before New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools chief Joel Klein came along, "everyone knew that an incompetent teacher would realize it and leave on their own."

That's not how the unions see it. A principal of a Queens public school told Mr. Brill that Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, "would protect a dead body in the classroom. That's her job."

This is just a small illustration of a much larger mess. America's large school systems are a disaster.

Yes, this disaster has many authors. Schools are expected to fix larger social problems that are best dealt with by parents. Good teachers aren't paid nearly enough, and bad teachers are kept around, draining budgets. Education bureaucracies siphon off vast resources better spent on classrooms. For example, in 2007, the Washington, D.C., school district ranked third in overall spending among the 100 largest school districts in the nation (about $13,000 per student) but last in terms of money spent on teachers and instruction. More than half of every education dollar went to administrators. President Barack Obama might be a hypocritical liberal for sending his kids to private school, but he's a good parent for it.

But of all the myriad problems with public schools, the most identifiable and solvable is the ludicrous policy of tenure for teachers. University tenure is problematic enough, but at least there's a serious argument for giving professors the freedom to offer unpopular views. Tenure for kindergarten teachers is just crazy.

Tenure's defenders point to horror stories from half a century ago, as if getting rid of tenure would automatically subject teachers to political witch hunts and sexual discrimination. We now have civil rights laws and other employee protections.

Also, to listen to teachers unions, you'd think incompetent teachers are mythical creatures. No wonder that from 1990 to 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest in the country with 30,000 tenured teachers, fired exactly one teacher.

The best argument for giving K-12 teachers tenure is that lifetime job security is a form of compensation for low pay. No doubt that's true, putting aside the fact that $100,000 a year with ample vacation is not exactly chattel slavery. And while most teachers don't make that much (the national average is about half that), the good ones could certainly make more if the dead weight were cleared away and rigid, seniority-based formulas were replaced with merit pay.

Oh, and kids would get better teachers.

Democratic politicians, mostly at the local level, are responsible for letting the unions protect their members at the expense of children and in exchange for campaign donations and other political support. And, to be fair, many Democrats (including Education Secretary Arne Duncan) are aware of the problem. What remains to be seen is whether they can do what needs to be done.

Jonah Goldberg is a syndicated columnist. His e-mail is jonahscolumn@aol.com.

Here is another article from the same syndicate:

Opinion
Unions protecting many bad teachers
Opinion by Jonah GoldbergTribune Media Services
Tucson, Arizona, Published: 09.10.2009
LINK

Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.
She's a New York City public school teacher who, like about 600 fellow NYC teachers, has been removed from the classroom for alleged incompetence or other charges that include being drunk in the classroom or molesting students.
Scheiner, who makes more than $100,000 per year, nonetheless insists she is a prisoner of conscience forced to spend her workdays in the rubber room — at full pay — until the system can adjudicate her case. She cannot be fired, at least not without the school district spending gobs on legal fees, because she has tenure and her union, the United Federation of Teachers, would rather protect 1,000 lousy teachers than let one good teacher be fired unfairly.
So Scheiner and her rubber-roomies report for duty every school day and do nothing. They all get the usual vacations, including the entire summer off.
This is all according to Steven Brill in a blockbuster article in the Aug. 31 New Yorker about New York City's efforts to reform the public school system. Brill adds: "Because two percent of her salary is added to her pension for each year of seniority, a three-year stay in the Rubber Room will cost not only three hundred thousand dollars in salary but at least six thousand dollars a year in additional lifetime pension benefits."
Ever the martyr, Scheiner says she's "entitled to every penny of it."
She says that before New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools chief Joel Klein came along, "everyone knew that an incompetent teacher would realize it and leave on their own."
This is just a small illustration of a much larger mess.
Yes, this disaster has many authors. Schools are expected to fix larger social problems that are best dealt with by parents. Good teachers aren't paid nearly enough, and bad teachers are kept around, draining budgets. Education bureaucracies siphon off vast resources better spent on classrooms. For example, in 2007, the Washington, D.C., school district ranked third in overall spending among the 100 largest school districts in the nation (about $13,000 per student) but last in terms of money spent on teachers and instruction. More than half of every education dollar went to administrators.
President Obama might be a hypocritical liberal for sending his kids to private school, but he's a good parent for it.
Of all the myriad problems with public schools, the most identifiable and solvable is the ludicrous policy of tenure for teachers. University tenure is problematic enough, but at least there's a serious argument for giving professors the freedom to offer unpopular views. Tenure for kindergarten teachers is crazy.
Tenure's defenders point to horror stories from half a century ago, as if getting rid of tenure would automatically subject teachers to political witch hunts and sexual discrimination. We now have civil rights laws and other em-ployee protections.
Also, to listen to teachers unions, you'd think incompetent teachers are mythical creatures, less likely to be encountered than Bigfoot and unicorns. No wonder that from 1990 to 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest in the country with 30,000 tenured teachers, fired exactly one teacher.
The best argument for giving K-12 teachers tenure is that lifetime job security is a form of compensation for low pay. No doubt that's true, putting aside the fact that $100,000 a year with ample vacation is not exactly chattel slavery. And while most teachers don't make that much (the national average is about half that), the good ones could certainly make more if the dead weight were cleared away and rigid, seniority-based formulas were replaced with merit pay.

Michelle Rhee

Democratic politicians, mostly at the local level, are responsible for letting the unions protect their members at the expense of children and in exchange for campaign donations and other political support. And, to be fair, many Democrats (including Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Klein in New York and D.C.'s Michelle Rhee) are aware of the problem. What remains to be seen is whether they can do what needs to be done.
Write to Jonah Goldberg at JonahsColumn@aol.com

If you read the comments of the article above, you can see that readers assume that Mr. Goldberg's premise is true: 'bad' teachers are put into "rubber rooms".

Comments on this Story
Unions protecting many bad teachers
Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.
LINK

1. Comment by Mark S. (Mark S) — September 10,2009 @ 4:42AMRatings: -5 +25

Does Goldberg get paid to rehash articles from the (liberal) New Yorker? Pretty good if you can get paid for someone else's work.

Read the original article. It is truly appalling what the unions have accomplished in NYC. The amount of money spent on do-nothing and unsuccessful teachers is astounding.

Report this comment
2. Comment by A c. (621ads) — September 10,2009 @ 4:57AM
Ratings: -9 +26

First, ELIMINATE TENURE then do like the construction unions do.

If you don't do a proper job or violate company rules you are FIRED with no appeal.

K.I.S.S.

Report this comment
3. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid) — September 10,2009 @ 5:58AM
Ratings: -17 +18

The dynamic in public education is that superintendents last less than 7 years in a school district -- they all come in with some little marketing slogan, and everybody is sick of them a few years later. In each individual school building, same dynamic happens with principals. It's rare that one has what it takes to make it work for longer than a few years.

So, this dynamic puts the one steady factor in the whole equation - teachers- in a precarious situation. Teachers who have the balls to speak truth to power will get fired by insecure principals who have career goals in mind rather than what works best for kids and parents.

The teachers' unions help protect teachers from this sort of invidious treatment.

Report this comment
4. Comment by Bob H. (Daedalus) — September 10,2009 @ 6:08AM
Ratings: -17 +24

Just remember that our President is bed with the unions. He wants Card Check, and all the fun and games that it will bring. He has changed the reporting laws so unions don't have to show how they spend union dues. Unions are nothing more than self serving blood sucking parasites.

Report this comment
5. Comment by Randi L. (RandiL4746) — September 10,2009 @ 6:22AM
Ratings: -17 +27

Unions have outlived their usefulness.

Report this comment
6. Comment by sandra f. (azrabbit) — September 10,2009 @ 6:46AM
Ratings: -15 +19

Public employee unions were once illegal, and should be again.

Report this comment
7. Comment by rob c. (chicagorufus) — September 10,2009 @ 6:52AM
Ratings: -3 +25

Keep the teachers unions, ditch the tenure. If you suck, you get fired, simple.

How does a crappy teacher make 100 G's???

Report this comment
8. Comment by Jeffrey H. (flibber) — September 10,2009 @ 6:57AM
Ratings: -9 +20

The function of unions is to protect its members, the public and the institution employing its members be damned. Union inefficiency has destroyed much of our industry and now seems to be firmly embedded in government where it can do the most harm.

Report this comment
9. Comment by wit w. (Wit) — September 10,2009 @ 6:57AM
Ratings: -8 +20

Unions have always protected bad workers. By preventing competition between workers, the quality of the work force goes down. Then the ability of employers to compete with others is lost, reducing the quality of products. The ability of a country with unions to compete in a global economy is the next loss.

Doesn't anyone question why the standard of living in the U.S. continuously slips ?

Report this comment
10. Comment by Steve H. (1559) — September 10,2009 @ 7:35AM
Ratings: -2 +25

Having been trained as a union president, and having been in one of the local teachers' "associations" here in Tucson, what is being said in the article and previous comments is true.

Firing poor teachers is a nightmare for administrators, too. The documentation, remediation, attempts at additional training, observations, notification periods, and meetings all end up with a bad teacher being placed in a different school, with more difficult students. However, with those student populations, there is little parent concern.

Get rid of tenure and watch education improve as teachers compete for their jobs.

Report this comment
11. Comment by John D. (Blkojo) — September 10,2009 @ 7:59AM
Ratings: -1 +18

"Education" will improve when the raw materials improve.

Report this comment
12. Comment by Rat T. (rattwo) — September 10,2009 @ 9:06AM
Ratings: -2 +8

Unions wouldn't do that, would they? And why then, are they given credibility when it comes time for negotiations?

Report this comment
13. Comment by chris b. (ctb) — September 10,2009 @ 11:03AM
Ratings: -8 +6

Teachers and Unions...just on the surface it looks and sounds wrong.
Catholic and private schools have no unions but provide the best educations for about 40% less overall cost.Now how about that as an example of educational success where less money, not more, provides a better outcome....go figure.
If teachers want kids and schools to succeed thay should quit the union today and forever and just watch the bubble rise.
Ever since the union took over in the sixties and seventies our public education system has fallen like a rock.

Bust it up ,and the sooner the better.

Report this comment
14. Comment by Randy L. (Instigator) — September 10,2009 @ 11:09AM
Ratings: -7 +8

Unions used to help America. Now they are destroying it.
I wish I had a GED and a union job, I wouldn't have to train or progress or even work, the union will stick up for me and I'll even get regular raises, retirement and healthcare.
Unions have no place, anymore, in our country. Take it to China where you made our jobs go.

Report this comment
15. Comment by Cicero V. (cicero) — September 10,2009 @ 12:25PM
Ratings: -1 +11

As a teacher and a member of TEA, I can say that I am ambivalent about unions. On the one hand, a union is a very good thing to have when dealing with a district like TUSD, which has a long history of duplicity and outright lying. On the other hand, I have seen teachers who need to find a new home kept in jobs for far too long.

This is changing though. With a new teacher evaluation system put in place with the full cooperation of the union, it is now much easier to remove incompetent teachers. Teachers who are found to be not meeting the agreed upon standards are put on a plan for improvement. Everything is documented: evaluations, observations, meetings, warnings, everything. If they cannot or will not improve, they are terminated. The union does not even enter into it because the moment a teacher is put on such a plan, the lawyers and the union are informed. Thus, if a teacher fails or refuses to improve, he/she does not have a leg to stand on because it is all documented.

I am last person who wants to see anyone lose their job needlessly or unfairly but this system makes sense. If you are doing your job, it is recorded so. If you are not, it is documented and you are given a chance to mend your ways. Seems fair to me. Perhaps this sort of thing should be implemented back east.

Report this comment
16. Comment by Patricia R. (lucianvista) — September 10,2009 @ 12:26PM
Ratings: -1 +9

Private schools can kick a student out without much to go on, public school cannot. Comparing apples to oranges doesn't work.

Public schools have to educate those that they might not choose to have their, the same shouldn't be about teachers. If a teacher is substandard then they should be let go, not based on tenure.

I know the TUSD union pres, she was a substandard teacher. How can we then expect the union to encourage high quality teachers. Get rid of the union and put money back into the teacher's pockets.

Report this comment
17. Comment by Rowan D. (RowD1) — September 10,2009 @ 1:41PM
Ratings: -6 +7

re: Unions have outlived their usefulness<<

So have corporations.

Report this comment
18. Comment by don c. (lonesom) — September 10,2009 @ 3:14PM
Ratings: -1 +3

#2 First, ELIMINATE TENURE then do like the construction unions do.

If you don't do a proper job or violate company rules you are FIRED with no appeal

What the construction industry has done is hire illegals which might work since they already speak spanish and we would not have to hire special teachers as spanish could be our first language without paying for extra teachers.

By the way how many benifits have the ones saying do away with unions willing to give up since you all benefit from the backs of union workers when you receive overtime, 5 day weeks, decent wages, retirement, paid holidays, health care, vacations, safe working conditions, and since the union has outlived its usefulness as some of you are saying how many of these benefits have outlived ther usefulness and which ones do you want to give up so the bankers and CEO's can have larger bonuses

Report this comment
19. Comment by don c. (lonesom) — September 10,2009 @ 3:24PM
Ratings: -1 +5

#9 Unions have always protected bad workers. By preventing competition between workers, the quality of the work force goes down. Then the ability of employers to compete with others is lost, reducing the quality of products. The ability of a country with unions to compete in a global economy is the next loss.

Doesn't anyone question why the standard of living in the U.S. continuously slips ?

The unions are not the problem the union had pride in its members and skills until the liberals passed laws to stop the unions from thowing out the unskilled, and making them let everyone join regardless of ability to do the job stop politicians from passing stupid laws that protect certain groups and let each person get and keep thier job on ability not race, religion or nationality

Report this comment
20. Comment by Tom B. (SBTB1) — September 10,2009 @ 3:36PM
Ratings: -3 +3

The unions destroyed the car industry and Detroit and they have done the same thing with our entire educational system. Now Obama wants to have complete unionization of the entire medical profession, including doctors. (Check out the Wall Street Journal editorial, Thursday,September 10th.) I wonder if hospitals will have rubber rooms for nurses and doctors?

Report this comment
21. Comment by Mark S. (Mark S) — September 10,2009 @ 3:48PM
Ratings: -2 +1

20 Wall Street Journal editorial page is somewhere to the right of Fox News and Limbaugh. The news portion of that media outlet is outstanding, the editorial portion is extremist garbage.

Report this comment
22. Comment by Rich K. (Rich907) — September 10,2009 @ 5:42PM
Ratings: -1 +3

Far be it from me to inject facts into this spin fest, but unions have a legal obligations to make sure all members of the bargaining unit...members and non-members alike...receive due process from their employers. This is part of federal labor law and has dated back to the 1930s.

The union will be sued by the employee if it does not insist that the employer prove the charges...incompetence, moral turpitude, criminal behavior, whatever...before a neutral third party.

If administrators cannot substantiate charges of incompetence and follow the due process rules, then that is on them. If TUSD...or any employer...wants to get rid of incompetent employees, then it needs to provide training to principals and other supervisors as to how to follow the due process and get it done.

In 39 years of teaching I worked with too many incompetent teachers who were allowed to continue failing students because the principals were every bit as incompetent as the teachers.

Report this comment
23. Comment by SAM R. (SAM11) — September 10,2009 @ 6:49PM
Ratings: -1 +1

How long should it take to fire an incompetent teacher??? or any employee for that matter, even a principal. All employees should be given a chance to improve (unless it is outright criminal action) but just how long and how many chances should they get. The average time it takse to fire a tenured teacher is 2-3 years, and that is if you dont make any mistakes in paperwork and aviod technicalities. It should take less than 3 months. If you cant improve in that time, it is time to go. If you are truly a good teacher, you will get another job...if not you wont. The only profession I know of that takes any excessive period of time is a tenured teacher.

Report this comment
24. Comment by Bruce B. (4262) — September 10,2009 @ 7:26PM
Ratings: -1 +2

I can care less on what goes on in NYC. This is a one sided story. Get a rope!

From Betsy
The news that I have for readers is this: Every teacher mentioned in Steven Brill's article should be in a classroom teaching the subject they are trained to teach because they are trained professionals and wonderful, caring individuals, but victimized by circumstances that have nothing to do with their value as competent teachers. They are all victims of the "rubberization" process that is powered by the Jack Welch theory of employment: improve performance by getting rid of 10% of your workforce every year.

When my four daughters went off to their respective public schools in New York City, and they were lucky enough to get a teacher who offered resources and respect for the learning process and for each of them as individuals, and taught them the subject matter in a way that enabled them to master tests in the subject, then I knew that they indeed had a "good" teacher, and this person needed to be protected from false claims made by Principals and administrators with an agenda that does not put my child - or any child, for that matter, first.

I have attended open and public 3020-a hearings for five years simply because I wanted to find out exactly what this process looked like. In my opinion, it is a mess, especially the hearings in which a teacher is accused of incompetence. I do not understand how anyone could believe that "competency" can be proven in a small room far away from children and a classroom. I have heard an arbitrator order that a teacher settle with the NYC BOE this way: "If you drop your New York State Supreme Court case against the NYC BOE, I will order you back to school as a full teacher, in the subject that you are certified to teach, with a clear record, no charges". When the teacher said "no", this arbitrator found guilt with the teacher taking 10 minutes too long to read a book in a class observed by the Principal (who the teacher had previously reported to investigators for violating No Child Left Behind legislation), and punished him with three months suspension without pay (@$25,000) and without medical coverage.

Please note that if the teacher had dropped his lawsuit, he would be exonerated/cleared of all charges, and immediately placed back into the classroom. His "incompetency" would have been 'cured'.

Makes you think that maybe teachers thrown into rubber rooms may not be guilty of anything after all, and it's all about money and politics, not education, learning, and children.

New H-1B VISA Reform: A Hugely Complex Problem

Monday, October 05, 2009 10:21 AM/EST
Analysts: Potential New H-1B Visa Clauses a Nuisance, No Game Changer
LINK

Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley is pushing for reform in the H-1B visa program and recently urged the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to ask for evidence that workers coming over to the United States actually have employment.



Grassley recently wrote to the director of the USCIS: "Simply put, adjudicators should be asking companies up front for evidence that H-1B visa holders actually have a job awaiting them in the U.S., i.e., that workers are not coming in only to be 'benched' by employers."

Some business analysts in India do not see the current efforts to prove employment evidence as anything more than an "irritant," writes Amit Tripathi of DNA India.

Apurva Shah, a Mumbai-based IT sector analyst at broking firm Prabhudas Lilladher, said, "This is not going to impact companies significantly. This can at best be termed as another irritant, as a small portion of the onsite workforce remains in transition between projects." On an average about 5% of the onsite workforce of Indian IT service firms remains on bench.

"I have not heard about such a clause yet. But even otherwise, we hardly have about 5% of our people on bench onsite. That too cannot be called as bench strictly, as most of them are on leave or have finished one project and being inducted into another. And all of them are actually on salary. So there is hardly any impact of such a clause," said an Infosys executive who did not wish to be named. Analysts feel the IT industry has ways to work around the clause.

"Companies such as TCS, Infosys and others are setting up delivery and development centres in Mexico and Canada which are close to US. This helps firms save on costs as well as serve US customers from those locations, since people from Mexico and Canada do not need H-1B under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta)," an analyst said.

Whether or not the USCIS will follow Grassley's lead on evidence gathering remains to be seen.

In 2007, an audit of a small percentage of H-1B visa companies found that there have been cases of fraud that included forged documentation, phantom businesses and phony job offers, and more. The Justice Department has been enforcing laws on the books after the audit, and has brought suit against a number of companies, including Vision Systems Group, Cognizant Technology, Patni Computer Systems and Computech.

In an effort to show that the USCIS takes fraud seriously, the organization began earlier this year making surprise audit visits to companies it suspects is operating under false pretenses.

At issue is whether the fraud is as widespread as Grassley and others believe. The H-1B visa program has had up to 65,000 participants with companies of all sizes, many of them household American firms including Microsoft, but also many of the largest Indian outsourcing companies like WiPro, Infosys and others.

H-1B Visa Companies Getting Unannounced Visits by Feds
By: Don E. Sears, e-week, 2009-08-17
LINK

If your company is using H-1B visa workers, you may get a surprise from the government. Piece of advice for your manager: It's voluntary, but the surprise could intimidate.

In an attempt to help root out fraud and other criminal activity, the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services agency is making surprise visits to companies with H-1B visa holders on the books.
After reports came out that there has been evidence shown of fraudulent use of temporary workers, bad documentation abusing the system and many visa holders not being paid prevailing wages, the Feds are showing up without notice and looking to see that everything is on the up and up.

From a CIO article on the subject (edited):

Recently, the USCIS has begun making "surprise visits" to the U.S. work sites of companies that sponsor H-1B and L-1 visa holders, including some large U.S.-based financial services companies, says Elizabeth Espin Stern, a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of law firm Baker and McKenzie. USCIS assessors come with a checklist of questions designed to confirm the identity of the employer who petitioned for the visa and the visa beneficiary and to verify that both are in compliance with the terms and conditions of the visa...

The objective of the unannounced on-site visits is clear: to detect fraud and abuses of the visa program. A study conducted last year by the Office of Fraud Detection and National Security estimated that 21 percent of H-1B visa petitions violate H-1B program rules. The offenses range from technical violations to outright fraud. The most common violation was not paying a prevailing wage to the H-1B beneficiary.

Resource Library:

The USCIS overseas the H-1B and L-1 visa programs. One question that some attorneys wonder, however, whether surprise visits, random audits and other fraud detection tactics are in the jurisdiction of this agency? From the same article:

USCIS investigation tactics often exceed what is necessary and reasonable to obtain H-1B application verification information, according to Stern (Elizabeth Espin Stern, of law firm Baker and McKenzie). Unlike the Department of Labor, which has the statutory authority to investigate an employer's compliance with visa obligations but rarely conducts audits unless there are complaints, the USCIS has no statutory or regulatory authority to enter the workplace of H-1B and L-1 visa holders. And investigators do not arrive with search warrants or subpoenas, says Stern.

What's more, USCIS has hired contract workers, who complete a USCIS training course, to conduct the site visits. But many of the contractors lack expertise about how companies maintain employment records or demonstrate employment terms, adds Stern.

Evidently, compliance with the program is voluntary, but imagine if an agency of the federal government busted into your workplace without being prepared? It's not hard to imagine your employer feeling a bit compelled or intimidated to hand over information.

How nutty are the rules for these visas? Well, they can get rather challenging, especially if your company is considering getting rid of these employees as part of layoffs. Take a look at the blog post When H-1B Visa Holders and the Recession Collide.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:56 PM/EST
Readers' Comments on H-1B Visa Surprise Visits

There is some buzz from readers on the recent blog article "H-1B Visa Companies Getting Unannounced Visits by Feds" and a healthy debate going on about problems with the laws around these visas.

Reader 'Vincenzo' writes (edited):

This search for fraud misses the REAL problems with the H-1B visa - 1) the "prevailing wage" nonsense and 2) the problems with portability - ie., the difficulties of an H-1B visa beneficiary of changing jobs.

1) Prevailing wage - this is a joke. There are large loopholes in this portion of the H-1B visa laws which allows employers to LEGALLY underpay H-1B beneficiaries. Moreover, it completely goes against the "free market" philosophy so many economists and corporate big-wigs love to parrot. Why not let the market dictate wages?

2) Portability - when an H-1B visa beneficiary becomes unhappy with his current employer, the H-1B visa laws do allow him to change employers, provided that another employer is willing to take over his H-1B visa. However, when an H-1B visa beneficiary does change employers, he has to re-file his Green Card application. So if he's been waiting for three years to get his Green Card, and then changes employers, that three years is completely wasted.

An anonymous reader writes about how the law should change to protect American workers:

Employers should have to actually offer the job to qualified US citizens (at least 10% of all applicants after advertizing the position for 90 days, all applicants if less than 15 applications received) and have all offers declined. Then the H1B visa applicant should be compensated no more than what was offered the US citizens; but the employer should be required to contribute (non-tax-deductable)an amount equal to all compensation, benefits, and travel/living expenses provided to the H1B visa holder to a University in the US that offers a degree that would qualify the degree recipient for the job. This payment to the University should be constrained to paying tuition, books, and fees for US citizen upper division students pursuing a STEM batchelors degree.

Another anonymous reader, who claims to be on the way to getting a green card, talks about some realities faced (edited):

I've been legally in the United States for more than 12 years. My green card is more than 3 years away.

I agree that the system sucks for immigrants. Other than the fact that I don't have job mobility, I am very well paid (almost 200K). I wish i had the option to move if I needed to, but the options available are limited.

The thing is, I pay federal, state and local taxes, social security, unemployment premiums (which I can never collect on) and I'm a participant in the health programs that my employer offers.

All these are a net benefit to all US workers (and me -- sort of) and just perhaps, in eight years or so, I'll be allowed to take the citizenship test.

And on the fraud detection strategies employed by the feds, another anonymous reader writes:

I have about ZERO sympathy for these companies being audited and some being caught abusing the H-1B visas. This has been going on for 15 YEARS; about time someone checked up on them. Sad it takes a recession of this magnitude to move someone to stop abuses of what is nothing more than a cheap labor pool of indentured workers so US companies can continue to live here and benefit from our society while undermining the ability of US workers to make a living. We've let in over 200,000 of these H-1Bs in a single year in the past 15 years or so. England has a similar program (used to be call the "Skilled Migrant Worker Programme"; know how many they typically let in? About 1,000. That spells "SUCKER" for you and me, allowing in nearly a quarter of a million of these people to be:

1) Stuck with their sponsoring company for 6 years (no raises, no bonuses); if they leave they have to find a new company within X days, pay a fine and start their 6 year immigration clock over again.

2) Paid far less than the "prevailing wage" standard (which is itself far too loose as pay can range all over for a given IT job title). This IS the reason these visas are sought - cheaper labor.

As you can tell, the heat of the debate over foreign technology workers is complex, and I thank those readers who offer some real depth and open communication on the issues affecting everyone.

The blatant racial comments, however, really have no place in this debate. The program has its flaws and strengths, but race, in my estimation, is not really part of the equation. Anger at the program is warranted, but not at the people who are trying to do right by themselves and their families.

Mike Bloomberg Needs To Improve Services For the Homeless in NYC

NYC Number of Homeless Single Adults in Municipal Shelters, 2008-2009

Capacity Crunch: The NYC Shelter System Risks Running Out of Shelter Beds for the Rising Number of Homeless Single Adults
By Patrick Markee, Senior Policy Analyst, Coalition for the Homeless
October 4, 2009
LINK

The number of homeless single adults in the New York City municipal shelter system has risen dramatically this year, largely as a result of rising unemployment and the continuing shortage of affordable rental housing. As winter approaches, the municipal shelter system is virtually at capacity and is at enormous risk of running out of available shelter beds. Indeed, on the night of September 30th there were only two available shelter beds for homeless men, and eight available beds for homeless women.

Unfortunately, NYC Department of Homeless Services officials have offered no plan to expand shelter capacity to meet rising need, even as temperatures are falling and the number of homeless single men and women in municipal shelters continues to increase.

Coalition for the Homeless urges the Bloomberg administration to add needed shelter beds immediately in order to meet the growing need for emergency shelter for homeless men and women this winter. In the long term, the Coalition urges Mayor Bloomberg to accelerate the development of permanent supportive housing for homeless individuals living with mental illness and other special needs, and to restore the City’s longstanding and successful policy of prioritizing homeless New Yorkers for Federal housing assistance.

Background: Dramatic Increase in Homeless Individuals in NYC Shelter System

Amidst rising unemployment and the acute shortage of low-cost rental housing, the number of homeless single adults has risen dramatically this year. Following are highlights of this trend:

* Even before winter begins, the number of homeless single adults in the municipal shelter system this year has increased by more than 7 percent - the largest one-year increase since the 2001 economic recession, and one of the largest year-to-year increases in more than two decades.

* So far this year, the number of homeless single adults in the municipal shelter system has risen every month except for one – a virtually unprecedented trend.

* Historically, the homeless adult shelter population rises in winter months and declines in the warmweather summer months. However, this year the number of homeless single adults in municipal shelter rose throughout the summer, a trend which has not occurred since the 2001 economic recession.

* So far this year, the number of homeless men seeking shelter at the City’s central intake center (located at the Bellevue shelter on the east side of Manhattan) has increased by 8 percent compared to last year. The number of homeless men seeking shelter who are new to the shelter system has increased by 10 percent.

NYC Homeless Men Seeking Shelter Each Day at Intake Center

* This year is the first to see an increase in the homeless adult shelter population since 2004. The number of homeless adults residing in NYC municipal shelters had declined in recent years, largely due to an expansion in the number of permanent supportive housing units and the targeting of supportive housing units to long-time shelter residents..

NYC Municipal Shelter System Running Out of Beds for Homeless Single Adults

* As the number of homeless adults has risen this year, municipal shelters for homeless single men and women have been at more than 99 percent of capacity. At the same time, shelters for homeless veterans and for chronic street homeless individuals (so-called “safe haven” shelters) – whose use is restricted to special populations – have also been near capacity.

* Currently there are 7,704 total municipal shelter beds for homeless single adults (which includes 6,912 municipal shelter beds, 411 “safe haven” beds, and 381 beds for homeless veterans). On many recent nights there have been more than 7,500 homeless adults in municipal shelters, utilizing more than 97 percent of all shelter beds.

* This September, the number of available municipal shelter beds for homeless adults has reached critically low levels. On many nights there were fewer than 25 available beds for homeless women and fewer than 50 beds for homeless men. On the night of September 30th, there were only two available shelter beds for homeless men, and only eight available beds for homeless women.



NYC Homeless Men Seeking Shelter Each Day at Intake Center

* Despite the acute shortage of shelter beds, NYC Department of Homeless Services officials have failed to articulate a plan for adding needed shelter capacity. (In fact, this summer the City actually closed a 150-bed shelter for homeless men.) In the cold-weather winter months, the nightly homeless adult shelter population historically increases by hundreds of people.

The Need for Immediate and Long-term Action

The Bloomberg administration needs to act now In order to avoid an even worse shelter capacity crisis this winter. Coalition for the Homeless calls on Mayor Bloomberg to enact the following immediate and longterm measures:

1. Expand Emergency Shelter Capacity for Homeless Adults This Winter:

* The NYC Department of Homeless Services must add new shelter beds to the municipal shelter system this winter sufficient to meet the rising need for shelter.

2. Accelerate Construction of Permanent Supportive Housing:

* In 2005, the City and State signed a ten-year agreement to provide permanent supportive housing for homeless people living with mental illness and other special needs.
* However, more than half of the newly-constructed supportive housing – 3,276 units of the planned 6,250 new units – will not be built until at least 2011.
* City and State officials should accelerate the development of supportive housing for homeless people with special needs.

3. Target Federal Housing Aid to the Homeless:

* In 2005, the Bloomberg administration cut off homeless New Yorkers from longstanding priority for Federal housing programs, including Section 8 vouchers and public housing.
* This year the City will distribute more than 12,000 Section 8 vouchers and more than 5,000 public housing apartments will be available to rent – but virtually none to the homeless.
* Numerous studies show that Section 8 vouchers successfully reduce family homelessness.
* Reversing the City’s misguided policy will move thousands of homeless families and individuals to permanent housing – and will save City taxpayer dollars spent on emergency shelter.

Note: All homeless shelter population data is from the New York City Department of Homeless Services. For more information, please visit www.coalitionforthehomeless.org.

Mayor Bloomberg needs to stop hiding on the homeless issue
by Errol Louis, Sunday, October 4th 2009, 4:00 AM
LINK

The arrival of autumn's first chill coincides with a bombshell report, to be released by the Coalition for the Homeless this week, showing that the city's shelter system is filled to bursting, unable to take in another homeless person.

New York City maintains more than 7,500 beds for single homeless adults, but on Sept. 28, according to Patrick Markee, senior policy analyst of the coalition, official city figures revealed that virtually every single adult bed was filled, leaving only nine empty beds for homeless men and 30 for women.

Two nights later, on Sept. 30, there were only two empty beds in the entire city system for homeless men. Two.

"You have a municipal shelter system that is literally on the verge of running out of beds," says Markee.

That's not supposed to happen. The system for homeless adults includes 6,912 municipal shelter beds, 381 beds for homeless veterans, and 411 "safe haven" beds for domestic abuse victims and other special cases. And even when those beds are all filled, the city literally isn't allowed to run out of beds.

In 1981, the courts established that in New York State the homeless have a constitutional right to shelter, and a standing court order, known as Callahan vs. Carey, remains in effect to this day. The order requires the city to shelter however many homeless people arrive at the front door.

So as a practical matter, the city must find a way to accommodate more people when the weather grows cold.

Department of Homeless Services officials say the agency decides how and when to expand shelter capacity as the need arises. Unused space in existing shelters will be used first, they say, with new shelters opened as a last resort.

"We are looking to bring on additional beds," says George Nashak, a DHS deputy commissioner. "We have seen an unprecedented demand for shelter on the adult side."

But advocates say City Hall, warned of growing problems, dithered while the crisis grew.

"The city literally has no plan," says Markee. On a recent visit to the central intake center for homeless men in Manhattan, says Markee, he met a man who showed up at 7:30 in the evening, desperate for a place to sleep - and was still waiting for help at 2:30 the next morning.

"It was complete chaos," he says. "Next month, if they don't do something dramatic, they're going to literally run out" of space.

The timing - "next month" - matters greatly, given the Nov. 3 mayoral election.

Voters must judge whether Mayor Bloomberg responded to indicators that were obvious long before the economy crashed last year.

According to the Mayor's Management Report, the 311 system recorded a steadily rising number of calls related to homelessness in recent years.

The 105,150 calls received in fiscal year 2009 are nearly triple the 50,751 calls in FY 2005.

The same report shows the number of homeless families increasing by more than 61% during the same years, to 12,959 from 8,027.

Nashak touts administration successes like moving 10,000 adults a year out of shelters and into permanent housing.

At least he's willing to talk about the issue. Bloomberg, on the other hand, would just as soon change the subject.

In August, when challenged on the city's homeless policies by his Democratic challenger, Controller Bill Thompson, the mayor told my Daily News colleague Frank Lombardi there would be "plenty of time" to debate the matter "after the election."

That won't cut it. The Bloomberg administration needs to answer questions right now about what it did - and did not do - to stem a growing homelessness crisis that's about to get much worse.

elouis@nydailynews.com

NYC Voters Do Not Like Bloomberg's Grab For a Third Term

October 4, 2009
Voters Like Mayor, but Not His Path to 3rd Run
By MICHAEL BARBARO, NY TIMES

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s re-election campaign can generate reams of statistics on how quickly the city repaired potholes in each neighborhood. It can produce memos on climate change and public health, and even translate fliers into Creole.

Just don’t ask about term limits.

Rosemary DeStefano found that out on her doorstep in the Bronx the other day when a Bloomberg volunteer showed up, asking for her vote.

When she complained about how the mayor had the law changed to stay in office, the volunteer recited details of his economic plan. When she persisted, he extolled Mr. Bloomberg’s promise to create 400,000 jobs.

“They missed the whole point,” she said.

With four weeks remaining until Election Day, little seems uncertain in the contest between the colossally advantaged incumbent, Mr. Bloomberg, and his lesser-known rival, William C. Thompson Jr.

But interviews with both campaigns and dozens of voters reveal that anger over a single issue still simmers, seemingly immune to a flood of television commercials and glossy brochures.That bedevils Bloomberg advisers and gives hope to his underfunded challenger.

Disenchantment over the change in the law helped topple four veteran City Council members this fall, the greatest repudiation of incumbents in a generation, and has catapulted two local lawmakers who opposed the measure into citywide office.

“The Bloomberg campaign can’t convince voters to not be upset about this. It won’t work,” said John H. Mollenkopf, a professor of political science at City University who has informally advised the Bloomberg campaign.

“If you ask New Yorkers what they did not like over the last eight years,” he added, “term limits is the major negative.”

Mr. Thompson is building his entire campaign around the topic, adopting the slogan “Eight Is Enough,” accusing the mayor of breaking his word and preparing commercials that portray him as a power-hungry mogul who plays by his own rules.

Mr. Thompson’s campaign aides have told undecided voters to express their outrage over term limits by supporting him, whether they like him or not. And Mr. Thompson will make it a major line of attack during two debates and turn it into a rallying cry in the days leading up to Election Day, the anniversary of the term limits change, which Mr. Bloomberg signed into law on Nov. 3, 2008. “It will be a big theme,” said Eduardo Castell, Mr. Thompson’s campaign manager.

The mayor’s political advisers privately acknowledge the public anger, but since they cannot reverse Mr. Bloomberg’s actions, they are looking for ways to deflect attention from it.

They have created a new round of commercials that play up Mr. Bloomberg’s middle-class roots, to soften his image as an imperious billionaire who defied the will of the voters.

They are leveling frequent attacks at Mr. Thompson’s record, as president of the Board of Education and comptroller, to send the message that, even if voters are still resentful about term limits, they would be foolhardy to choose an untested leader.

If voters insist on talking about term limits, volunteers are instructed to tell them the mayor “is not guaranteed” a third term and has given them “more choice” by changing the rules.

“Bill Thompson wants to make this election about one issue,” said the mayor’s campaign manager, Bradley Tusk. “And given his track record that’s understandable. But the performance of the mayor has an enormous impact on people’s lives, and because of that, voters choose their mayor based on very real tangible issues.”

No one is predicting that resentment over term limits will, by itself, be enough to cost the mayor the election. But in interviews, political analysts and pollsters said that unease over the issue helps account for a stubborn anomaly in New Yorkers’ feelings about the mayor. Polls consistently show that a large majority (roughly 70 percent) approve of his performance, but that a significantly smaller number (50 percent) plan to vote for him in November.

The 50 percent figure has not budged in months, even though the Bloomberg campaign has spent about $65 million to promote the mayor’s record. “Term limits has a lot to do with that,” said Geoff Garin, Mr. Thompson’s pollster. “It has put a ceiling on good will toward the mayor.”

Marilyn Arthold, 64, who lives in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, said she liked the mayor but was considering voting against him because of how he changed term limits.

“He did it the wrong way,” she said.

Her neighbor, Anna May, who would give only her first and middle name, agreed: “I didn’t go to college, but I know right from wrong. This was wrong.” She said she would vote for Mr. Thompson.

Those involved in the mayor’s campaign said the issue has unexpected staying power, a year after City Hall introduced the legislation allowing officials to serve three consecutive terms, not two.

“It comes up a lot with voters,” said one campaign staff member. In the fall of 2008, when Mr. Bloomberg and his aides fought to change the rule, they made two predictions: that voters would be distracted by the presidential election, and that any anger over the move would recede by Election Day 2009.

They may have been overoptimistic, pollsters and analysts said.

“The anger in the electorate remains an inconvenient truth for the Bloomberg campaign,” said Bruce N. Gyory, a political consultant.

New York voters approved a referendum limiting council members and officials elected citywide to two four-year terms in 1993, and then ratified that vote in a second referendum in 1996. Mr. Bloomberg, in overturning the law, rewrote it through legislation that was approved by the City Council; critics and good-government groups said any change should have gone before the voters.

Mr. Bloomberg was previously outspoken in his opposition to changing term limits, saying any effort to do so would be a “disgrace.”

Just how much it will hurt him on Election Day remains an open question, however. Many voters who intensely opposed the change said they planned to vote for him, citing his skills as a manager and a weak opponent.

“If it were anyone else, I would probably be against him,” said Carlo Dioguardi, who lives in Battery Park City and voted in favor of term limits. “I don’t think anyone else can do the job he’s done.”

As for those who are less forgiving?

The campaign’s strategy of changing the topic occasionally backfires. A few days after Ms. DeStefano’s confrontation with a Bloomberg campaign volunteer in the Bronx, a handwritten letter from a campaign volunteer arrived, ticking off the mayor’s plans to improve the economy in the borough. Ms. DeStefano, a 75-year-old Republican, tore it up.

“I didn’t ask about jobs,” she said. “I asked about term limits.”

Tweed Continues To Post Jobs, Despite Hiring Freeze

It seems that "Tweed", the nickname of the New York City Board of Education, has not been informed that there is a hiring freeze and is offering the three positions below.

I have asked this before, and will probably ask it again in the future: why do we need such a huge bureaucracy at "Central Headquarters"? Why cant we have five people at Tweed:

1) Public School Chancellor: Person with a strong teaching background, with administrative policy-making experience as well as more than 10 years working at an Executive level in an educational institution; legal background not required or recommended;

2)Assistant to the Chancellor, Academic support: An individual with an academic background in curriculum design and implementation who has taught in a public school for more than 15 years, full-time;

3) Assistant to the Chancellor, Special Needs: coordinator for implementing federal guidelines for children with special needs, special education funding (including gifted and talented), and provider procurement; Attorney with strong ethics preferred;

4) CPA/Accountant: experienced Certified Public Accountant with 20 years' experience in managing a large public institution; forensic informatics experience preferred, with a speciality in taxation;

5) Field Coordinator for Personnel and Accountability: person able to coordinate the activities of all 32 Superintendents, and provide accountability assessment for these Superintendents in terms of the success/failure to meet reasonable goals in each school within each of their districts; able to design and implement appropriate standards for personnel hiring/firing; outplacement and re-assignment strategic planning a plus; 10 years' experience in the area of human resource management required.

We all must remember Erin Einhorn's article in the NY Daily News:

18 Ed Dept. bigs making at least 190G
BY ERIN EINHORN, DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER, Tuesday, December 18th 2007, 12:26 PM
LINK

Educrat Marcia Lyles and Chancellor Joel Klein both make over $200,000 - more than the police commissioner.

Eighteen city education honchos were making more than $190,000 a year when classes began this September - up from just two last year, a Daily News salary analysis found.

That's more than Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta and the commissioners of major city departments like Health, Housing and Children's Services, who all make $189,700.

The top execs at the Education Department's Tweed Courthouse headquarters are among only 28 noncourt officials in all of city government who have cracked the $190,000 line. Most of the others are deputy mayors.

"Tweed is too top-heavy," said William McDonald, who heads a citywide group of elected parent leaders. "I don't know what it is these people are doing, but it doesn't seem to be getting down to the kids."

One of the 18 execs has since dropped to part-time status, but even with her out of the mix, the total number drawing salaries above $180,000 has surged to 36 from 20 in September 2006.

"Given their responsibilities, the salaries are appropriate," schools spokesman David Cantor said. "You're talking about the top managers of an agency that employs 140,000 people and educates 1.1 million children."

He pointed out that the number of managers making more than $150,000 dipped from 204 early in the year to 194 in September.

School officials yesterday could not provide details on total administrative salary costs this year compared with last year. A consultant hired to cut fat claims $170 million that once went to the bureaucracy is going to classrooms.

Most of the pay increase was part of a one-year 6.5% bump that went to most city managers last year. That's compared with the 2% increase teachers collected from October 2006 to this October.

The total cost of paying the top 100 people on the school payroll surged by 7.3% from September 2006 to this September.

Those 100 execs cost nearly $18 million.

"It's way too much," said Carlton Richardson, a member of the elected Community Education Council in Brooklyn's District 18. "They need to filter that money down to schools."

City Council Education Committee Chairman Robert Jackson said he has "no problem with paying people a good salary as long as they produce."

But school officials, he said, are leading a system where only 50% of kids earned an on-time diploma last year.

"Overall, as a system, that's failure," he said.

eeinhorn@nydailynews.com

With Tina Moore and Benjamin Lesser

Instead, what we now have is a top-heavy administration that hires more people to hide the facts (the NYC BOE public relations/press office, for example) than necessary, too many people to do petty paper-pushing, and too many positions filled with "thank you" people - people whose relative/friend is owed a favor. The Department of Labor Relations has alot of information for researchers.

I also like the look at personnel issues on the "bold exec" blog, where blogger Tom Epley goes into the Personnel Matrix: "Solid personnel decisions are one of the most important management functions. They impact individual positions and the way the entire organization views the CEO."



Anyway, with so many good teachers in key subjects being terminated or let go for dubious reasons, the right thing to do would be to maximize the use of already hired in-school personnel, and go for an overhaul of "Tweed", as in letting everyone there go off the public payroll. We dont need them.

Betsy Combier

Here are jobs posted on the NYC BOE website, and open until October 28, 2009:

Developer, Progress Reports (DAAR)
Tracking Code: 6561
LINK

Job Description

Position Summary: The New York City school system is the largest in the country, composed of approximately 1.1 million students and 90,000 teachers in over 1,600 schools. In January 2003, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel I. Klein launched Children First: A New Agenda for Public Schools in New York City, a multi-year reform effort aimed at significantly improving student achievement through effective teaching and learning.

Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have made accountability an essential element of New York City’s education reform effort. With an investment of over $130 million from national and local foundations, New York City has embarked upon an ambitious education reform initiative that is unprecedented in urban education. The NYC Department of Education will drive and support the creation of more robust accountability tools over the next three years.

The Report Developer, Progress Reports in the Division of Accountability and Achievement Resources will be responsible for managing the report production process related to the School Progress Reports and School Surveys, which serve as accountability and performance management tools used by school administrators and educators. This will involve programming, design, and distribution of a series of reports and tools. The Report Developer also provides technical support for implementation and policy decision-making relating to the Progress Reports and School Survey. This position requires a detailed-oriented, well-organized professional with experience in Excel VBA or SAS.

Reports to: Lead Developer, Progress Reports

Direct Reports: NA

Key Relationships: Will work closely with members of the Progress Report team and other members within the Division of Accountability & Achievement Resources.

Responsibilities

Manage and improve report production and business intelligence tool production for the Progress Reports and School Survey.
Coordinate product distribution with stakeholders including schools, administrators, and database administrators.
Perform analyses and simulations in support of policy decisions pertaining to the Progress Reports and general school policies (e.g., credits, state exams, Regents, graduation).
Write, maintain, and execute code required for the implementation of the Progress Reports and School Survey
Perform quality assurance of products and codes.
Perform policy analysis or technical support for policy analysis.
Qualification Requirements:

Minimum:

A master's degree from an accredited college in economics, finance, accounting, business or public administration, human resources management, management science, operations research, organizational behavior, industrial psychology, statistics, personnel administration, labor relations, psychology, sociology, human resources development, political science, urban studies or a closely related field; or
A baccalaureate degree from an accredited college and three years of satisfactory full-time professional experience working in one or a combination of the following areas: working with the budget of a large public or private concern in budget administration, accounting, economic or financial administration, or fiscal or economic research; in management or methods analysis, operations research, organizational research or program evaluation; in personnel or public administration, recruitment, position classification, personnel relations, labor relations, employee benefits, staff development, employment program planning/administration, labor market research, economic planning, or fiscal management; or in a related area.

Preferred:

1-3 years experience as a professional programmer.
Expertise with Excel, especially Excel 2007.
Strong object-oriented software development skills.
Proficiency with VBA or SAS.
Dedicated work ethic to deliver results rapidly.
Experience with SQL, particularly Microsoft SQL Server.
Experience with SAS macros.
Experience with design, data visualization, or infographics.
Experience with SharePoint or other Microsoft technologies.
Experience with a scripting language, e.g., Python.
Experience performing file management tasks, e.g., Windows command line, PowerShell.
Interest in public education.
Salary: $60,571

Please submit a resume and cover letter with your application.
Applications will be accepted through October 28, 2009.
NOTE: The filling of all positions is subject to budget availability.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

It is the policy of the Department of Education of the City of New York to provide educational and employment opportunities without regard to race, color, religion, creed, ethnicity, national origin, alienage, citizenship status, age, marital status, partnership status, disability, sexual orientation, gender (sex), military status, prior record of arrest or conviction (except as permitted by law), predisposing genetic characteristics, or status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual offenses and stalking, and to maintain an environment free of harassment on any of the above-noted grounds, including sexual harassment or retaliation. Inquiries regarding compliance with this equal opportunity policy may be directed to: Office of Equal Opportunity, 65 Court Street, Room 923, Brooklyn, New York 11201, or visit the OEO website, http://schools.nyc.gov/OEO.

Job Location
Tweed (52 Chambers Street) (TWEED)
Position Type
Full-Time/Regular
New Posting
Yes
Readvertisement
N/A
Recanvass
No
District
N/A

Policy Director, School Performance (DAAR)
Tracking Code: 6559
LINK

Job Description

Position Summary: The New York City school system is the largest in the country, composed of approximately 1.1 million students and 90,000 teachers in over 1,600 schools. In January 2003, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel I. Klein launched Children First: A New Agenda for Public Schools in New York City, a multi-year reform effort aimed at significantly improving student achievement through effective teaching and learning.

Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have made accountability an essential element of New York City’s education reform effort. Over the next three years, the NYC Department of Education will drive and support the creation of more robust accountability tools through the Division of Accountability and Achievement Resources (DAAR).

Reporting to the Executive Director of School Performance and working with the other group leaders in the Division of Accountability and Achievement Resources, the Policy Director will manage a small team of researchers/analysts to evaluate the impact on student achievement of current and potential New York City education initiatives.

Reports to: Executive Director of School Performance

Direct Reports: Associate Director, Policy Team, Director Analytics and indirect management of work done on the Research and Policy Support Group.

Key Relationships: Works closely with Executive Director of School Performance, Chief Accountability Officer, members of the Chancellor’s Office and Press Office, the Research and Policy Support Group and members of DAAR.

Responsibilities

Manages team engaged in the planning, implementation and conduct of major research, evaluation, and policy studies (including college readiness), as well as analyses designed to assess the effectiveness of and improve existing educational programs.
Sets policy agenda for Chief Accountability Officer that largely informs agenda for the Department and ensures that student achievement is a key metric by which potential education initiatives are evaluated.
Uses modeling, regression, psychometric and other techniques to identify structures, conditions, interventions, and programs associated with high student achievement.
Collects, analyzes, and interprets data; prepares statistical and narrative reports and/or graphs, as appropriate; prepares manuscripts for publication; presents research results to DOE leadership.
Directs creation of systems for separating routine reporting and analytic requests suitable for help desk coverage from requests requiring high-end analysis.
Produces ad-hoc data reports and analyses at the request of DOE leadership, including the Chancellor and his Cabinet.
Sets process and policy for maintaining integrity of achievement-focused data system-wide
Maintains currency of knowledge with respect to relevant DOE policies and data as well as state-of-the-art technology and statistical methodology.
Serves as principal investigator on projects of complexities consistent with above criteria; writes proposals to external funding agencies to ensure DOE thought leadership in the area of K-12 school accountability.
Qualification Requirements:

Minimum:

A master's degree from an accredited college in economics, finance, accounting, business or public administration, human resources management, management science, operations research, organizational behavior, industrial psychology, statistics, personnel administration, labor relations, psychology, sociology, human resources development, political science, or a closely related field, and two years of satisfactory full-time professional experience in budget administration, economic or financial administration, fiscal or economic research; management or methods analysis, operations research, organizational research or program evaluation; educational, personnel or public administration, recruitment, position classification, personnel relations, labor relations, employee benefits, staff development, employment program planning/administration, labor market research, economic planning, fiscal management, or a related area, for educational program(s) and/or institution(s), 18 months of which must have been in an executive, managerial, administrative or supervisory capacity. Supervision must have included supervising staff performing professional work in the areas described above; or
A baccalaureate degree from an accredited college and four years of satisfactory full-time professional experience as described in '1' above, including the 18 months of executive, managerial, administrative or supervisory experience described in '1' above.

Preferred:

A Ph.D. in statistics and/or research methodologies or related discipline and 2 years of relevant work experience with 18 months managerial experience OR a master’s degree in statistics and 4 years of relevant work experience with 18 months managerial experience OR a bachelor’s degree in math/statistics and 5 years of relevant work experience with 18 months managerial experience.
Minimum three years data analysis experience, including knowledge of statistical software packages such as SAS, SPSS, S-Plus etc.
Ability to perform independent, original research in advanced areas of statistical expertise.
Ability to conduct systematic analysis and develop solutions to complex data analysis problems.
Ability to develop and follow research methodology and protocol.
Ability to develop reports and charts based research.
Ability to use independent judgment to adapt and modify research concepts and approaches to specific projects.
Knowledge of current technological developments/trends in area of expertise.
Ability to propose, design, organize and coordinate scientific research projects.
Proficient in Microsoft Office applications.
Excellent interpersonal skills in dealing with education and non-education personnel internal and external to the DOE.
???Ability to thrive in and enjoy working in a team-oriented, high-pressure environment.
Excellent oral and written communication skills.
Experience or working knowledge of the public sector and/or demonstrated interest in public education strongly preferred.
Experience in a public reform or start-up environment, favorable.
Attentive to detail, extremely well organized, able to work under pressure, and meet frequent and changing deadlines.
Salary: $95,000 +

(Internal candidates who are selected for this position and who currently hold comparable or less senior positions within the DOE will not make less than their current salary.)

Please submit a resume and a cover letter with your application.

Applications will be accepted through October 28th, 2009.

NOTE: The filling of all positions is subject to budget availability.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

It is the policy of the Department of Education of the City of New York to provide educational and employment opportunities without regard to race, color, religion, creed, ethnicity, national origin, alienage, citizenship status, age, marital status, partnership status, disability, sexual orientation, gender (sex), military status, prior record of arrest or conviction (except as permitted by law), predisposing genetic characteristics, or status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual offenses and stalking, and to maintain an environment free of harassment on any of the above-noted grounds, including sexual harassment or retaliation. Inquiries regarding compliance with this equal opportunity policy may be directed to: Office of Equal Opportunity, 65 Court Street, Room 923, Brooklyn, New York 11201, or visit the OEO website, http://schools.nyc.gov/OEO.

Job Location
Tweed (52 Chambers Street) (TWEED)
Position Type
Full-Time/Regular
New Posting
Yes
Readvertisement
No
Recanvass
No
District
N/A

Policy Manager, Progress Reports (DAAR)
Tracking Code: 6560
LINK

Job Description

Position Summary: The New York City school system is the largest in the country, composed of approximately 1.1 million students and 90,000 teachers in over 1,600 schools. In January 2003, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel I. Klein launched Children First: A New Agenda for Public Schools in New York City, a multi-year reform effort aimed at significantly improving student achievement through effective teaching and learning.

Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have made accountability an essential element of New York City’s education reform effort. With an investment of over $130 million from national and local foundations, New York City has embarked upon an ambitious education reform initiative that is unprecedented in urban education.

The Policy Manager will support the Progress Report Team in evaluating the performance of all schools in the City. This person will work on challenging and important projects that require strong organizational, communication, and analytical skills.

Reports to: Executive Director, School Performance

Direct Reports: Senior Analyst, Progress Reports

Key Relationships: Works closely with the Children’s First Intensive team, ARIS team, and other members of the School Performance team.

Responsibilities

Manage, maintain, and evaluate the effectiveness of the business policies underlying the New York City Progress Report.
Work collaboratively with the School Performance Team and other NYC DOE divisions and schools to solicit feedback and get buy-in to any proposed changes to the business policies.
Design and perform data analysis relating to the Progress Report and other accountability reports, e.g., School Survey. Assesses the effectiveness of each measure on the Progress Report, analyzing trends in Progress Report data from year to year, and correlating Progress Report outcomes with other school accountability data.
Apply structured, thoughtful analytical approaches to the examination and solution of a wide variety of policy issues. This includes: how to evaluate student progress for hold-overs; how to baseline a student’s proficiency in the absence of proficiency data; how to ensure that progress is being measured accurately for all students, e.g., ELLs, Special Education, and use ingenuity in selecting and evaluating approaches to unforeseen problems.
Provide guidance to facilitate the development of new Progress Reports for schools that have not received one in the past, such as those focused on special education students and early childhood education.
Demonstrate and apply a thorough understanding of statistical and analytical methodology and protocols. Perform correlation, regression, and factor analysis to test the reliability and validity of the Progress Report results. Use cross-tabs and pivot tables to summarize key Progress Report results.
Qualification Requirements:

Minimum:

A master’s degree from an accredited college and three (3) years of full-time progressively responsible professional experience in education administration in one or more education-related areas, at least eighteen (18) months of which must have been in a managerial capacity; or
Graduation from an accredited college with a baccalaureate degree and four (4) years of full-time progressively responsible professional experience, as described in (1); or
A satisfactory combination of education and/or experience which is equivalent to (1) above including teaching experience towards meeting the general experience in (1) above; however, all candidates must have the eighteen (18) months of managerial experience.

Preferred:

Extensive data analysis experience, including Microsoft Excel and Access and knowledge of statistical software packages such as SAS, S-Plus, etc.
Ability to conduct systematic analysis and develop solutions to complex data analysis problems.
Ability to trouble-shoot, problem-solve, and anticipate issues around accountability measures.
Ability to manipulate, organize, and analyze large datasets.
Ability to develop and follow research methodology and protocol.
Ability to develop reports and charts based on research.
Ability to use independent judgment to adapt and modify research concepts and approaches to specific projects.
Attentive to detail, extremely well-organized and able to meet frequent and changing deadlines.
MA/PhD in statistics or related discipline.
Experience or working knowledge of the public sector and/or demonstrated interest in public education.
Salary: $81,000 +

(Internal candidates who are selected for this position and who currently hold comparable or less senior positions within the DOE will not make less than their current salary.)

Please submit a resume and cover letter with your application.
Applications will be accepted through October 28, 2009.

NOTE: The filling of all positions is subject to budget availability.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

It is the policy of the Department of Education of the City of New York to provide educational and employment opportunities without regard to race, color, religion, creed, ethnicity, national origin, alienage, citizenship status, age, marital status, partnership status, disability, sexual orientation, gender (sex), military status, prior record of arrest or conviction (except as permitted by law), predisposing genetic characteristics, or status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual offenses and stalking, and to maintain an environment free of harassment on any of the above-noted grounds, including sexual harassment or retaliation. Inquiries regarding compliance with this equal opportunity policy may be directed to: Office of Equal Opportunity, 65 Court Street, Room 923, Brooklyn, New York 11201, or visit the OEO website, http://schools.nyc.gov/OEO.

Job Location
Tweed (52 Chambers Street) (TWEED)
Position Type
Full-Time/Regular
New Posting
Yes
Readvertisement
No
Recanvass
No
District
N/A

Success For Lucienne Mohammed

On September 15, 2009 I posted an article in response to the "Worst Teachers" article published in the New Yorker magazine and written by Steven Brill. My article:

The Rubber Rooms and the Misinformation of Steven Brill

One of the reasons for my posting this piece on my website and blog was to try to get the NYC BOE Attorney, Dennis De Costa, to ask questions of Lucienne Mohammed relating to her allegations of wrong-doing by PS 65 Principal Daysi Garcia, and get this information into the 3020-a hearing record.

This effort was successful.

A little bit of background into the 3020-a hearing itself may be relevant: arbitrators either are reluctant, or forbid altogether, information about the administrators in the school from which the re-assigned teacher was removed. I heard one arbitrator say at a 3020-a hearing, "I will not hear any information about what the principal did or did not do, as [he/she] is the Supervisor. You must do what the Supervisor asks you to do, and grieve it later." Some arbitrators are less strict about the "dont ask, dont tell" policy of the NYC BOE and what I call the "rubberization" process.

Yet it makes no sense to me that a hearing could be fair if the reasons for a teacher to be observed as "incompetent" are not based on performance, but on some other "fact", and these "facts" or information are not permitted by the arbitrator to be mentioned. A principal who wants to remove a teacher from his/her school can see a 'messy' classroom when indeed the room may be picture perfect; a lesson may take ten minutes too long, says the Principal on the U-rating sheet, but that may not have happened at all; two students may be talking in class about the subject at hand (this is called "accountable talk"), but on the rating sheet the "U" is for deficiencies in classroom management. And so on.

What must be addressed is the visual prism of the Principal when he/she is observing the teacher, and I believe that this information must be allowed into a 3020-a hearing to clarify the record. By the way, as you can see in the information supplied by Ms. Mohammed in her statement about what was happening at PS 65, she signed up for the PIP+ Program, a totally-owned-and-paid-for-by-the-NYCBOE-no-bid-contract thing designed to help Principals. Who said that the program was designed to support the Principal? Executive Director Sandra Kase. Lucienne Mohammed's Peer Observer, who watched her teach and was supposed to help her 'improve', last taught in New York City in 1968 and was never trained in the Workshop Model (the program used at PS 65). The observations proved to be exactly what Principal Garcia asked for: total support for Ms. Mohammed's removal from the school because of incompetence. Watch out for the observers, and try to find out what their visual prism may be. By the way, I filed a freedom of information request of the NYC BOE for the RMC Contract, (see sections #1, #2, and #3) and I was asked to pay $52+ for the document - missing pp. pp. 88 - through 94; 114 – through 183; 187 – through 191; and 221 – through 252. I've appealed.

So, how can the teacher get in to the 3020-a record that the Principal was discriminating against him/her, and this may have been the root cause of the re-assignment? One way is to write about the Principal during the 3020-a, and anger the NYC BOE Attorney into forgetting that the hearing is not supposed to focus on anything the Principal has done or may have done in the school building. Another way is to have your Attorney ask questions about what the Principal was/is doing in the school, and any grievances or special complaints you may have filed, but this is not always accepted by the arbitrator, as I wrote above.

PS 65 Principal Daysi Garcia, in front of PS 65 in Brooklyn, NY

On September 17, 2009 Lucienne Mohammed went to day 37 of her 3020-a hearing and she was cross-examined by NYC BOE Attorney, Dennis De Costa of the BOE "Gotcha Squad". I was there for the afternoon.

Evidently when Lucienne and her Attorney Mr. Cavallero walked into the hearing room, Mr. De Costa had my article on the table before him. All of his questions to Ms. Mohammed were about the actions of Principal Garcia, based upon what Lucienne had sent to me for my posting online.

Mr. De Costa wanted to know if, indeed, Principal Garcia discriminated against Ms. Mohammed and another staff member (whose hearing was not completed, but at which Ms. Mohammed testified), and Ms. Mohammed was asked how, and when this discrimination took place. The possible motives of Principal Garcia to remove Lucienne Mohammed from her job at PS 65 for reasons OTHER THAN the actual performance of Ms. Mohammed were brought to the table and put into the record. This was my goal in writing the article.

The impossibility of "proving" incompetence in the hearing room at 51 Chambers Street is clear to anyone who attends these hearings. A good teacher is someone who knows the subject he/she is assigned to teach, and who transfers this content knowledge in an "appropriate" and "educationally sound" way - please excuse my use of these general terms, but my point is, both "appropriate" and "educationally sound" are based on the students you have in your class and the visual prism and mindset of the person reporting. Thus, arbitrators placed in the position of deciding cases of incompetence must try to understand the school culture and the specifics of the classroom of the teacher whose case is being heard. James A. Gross, author of the book "Teachers On Trial" puts it this way:

"This study has demonstrated that decision makers' conceptions of the way things ought to be and beliefs about the way things presumably are - unchecked and unverified by empirical evidence about the way things actually are - often lead to unjust decisions about teachers' conduct and performance and to outcomes that are detrimental to teaching and learning. Injustice and inefficiency will persist as long as policy makers and decision makers operate without sufficient evidence."
(p 110)....and,

"This study has revealed the serious inequities that result when decision makers operate without objective standards or reliable evidence concerning the educational conseqences of various teacher behaviors both in and outside of the classroom. Of course, educational reform involves matters of productivity and performance as well as equity, and the objective should be to maximize learning and teacher effectiveness in ways consistent with justice and equity for teachers, students, and administrators." (p. 111).

I recommend that you beg someone for this book, or buy it yourself.

Of course in Lucienne Mohammed's case no one knows what the decision of Mr. Jay Siegel will be after the closing on October 27, 2009, but for now, the record is clear that Principal Daysi Garcia may have had a motive to make Lucienne Mohammed appear to be "incompetent" when indeed she was - and is - not.

Think about it.

Betsy Combier