ATR Meetings

Remaining ATR official UFT ATR meetings:

Thu., Oct. 25 Official Brooklyn ATR meeting**, 4-6; alternative mini-meeting, Au Bon Pain, 70 Myrtle Ave, 1/2 block east of Starbucks at Jay St. (a direct trajectory from Brooklyn UFT HQ), facing Metrotech Commons (park), 6-7 or 730.

Mon., Oct. 29 Official Brooklyn ACR meeting**, 4-6; alternative mini-meeting, Au Bon Pain, 70 Myrtle Ave,, 6-7 or 730.

**Brooklyn HQ is 335 Adams St., between Johnson St. and Willoughby St., near 2,3,4,5,R Boro Hall and A,C,F,R Jay St. Boro Hall

Thu., Nov. 1 Official Manhattan ACR/ATR meeting***, 4-6; alternative mini-meeting, Cafe Exchange, 49 Broadway,  6-7 or 730.

***Manhattan HQ is 52 Broadway, near 4,5 Wall St., Rector St. R

Mon., Nov. 5 Official Queens ACR/ATR meeting****, 4-6

****Queens HQ is 97-77 Queens Blvd., alternative mini-meeting: Ben's Best Gourmet Deli, 96-40 Queens Blvd. 63^Rd Dr. Sta. M, R, 6-7 or 730

General citiwide meeting:

Unsatisfied with the evasive answers you get to these questions in this well-managed top-down meeting?  Join the meeting of ATRs in

the ATR Chapter Committee, organized by ACRs and ATRs 
place: Meet at the Skylight Diner (in the back) at 402 W 34th St. (SW corner of 9th Ave.), Manhattan,
date: Thurs., November 8, 2012, 5:00 pm.  Please RSVP to saferatr@gmail.com

The Gotcha Squad Strikes Again: Now Its Special Education That Will Get You Discharged or Terminated

Think about it. As you can read below,  "Every principal must implement procedures to ensure that each gen ed. teacher, special ed. teacher and related service provider who is responsible for implementing the student's IEP is provided a paper or electronic copy of the IEP prior to implementation of the IEP "

But what if Mr. or Ms. Principal does not ensure the procedures are in place (this is, by the way, Chapter 408) but says they did everything and it is YOUR fault the IEP was not followed, cannot be found, was not in a locked drawer, etc?? Then what??

Betsy Combier

Copies of IEPs

LINK

The IEP describes the school’s obligation to provide specially designed instruction as well as related and other support services to students with disabilities. In order for students to achieve the full benefit of the IEP planning process, school personnel with responsibility for implementing the IEPs of students with disabilities must understand their responsibilities and have students’ IEPs readily available to them. Chapter 408 of the Laws of 2002 and state regulations prescribe the process for ensuring that this occurs.

Providing Copies of IEPs to Teachers and Related Service Providers

Every principal must implement procedures to ensure that each general education teacher, special education teacher and related service provider who is responsible for implementing the student’s IEP is provided apaper or electronic copy of the IEP prior to implementation of the IEP. This includes every teacher responsible for implementing a service, accommodation and/or program modification on a student’s IEP. Additionally, a process must be in place to ensure that copies of a student’s IEP are immediately disseminated to all appropriate staff when the IEP has been revised during the school year.

Schools that use SESIS to provide an electronic copy of the IEP must ensure that teachers and related service providers are able to readily reference their students IEPs on an ongoing basis. Teachers and related service providers who cannot readily refer to electronic copies of their students’ IEPs in their school building during the school day because they do not have access to a computer (the computer does not need to be in the classroom or therapy room) must be provided paper copies.

A school does not meet the requirements of the law by disseminating lists of students requiring test accommodations or summaries of IEPs such as “IEP at a Glance.”

The determination of which teachers and related service providers must be provided a copy of the IEP should be made at the student’s IEP meeting.

Teachers of students who have been declassified and who continue to receive accommodations, modifications and/or other support services must receive a copy of the student’s last IEP.

Providing Paraprofessionals Opportunity to Review and Ongoing Access to IEPs

Every principal must implement procedures to ensure that each paraprofessional responsible for assisting the implementation of a student’s IEP is provided the opportunity to review a copy of the student’s IEP prior to implementation of the IEP.

Additionally, the procedures must ensure that each paraprofessional responsible for assisting in the implementation of a student’s IEP has ongoing access to a copy of the IEP.  The copy may be the copy provided to the student’s special education teacher or another teacher or related service provider under whose direction the paraprofessional works. It may also be a copy maintained in another location in the school building if that location is readily accessible to the paraprofessional.

Access to IEPs may also be provided electronically, through SESIS. Schools that use SESIS to provide electronic access must ensure that paraprofessionals receive training on how to use SESIS to access students’ IEPs. They must also ensure that computers are available in the school building during the school day for paraprofessionals to use.

While schools are not required to provide a copy of the IEP to the paraprofessional, they may legally do so if they choose.

Informing School Personnel of IEP Implementation Responsibilities

 In addition to providing copies of IEPs to teachers and related service providers and access to paraprofessionals, every principal must have a process for ensuring that each general education teacher, special education teacher, related service provider and other support staff has been informed, prior to implementation of the IEP, of his or her responsibility to implement the recommendations on the student’s IEP, including the responsibility to provide specific IEP-mandated accommodations, program modifications, supports and/or services.

To accomplish these, the principal must designate one or more professional staff members who are familiar with the contents of the student’s IEP, such as an administrator, school psychologist and/or teacher, to directly inform appropriate staff of their specific responsibilities. Teachers and related service providers who were present at the meeting where the IEP was finalized are assumed to be familiar with the contents of the IEP and their specific duties in implementing the IEP.

Confidentiality

The Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) allows schools to disclose personally identifiable information in a student’s education records, including the student’s IEP, to school personnel with “legitimate educational interests.” While an IEP contains important instructional information that teachers, related service providers, paraprofessionals and others need to know to implement the IEP, it may also contain sensitive personal information about the student. Teachers and related service providers who receive a copy of a student’s IEP and paraprofessionals who have access to IEPs must ensure that student IEPs remain confidential and are not disclosed to any other people.

Schools districts that provide electronic copies of the IEP, such as through SESIS, are required to implement security systems to prevent unauthorized internal and external access to students’ IEPs. Due to systems integration issues, SESIS does not currently have controls in place to prevent members of the school staff who do not have IEP implementation responsibilities from accessing students’ IEPs. SESIS does, however, maintain a record of every time the IEP is accessed. School staff who are not connected with a student should never use SESIS to access the student’s IEP.

The school is responsible for instructing all people who receive copies of IEPs or have access to IEPs regarding their legal obligation to maintain the confidentiality of student records. Personally identifiable student information from the IEP may not be disclosed to others without parent consent.

• State Regulations: 8 NYCRR §200.4(e)(3)
• NYC DOE Special Education Annual Review Implementation (with attachment on Chapter 408)
• State Guidance on Providing Copies of IEPs for Students with DisabilitiesThis document includes a copy of the law and state regulations.

Providing a Copy of the IEP to Parent

 Schools must ensure that a copy of the IEP is provided to the student’s parents. If the IEP is amended with or without an IEP team meeting, the parent must be provided with a copy of the amended IEP immediately.

• NYC DOE Standard Operating Procedures Manual, pp. 73 & 109
• State Regulations: 8 NYCRR §200.4(e)(3)(iv)

Storage of IEPs

IEPs are confidential documents and must be kept in locations not accessible by students or staff members who are not responsible for implementing the IEP. While the storage location must not be accessible, this does not necessarily mean that it must be in a locked location.

Questions and Answers from Live Web Cast on the Standard Operating Procedures Manual

Resources

• State Guidance on Providing Copies of IEPs for Students with DisabilitiesThis includes a copy of the law and State regulations.
• NYC DOE Special Education Annual Review Implementation (with attachment on Chapter 408)
• Standard Operating Procedures Manual
• State Regulations: 8 NYCRR §200.4(e)
• UFT Special Education Complaint Form

You Have No Rights At Work

Posted on October 19, 2012 by Jake Blumgart #

Ketstone Politics

 

This election season has done an excellent job of showcasing an important, and little understood, truth about political freedom in the American workplace. In short: There isn’t any, unless you happen to be the boss.

Last Sunday, In These Times’ Mike Elk revealed that the Koch brothers have been sending their employees a helpful reminder to vote for Mitt Romney. (Other candidates are endorsed as well, all Republicans.) If Obama won, they warned, “Many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences. . . including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and other ills.”

The Koch mailers were subtle compared to the email CEO David Siegel sent to his 7,000 employees. In his missive, the billionaire described the harrowing consequences of an Obama victory, chiefly that he might have to pay higher taxes. “If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about,” he concluded. (Gawker broke this story, another in a series of excellent posts this year on inequality, labor rights, and economic justice: They aren’t just good for snark and gossip anymore.) These aren’t isolated incidents of political intimidation in the workplace.

Republicans are gleefully encouraging their allies to keep the pressure up. “”If you run, manage or own a company tell your employees. . . if Obama is reelected, I may have to let all of you go next year. . . I may not be able to cover your health insurance next year,” Congressman Joe Walsh (R-IL) told a gathering of business representatives recently. On Wednesday Mike Elk broke the news that Romney himself, on a conference call with the intensely conservative National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) is on the same page: “Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well.”

And Romney is right, as Josh Eidelson explains in Salon.

Why is that? First, thank Citizens United. The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision overturned a key section of federal election law, which had previously restricted how and when employers could make political appeals to rank-and-file employees. That little-noticed aspect of the lightning-rod decision meant open season for any employers itching to tell their employees what to do with their votes or their dollars. It’s not restricted to postal mail – employers are also free to hold mandatory, on-the-clock meetings devoted entirely to lecturing their workers about politics

But while your bosses can say what they want to you about politics, the same does not apply to you or your co-workers. The Constitution only protects against public sector political persecution. In the private sector “employment-at-will” rules. That means you can be fired at any time, for any reason (or no reason at all), including your political actions outside the workplace. (As Eidelson notes, in 2004 a worker was sacked because she would not remove a John Kerry sticker from her car.)  This total power is not limited to politics either. Employers have almost complete freedom of action in the workplace, unless they clearly fire or harass you based on your race, gender, religion, or a few other protected categories. (Theoretically, you are also protected if you are organizing a union or otherwise working to advance your rights at work, but the law is so weak that it’s practically worthless.)
In the United States, you have almost no rights at work unless you are a member of a union or, weirdly, live in Montana (and very few people can claim either of those protections).

From a Crooked Timber that explores this issue in great detail:

On pain of being fired, workers in most parts of the United States can be commanded to pee or forbidden to pee. They can be watched on camera by their boss while they pee. They can be forbidden to wear what they want, say what they want (and at what decibel), and associate with whom they want. They can be punished for doing or not doing any of these things—punished legally or illegally (as many as 1 in 17 workers who try to join a union is illegally fired or suspended). But what’s remarkable is just how many of these punishments are legal, and even when they’re illegal, how toothless the law can be. Outside the usual protections (against race and gender discrimination, for example), employees can be fired for good reasons, bad reasons, or no reason at all. They can be fired for donating a kidney to their boss (fired by the same boss, that is), refusing to have their person and effects searched, calling the boss a “cheapskate” in a personal letter, and more. They have few rights on the job—certainly none of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendment liberties that constitute the bare minimum of a free society; thus, no free speech or assembly, no due process, no right to a fair hearing before a panel of their peers—and what rights they do have employers will fight tooth and nail to make sure aren’t made known to them or will simply require them to waive as a condition of employment. Outside the prison or the military—which actually provide, at least on paper, some guarantee of due process—it’s difficult to conceive of a less free institution for adults than the average workplace.
In addition to abridging freedoms on the job, employers abridge their employees’ freedoms off the job. Employers invade employees’ privacy, demanding that they hand over passwords to their Facebook accounts, and fire them for resisting such invasions. Employers secretly film their employees at home. Workers are fired for supporting the wrong political candidates (“work for John Kerry or work for me”), failing to donate to employer-approved candidates, challenging government officials, writing critiques of religion on their personal blogs (IBM instructs employees to “show proper consideration…for topics that may be considered objectionable or inflammatory—such as politics and religion”), carrying on extramarital affairs, participating in group sex at home, cross-dressing, and more. Workers are punished for smoking or drinking in the privacy of their own homes. (How many nanny states have tried that?) They can be fired for merely thinking about having an abortion, forreporting information that might have averted the Challenger disaster, for being raped by an estranged husband. Again, this is all legal in many states, and in the states where it is illegal, the laws are often weak.

Follow Jake on Twitter.

The DOE Will Certify Aspiring Teachers

EXCESS'D - A Teacher Without a Room

---

Mark Twain and the Dirt Eater. Posted: 20 Oct 2012 02:13 PM PDT Interesting yet bewildering; this idea of letting the DOE take over the certification of aspiring teachers.  Especially bewildering is the notion that placing a new college graduate with an experienced teacher in a "thriving" school would somehow provide the framework and support for that newbie to take over a class in one of our famous hard-to-staff schools.  Let's get this straight from the git-go.  I do believe that the best preparation for a teacher contemplating a career teaching in NYC is not only a degree in education but also the essential fieldwork that introduces the novice to the daily reality of the teaching profession.  When I returned to school and enrolled in a graduate program in education, part of our assignment was to do the required fieldwork in a school of their selection.  The fieldwork is the first step into a classroom - where you, as teacher, are finally facing the class and not the other way around. I was sent to a number of  schools but I want to focus on two experiences that relate to the subject of this post. The first school I was assigned  to was a 5th grade class in an elementary school on the Upper West Side which is, by all accounts, a great school.  Great staff, facilities, parental involvement, money, and a student body that valued education.  I can recall being asked to do a read-aloud of a Mark Twain story. Having some experience on stage, I gave it my all with animated gestures, character voices and audience engagement.  The kids loved it, even applauding the performance - my mentor congratulated me on my efforts and gave me suggestions for the lesson follow-up. What I was expected to gain from this experience was to know how and when I was "on my game" as a teacher.  What did student engagement actually look like?  What did it sound like?  All of this out of the learning room of the graduate school into the teaching room of the public school.  Wow, I thought, this is going to be great; here are the budding minds, eager to learn, eager to show off what they already know, respectful, knowledgeable and wanting to know more.  So, this is what teaching is like and this is a teacher's classroom. The other school I wanted to mention is located in East Harlem.  Not a difficult school by any means; nice modern building, helpful staff and just elementary school kids being kids. I was assigned to a lower grade - maybe 2nd or 3rd with a teacher who used "Shhhhhhhush" after every other word.  This was the first indicator that perhaps I have chosen the wrong second career.  My engagement with children so young was ineffectual and frustrating (thus my stint as a Middle School teacher).  However, I did learn an important lesson from one child and it is a lesson I always keep in the back of my mind.  Due to some malfeasance on part of the student, I was instructed to deprive said student of a privilege held dear.  As I was trying to explain my action to said student I was met with an impenetrable and defying stare that accompanied the words " I don't care.  I can eat dirt".  Clearly, the deprivation tactic to change behavior was not going to work here.  Wow, I thought, this is NOT going to be great; this is not as easy a being an animated reader to a group of inquiring minds.  Where is the desire to learn?  How can I get to make these children care?  Two starkly contrasting experiences of the daily reality of teaching in an urban public school. So how does this fit in with the topic of the post?  Needless to say, I am basically against the DOE taking over certification but I am aiming at what I see as a misguided strategy for preparing any teacher to take over a classroom.  You cannot teach unless you can manage and you cannot learn classroom management out of a book; it helps and give you some tools to work with but you will only get it in the classroom itself.  Design for a teacher preparation program for an urban public school must place primary importance on classroom management and, in most cases, lack of management is not a big issue in a "thriving school".  The idea that you would mentor a teacher in a thriving school as preparation for that teacher to take the helm in a struggling school is to miss the mark, big time. We know that there is more learning than teaching in a teacher's first years on the job and the steepest learning curve to navigate is classroom management.  This is why it would make so much more sense to place a last year graduate student into a "managed classroom" in a hard to staff school in order to hone their skills in this critical area. To succeed in the trenches you need to learn in the trenches.  All this would seem quite self-evident to any teacher already in the system, so I am not offering any revolutionary ideas and, in fact, this "mentoring issue" is subsumed in the larger picture of the DOE efforts to drive experienced tenured teachers out of the building.  As I consider the bigger picture and how this "bogus route to certification" is being contemplated, I am tempted to suggest that their "mentoring' idea is valid with the idea that if implemented it is doomed to failure - another disaster policy brought to you by the DOE.  The only drawback is that another class of students will fall by the wayside as the DOE clumsily grasps for more power with their oversized hands.

ATRs: Be prepared! Don't count on principals to provide you with lesson plans

 From Dedicated To All ATRs in NYC
LINK

This post is dedicated to supporting and preserving all ATRs in the DOE.  Face it, we are an oppressed group.  They want to do away with us.  Klein had it in for us as soon as his policy for closing schools caused him to be embarrassed for not having anticipated the fall-out.

Although principals depend upon us, (especially us since we represent the veterans in education) to maintain class order and preserve the tone of the school, they aren't very reliable when it comes to providing us with lessons that assure pedagogical continuity when the regular teacher is absent.  This may be because they don't really know where each class should be on the curriculum map, and it may be because one thing they don't teach teachers in the Fellowship program (or elsewhere) is how to create activities that can be used to hold students accountable while they are not running the class.

In a previous post I announced the call for a "Uniform Absent Teacher Assignment Plan" and wrote the deputy chancellor a short pitch for taking some of us out of rotation to work on this, full-time.  We, the ATRs on rotation, have visited so many schools and met more principals in a year than most teachers do in a life-time of service!  This places us in a unique spot, for we are able to reach out to principals and teachers who will supply us with best practices.  Once in place, the Absent Teacher Assignment Plans will be available through a data base and downloadable for each class- perhaps even wired right into the classroom via a smart board...

However, in the meanwhile, we, as ATRs are at risk of losing our wonderful positions as rotating teachers if we get stuck in a class with no back up plan.

I would like to ask all of you to send some of your cleverest assignments.  The idea is this:  When kids are distracted by interesting assignments, they don't act out quite as much and quite as awfully as they do when do have something to do.

For example, I will post some links for WordSearch Puzzles- kids love them, and they can be found in every subject and at any level. 
Here is a website that has tons of great WordSearch Puzzles:http://www.armoredpenguin.com/wordsearch/Data/best/

Another nifty thing was suggested to me by our own Mr. Macri- perhaps the city's most popular ATR
Tracing paper.  We had an art class at a Brooklyn High School and Mr. Macri had a great way of keeping kids engaged and behaved: Let them trace.  I found some geometric and stained-glass workbooks (Dover Publishers) and kids traced the patterns and then, colored them.  The whole room and the bulletin boards were filled with light catchers. 
If you have a class for a whole week, never mind if it's science or math- give them tracings with a theme: Last week I did one on "Winners" - pictures of the olympic gold metallists and famous people that students value as role models.  A roll of tracing paper (12" x 50 yards) is less than $10 at Pearl.  I don't think we should pay for our students' supplies, but, desperate times mean taking desperate measures.

I have a bunch more but I really want you to make a page of sanity-saving suggestions for the well-being of us all.... Please!

Posted By Blogger to Dedicated to all ATRs in NYC at 10/21/2012 09:37:00 AM

Library Media Specialist Antoine Bogard Fights The NYC Department of Education On The Closing Of School Libraries

Parentadvocates.org
Betsy Combier, Editor
LINK
 
There is currently a lot of movement within the Department of Education to push and support school libraries to play a major role in linking information literacy with the curriculum and common core standards to accelerate student achievement. It is in this context, the principal made the very unfortunate and ill-advised decision to close the library. At a time when our students need more literacy, more information literacy instruction, not less, the closure of our school library makes this a sad school year for our students, our staff, our parents, and our community. It is of utmost importance and urgency for the PS 197M family and learning community to take up the conversation about the re-opening of our school library before the end of the year 2012.

October 19, 2012
UPDATE ON THE LIBRARY UFT GRIEVANCE

Grievance
Colleagues,
In the spirit of transparency, I just want to update you on the state of the grievance against the closing of the library this school year 2012-2013. Both decisions at Step 1 with the principal and Step 2 with the hearing officer representing the superintendent and the principal alleged that the Union failed to prove any contractual violations. They, therefore, stated that the library was closed for budget reasons. With that, we can say that this year proves to be a very, very sad year for our students, our staff, our parents, and our community. All the work we’ve done with the support of the PS 197M family was done on the basis of our deep-seated belief that our students deserve a school library that is up-to-date at all levels.

I picked up a dilapidating library 16 years ago that was closed for two years prior after the death of our beloved, Ms. Anna B. Hildebrand, the oldest colleague in our school back then. She managed this library with a lot of grace and the students responded to her with grace. After her death in 1994, the library was practically closed. People scattered books all over the place, on tables, and on the floor. This state of affairs concerned me very much. In June 1996, two years later, I requested to come and revamp the school library as a Teacher-assigned. My request granted, I immediately started going to countless hours of workshops on running the library.

I taught hundreds of students in the library and manually circulated books without an automation system. Then feeling that our students deserved more quality library instruction, in 1998, I enrolled in the Masters degree Program for Library Science at Queens College for three years. In 2001, upon receiving my degree and certification in School Library Media, the principal then, Ms. Sandridge, appointed me in place in September 2001. This was a major victory for our students and the school community because very few elementary school libraries had licensed, and certified school librarians.

For years also, I ran an early morning library club where students came to the library before school and started to read in the library. I ran Storytelling contests where our winners went on borough and citywide Storytelling contests and brought back trophies. The library played a leading role in advancing reading achievement throughout the school when the Renaissance program first started here at PS 197M. My leadership was significant in the systematic implementation of the principles of the program.
Our big break came in 2008 when I wrote a grant that brought $200,000 to the school for the renovation of our school library. With the completion of renovation in the 2009-2010 school year, our students and school community scored another major victory.

As a result of my activism in school library world throughout the city, our school was selected as one of 50 schools to participate in a Pilot Program with the New York Public Library as a Partnership between the New York City Department of Education Library Services and the New York Public Library. The Pilot Program offered our teachers an opportunity to check out book sets to support the curriculum and instruction in the classroom. All staff members and all students were provided with special New York Public Library Cards with special privileges. At first, NYPL shared its automation program with Pilot schools. Ultimately, after I made a request for a possible new automation system, NYPL said they were going to look into that. They did and offered to provide PS 197M with a new automation system, Destiny, for the school library as a Pilot School for free with a subscription value of $7,500 a year.

In addition to the spectacular improvement of the physical infrastructure of the library, my leadership empowered and inspired our students to do an extensive amount of reading and writing in the library. I have also shared a dynamic proposal with the current principal on moving forward with the library program. It outlined the next level, namely, a high level of collaboration between classroom teachers and me to integrate information literacy in the school wide curriculum and classroom instruction.

There is currently a lot of movement within the Department of Education to push and support school libraries to play a major role in linking information literacy with the curriculum and common core standards to accelerate student achievement. It is in this context, the principal made the very unfortunate and ill-advised decision to close the library. This unjustifiable decision takes us eighteen (18) years backwards when our students had no access to their school library and the books and resources of the library laid to waste. That decision to close our school library is a major setback and a major defeat for our students’ academic, intellectual, social and cultural needs and achievement historically at PS 197M. At a time when our students need more literacy, more information literacy instruction, not less, the closure of our school library makes this a sad school year for our students, our staff, our parents, and our community. It is of utmost importance and urgency for the PS 197M family and learning community to take up the conversation about the re-opening of our school library before the end of the year 2012.

In Solidarity & Struggle for our Students’ Education and Achievement,

Antoine Bogard, Library Media Specialist, MLS
& UFT Chapter Leader 

 The UFT, NYSUT and the DOE defamed Chris Asch, Library Specialist at Stuyvesant High School when they allowed former principal Stanley Teitel to lie about Chris at his 3020-a arbitration, to remove him from his job and close part of the Stuyvesant High School library.
 
Christopher Asch, Tenured NYC Board of Education Employee, Wins In the Supreme Court His Petition To Vacate The 3020-a Arbitration Decision

Betsy Combier

Philip Nobile: UFT Silent On ATR Rights and Representation

Printable Version >> CURRENT EVENTS "Why does Michael Mulgrew’s UFT persist in shafting ATRs by denying us representation within the union? Why hasn’t the Mulgrew established a bill of rights for ATRs? In contrast, Randi (Weingarten) arranged for rubber roomers to elect liaisons who met monthly with UFT Secretary Michael Mendel and Co-Staff Director LeRoy Barr at 52 Broadway. She also produced a pamphlet on our rights. Surely, what was good for reassigned members in the past is good for ATRs in the present."                   UFT President Mike Mulgrew     UFT Silent On ATR Rights and Representation By Philip Nobile Why does Michael Mulgrew’s UFT persist in shafting ATRs by denying us representation within the union? Why hasn’t the Mulgrew established a bill of rights for ATRs? In contrast, Randi (Weingarten) arranged for rubber roomers to elect liaisons who met monthly with UFT Secretary Michael Mendel and Co-Staff Director LeRoy Barr at 52 Broadway. She also produced a pamphlet on our rights. Surely, what was good for reassigned members in the past is good for ATRs in the present.  The UFT disagrees. Instead of real representation the union has handed us crumbs, insisting that revolving (and usually invisible) chapter leaders are all the representation we need.  On Sept. 24, hoping to change hearts and minds, I emailed two questions to the chain of command (Mulgrew, Mendel, Barr, Amy Arundell, Brooklyn Borough Rep. Howie Schoor, and my Brooklyn District Rep. Tom Bennett): (1) Why hasn’t the UFT drawn up an advisory to CLs (Chapter Leaders) on how to handle ATRs? Or have I missed it? In the good old days of rubber rooms, we not only had elected reps (liaisons) and monthly meetings at 52 Broadway, but Randi produced a brochure on our rights. (2) Can you explain why ATRs in good standing get less respect than accused members in the past? There was no reply until October 9 when Bennett emailed me and said to give him a call. I preferred a written response and Bennett obliged in his fashion. Herewith the ensuing correspondence revealing the UFT’s contempt for ATR rights:  Oct. 10: Bennett to me Ok, written response it is. I dont agree with the premise of question #2 in your email, so, I cant respond in a meaningful way. As for #1, there is no specific handbook on ATRs for chapter leaders, but it has been addressed at Chapter Leader training and at monthly meetings. Professional courtesy, bathroom keys, no menial assignments, no 6th period, etc. have all been emphasized repeatedly. It has also been addressed in chapter leader weekly, as well. Sorry to hear you are in high dudgeon, but I think I am innocent of the charge of being unavailable. If I dont respond it is because I dont know the answer, or because your question is, shall we say, tendentious. But I have always taken your call. Let me know where you are, and Ill come by. Oct. 13: Me to Bennett et al:  Good to hear from you. Thanks for the info on the indoctrination of chapter leaders in the care of ATRs. In my experience it’s not working. The only CL to meet and greet me in Brooklyn and Staten Island all last year was the esteemed Bill Kalogeras at Automotive. If the union were serious about the least of its members, at the least you would establish a protocol whereby CLs welcome their ATR brothers on day one, maybe even get them a cup of coffee. Is that too much to ask? If you were an ATR, wouldn’t you like to be treated with such solidarity?  The premise of question 2, as you know, is the UFT’s refusal to grant ATRs the same rights as rubber room residents of the past. Nobody in the UFT, including you, has explained why ATRs in good standing are less worthy of direct representation than suspect resassigned teachers who had elected liaisons to guard their interests at monthly meetings at 52 Broadway with LeRoy Barr and Michael Mendel no less. This is what I meant by a dearth of respect. Once again, if you were an ATR, wouldn’t you prefer to have a representative fighting for you inside the UFT instead of depending on invisible chapter leaders? Nevermind the Unity line, tell me what you really think.  Thanks for your consideration. Oct. 16: me to Bennett et al. Let's stipulate that you're in a tough spot along with Amy, Howie, LeRoy, and Mendel. Apparently, none of you can explain (justify) denying ATRs in good standing the same representation (e.g., elected liaisons and monthly meetings at 52) once granted reassigned members in bad standing. So why not walk the golden bridge of retreat and give ATRs their due. Call it solidarity. Oct. 17: Bennett to me Thanks for the email. Your comments are very thoughtful, as always. I look forward to seeing you at the meeting. Oct. 17: Me to Bennett et al. How sad, even pathetic, that you won't express your personal opinion on the union's refusal to extend the same representation rights to good standing ATRs that were formerly bestowed on suspect rubber room members.  The UFT's refusal to deal with this disparate treatment is really shabby. But you know that. You just can't admit it. You've taken the Unity oath.  Posted by Norm @ ed notes online at 11:30 PM  Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook 5 comments: AnonymousOctober 19, 2012 12:45:00 AM EDT Hello!! The ATRs should file a suit against both the DoE and UFT for discrimination. Last time you did, it caught the attention of the media and then that caught Randi's attention. Stop writing emails that get you nowhere and get together and file a class action suit. Isn't the writing on the wall. The UFT plans to sell ATRs down the river in this next negotiation. Reply AnonymousOctober 19, 2012 7:07:00 AM EDT Important information for city-wide ATR's (ALL TITLES) Next week on Tuesday, October 24, there is a meeting for all ATR's at the UFT Bronx Office. Not surprisingly this meeting is buried on the UFT calendar: http://www.uft.org/events/atr-informational-meeting ATR's of all titles are invited to attend this informational Q & A session on ATR-related issues and to meet the representatives of the Bronx Borough Office. It has been suggested by an ATR who has assumed a leadership role, that ALL ATR's, including those on the GEM listserve attend the Bronx meeting in order to speed up the quickly moving organization of ATR's. Should the meeting turn out to be a performance by Amy Arandle whining, "you're lucky to have a job," then all attendees at the meeting can rapidly retreat to the parking area to exchange contact information which will further strengthen the ATR movement. It has been reported that a list of city-wide ATR's has recently surfaced. Hopefully, this list can be used to urge attendance at the ATR meetings.  Reply Replies AnonymousOctober 19, 2012 8:32:00 AM EDT I agree it is time to file the lawsuit Reply Angry ATROctober 19, 2012 7:26:00 AM EDT Bronx ATR meeting is on WEDNESDAY, October 24, 2012 Reply AnonymousOctober 19, 2012 8:29:00 AM EDT Several physically-challenged ATR's have hired a lawyer to file a lawsuit against the UFT. Many of these ATR's are forced to WALK long distances (Like 8-10 Blocks) from subway stations after ascending and descending steep staircases. When they arrive at their 3 to 4 floor "schools-of-the-week" they find that many schools lack working elevators. Then these educators are forced to demean themselves, pleading with a cold-hearted leadership academy principal for an assignment on one floor for the day! This situation is outrageous. Reply