Remember Occupy NYSUT?

 http://blog.nycsa.org/2011/10/occupy-nysut-headquarters-thats-where.html 
"Occupy" NYSUT Headquarters? Might Find Some of that "1%" - UPDATED

This blog post was updated on Friday, Nov. 4 to reflect substantial corrections made by the Times Union to its original story.

Many a credible analyst believes the country is experiencing the worst economic period since the Great Depression of the 1930's. That may be true, but not if you work in the upper echelons of the New York State United Teachers' offices just outside of Albany, where it's "Happy Days Are Here Again." In fact, those days never left, even if they changed for the worse almost everywhere else.

The Albany Times Union today has a front-page story on NYSUT staff receiving massive salary increases in 2010 which included some one-year pay raises "equal to more than an entire year's worth of earnings for the average teacher." [NOTE: The TU has since substantially corrected this story that renders this quoted assertion by the paper as inaccurate.] Turns out, NYSUT president, Richard Iannuzzi, received a pay hikes in 2008 through 2010, including a one-time 11 percent increase, for a base salary of $240,180 (not including tens of thousands of dollars more in benefits and perks); while the organization's other executives got raises ranging from 2.75 percent to nearly 4 percent. [See further "Follow-up" discussion, below.]

Now, I do not begrudge anyone at NYSUT or most anywhere else their compensation package. They are professionals, they work hard, and can be very good at what they do. Look no further than the teacher evaluation law it negotiated into ambiguity and litigated to virtual meaninglessness. One can argue the union hasn't otherwise accomplished much else with the retrenchment in school aid for the last two years, but not even NYSUT can defy the laws of mathematics and economics indefinitely - the state's cupboard is bare.

Pay Hikes at HQ; Pink Slips in the Classroom
It remains ironic that NYSUT would reward its hierarchy this way since they knew, at the start of 2010 when more pay hikes took effect, that the state's economy remained in the doldrums and public budgets weretightening further. In fact, during the time of the NYSUT salary hikes, the state government, due to cash flow problems, already was withholding school aid payments to school districts and teachers were facing layoffs.

This past year, numerous NYSUT locals voluntarily agreed to forgo contractual pay hikes to minimize teacher layoffs. In other words, many teachers gave back scheduled salary increases so that other teachers could avoid pink slips. According to NYSUT, the organization froze executive salaries for the 2011-12 school year.

How 'bout that "Social Conscience?"
The irony is more so considering how NYSUT has weighed in about the "Occupy Wall Street" protests. In a column this week by Mr. Iannuzzi, he writes: "Beyond the social contract, I believe exists a social conscience and a social compass" that, in effect, demands tax fairness which he says is "about values." Should NYSUT's headquarters, which is not on Wall Street but still five times the size of a WalMart store, get a carve-out of this social contract?

In contrast to "corporate greed" that at least makes its money mostly via the private market, NYSUT's treasury is comprised primarily of mandatory union dues from teachers and other members who are paid by taxpayer dollars. At a minimum, this suggests the union should have more sensitivity about its own organizational wealth disparities, especially when Mr. Iannuzzi decries societal disparities that can "make our blood boil."

Reading the front page of today's Times Union, a few dues-paying NYSUT members may get that same feeling.

Peter Murphy
for The Chalkboard
Twitter.com/PeterMurphy26
Facebook: Chalkboard Nycsa

FOLLOW-UP: As mentioned above, the Times Union in its November 4th edition, made substantial correctionsto its original October 28th story that was used by The Chalkboard for its original post on the same day. Primarily, Mr. Iannuzzi did not receive a "45 percent" pay hike, nor did the Secretary-Treasurer get a 54 percent pay hike of $75,000.

posted by Peter Murphy at PermaLink 11:52 AM

On the Possibility of a UFT/DOE Buyout....

To all teachers who think that a buyout is a good thing: be careful, be very careful, that your rights to legal action in the future will be compromised!!

Think long-term, and rely upon only yourself, if offered any buyout or settlement of any kind.

Betsy Combier

09/21/2012 11:50 PM

DOE, Union Release Desired Figures For Teacher Buyouts

By: NY1 News

LINK

The United Federation of Teachers and the Department of Education have been at odds over buyouts for city teachers who are on the payroll but don't have permanent jobs. Now, both sides have released their version of acceptable terms for those buyouts.

The DOE is offering to pay teachers taking a buyout of three months' salary, up to $25,000. That would end up costing between $14,000 and $25,000, depending on the teacher.

The UFT is asking for 6 months salary with a minimum of $35,000. That comes to between $35,000 and $50,000.

The DOE says there are about 1,800 such teachers on the books, costing the city a huge amount of money.

The chancellor and union president released statements Friday blaming each other for misrepresenting the facts and not negotiating in good faith.

Related Stories

09/20/2012 07:57 PM

NY1 Exclusive: Buyout For Teachers Not Likely To Happen

By: Lindsey Christ

LINK

The city and teachers' union have been fighting for years over what to do with a pool of teachers who've lost their jobs at schools but are still employed by the school system. Now, it looks like a buyout offer the city hoped to make is unlikely to go through. NY1's Lindsey Christ filed the following report.

There are 1,800 teachers who lost their jobs at schools but are still employed by the school system. Many worked at schools that closed or teach subjects schools have cut back on, like art. They work as substitutes, collecting full salary and benefits. It's up to principals whether to hire them or not.

But the city wants them off the payroll. So in May, Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott announced a somewhat radical plan: he'd offer these teachers the first buy-out program for public employees in recent city history.

"If you're a teacher who can't find a permanent job in our schools after a year, we will offer you a generous incentive to resign and pursue another career," Walcott said in May.

He said it would be the most generous buyout any city has ever offered teachers and he hoped to have it in place by the beginning of the school year. But sources now tell NY1 it may never happen. Meanwhile, the number of teachers without permanent work has swelled, from 800 in May to 1,800 now.

"We are spending more than $100 million on teachers who aren't interested in teaching," Walcott said in May.

But try telling that to the dozens who came to a job fair Wednesday evening hoping to find permanent work.

"I want a job," said teacher Jonathan Dobbs. "I want to teach. I want to be in the classroom."

When the Chancellor announced the buyout, leaders of the teachers union said they were on board and had been asking for a such an option for years. But since then, NY1 has learned that the two sides have not been able to agree on terms because the city's idea of a generous buyout hasn't come close to matching the union's definition of an acceptable one.

Teachers who might qualify were already skeptical.

"They wouldn't offer me enough," said teacher Judith Allainer. "$10,000? Come on. When I'm making much more than that?"

"What would I like?" said Gibbs. "Give me years on my pension. If I'm a 15-year teacher, give me 20 years and I'll take a buyout."

Many say the system is stacked against them finding jobs, saying principals prefer new teachers with much lower salaries.

In fact, minutes after walking into the hiring fair Wednesday, teachers began streaming out.

"It's basically an empty room with five principals," said teacher Caroline Schulz.

"There's no one up there," said teacher Jame Torres. "There's no schools. Mostly math, special ed and nothing is being offered."

The DOE says it expects many will find jobs soon and says negotiations over the buyout continue. But NY1's sources say the chances they'll reach a deal, particularly under the current mayor, are very slim.

Good luck Francesco!

My favorite "I've got The Gotcha Squad on the radar" rubber room teacher Francesco Portelos goes to Federal Court today with his lawsuit against Principal Linda Hill.

Good luck Francesco!!

Betsy Combier

Bronx Health Science HS Puts Kids In A Rubber Room

Rubber rooms are places where a person is put after being removed from a setting they were assigned to. My definition of The Rubber Room is that this is a process, and not a place, but if you want to get a literal definition, a rubber room is a place that is part of a process.

Evidently Bronx Health Science High School believes in putting kids in a re-assignment in order to keep them from lowering school grades.

Happens all the time....let's stop this practice once and for all.

Betsy Combier

Bronx Health Sciences using Rubber Room to pressure kids out: critics

LINK

Posted by or from a variety of publications on EducationViews.org on September 10, 2012

Principal Miriam rivas

It’s a rubber room for students.

The leaders of a Bronx public high school who have illicitly pressured dozens of struggling students to transfer out in recent years to keep up a 95 percent graduation rate are trying to push out more teens — with the help of an in-school holding pen, critics charge.

Despite an ongoing probe by the city’s Department of Education on the issue, administrators at Bronx Health Sciences HS are allegedly pulling struggling students from class for minor infractions and sticking them in an office with nothing to do — leaving them there for hours, days or weeks until their parents come in for a conference — in a bid to break them.

ADMIT NO EVIL: Principal Miriam Rivas (above) wouldn’t answer questions about Bronx Health Science HS’s ploys to push out students like Lenworth Cuveilje, as reported by The Post in July.

ADMIT NO EVIL: Principal Miriam Rivas (above) wouldn’t answer questions about Bronx Health Science HS’s ploys to push out students like Lenworth Cuveilje, (pictured below) as reported by The Post in July.

At those meetings, administrators have repeatedly been telling parents to transfer their kids elsewhere because of alleged behavioral or academic issues, documents show.

Families identified Assistant Principal Maudi Rodriguez as the main enforcer of the policy.

Senior Lenworth Cuveilje said that he was repeatedly badgered to transfer because of occasional academic struggles and that he finally agreed to go to a new school this summer. His transfer didn’t come through by the start of this school year, and BHS still barred him from attending class last week.

“They wouldn’t let me go to class . . . They made me sit in an office [all day],” the 18-year-old said of his first day of school.

“They said I don’t have enough credits [to graduate on time], so they are trying to make me transfer,” he said. “They have done that to a lot of kids here in the last year.”

Cuveilje’s mom, Camille Mitchell, said she came to a scheduled appointment with Principal Miriam Rivas on Friday but left after being kept waiting for 90 minutes.

“I’m really upset right now because this is crazy,” she said. “I don’t think they should be keeping him out of school.”

Approached outside the school Friday, Rodriguez and Rivas said nothing when asked if they’ve been pushing students out. They refused to confirm their identities before getting into a car together and driving off.

via Bronx Health Sciences using Rubber Room to pressure kids out: critics – NYPOST.com.

Bx. school stashes struggling students to pad stats

By YOAV GONEN, KATE KOWSH and KEVIN FASICK

Last Updated: 6:28 AM, September 10, 2012

Posted: 1:43 AM, September 10, 2012

It’s a rubber room for students.
The leaders of a Bronx public high school who have illicitly pressured dozens of struggling students to transfer out in recent years to keep up a 95 percent graduation rate are trying to push out more teens — with the help of an in-school holding pen, critics charge.
Despite an ongoing probe by the city’s Department of Education on the issue, administrators at Bronx Health Sciences HS are allegedly pulling struggling students from class for minor infractions and sticking them in an office with nothing to do — leaving them there for hours, days or weeks until their parents come in for a conference — in a bid to break them.
At those meetings, administrators have repeatedly been telling parents to transfer their kids elsewhere because of alleged behavioral or academic issues, documents show.
Families identified Assistant Principal Maudi Rodriguez as the main enforcer of the policy.
Senior Lenworth Cuveilje said that he was repeatedly badgered to transfer because of occasional academic struggles and that he finally agreed to go to a new school this summer. His transfer didn’t come through by the start of this school year, and BHS still barred him from attending class last week.
“They wouldn’t let me go to class . . . They made me sit in an office [all day],” the 18-year-old said of his first day of school.
“They said I don’t have enough credits [to graduate on time], so they are trying to make me transfer,” he said. “They have done that to a lot of kids here in the last year.”
Cuveilje’s mom, Camille Mitchell, said she came to a scheduled appointment with Principal Miriam Rivas on Friday but left after being kept waiting for 90 minutes.
“I’m really upset right now because this is crazy,” she said. “I don’t think they should be keeping him out of school.”
Approached outside the school Friday, Rodriguez and Rivas said nothing when asked if they’ve been pushing students out. They refused to confirm their identities before getting into a car together and driving off.
Other students said they’ve been sent to BHS’s rubber room — which is like the holding areas where, until recently, teachers accused of misconduct were sent and did nothing all day — simply for talking to students from another school in the same building, dying their hair or wearing boots instead of shoes.
In another gross violation of DOE policy, students who made minor missteps have allegedly been sent home for the day.
Schools are not permitted to force out unwanted kids, but Mitchell insisted to The Post that BHS made her son fall behind even more by sending him home for forgetting to remove his hat or for wearing dark brown shoes instead of the required black ones.
But she said her son likes his classmates and teachers so much that even when he lacks enough bus fare to travel the 2.3 miles from his Bronxwood home to the Baychester school, he walks.
“Why are they doing this? Why are they torturing him?” she asked. “Every year, it’s the same thing. I spend more time going into the school for meetings than I do at work.”
The Post reported in July that Bronx Health Sciences has forced out so many kids over the years that only 58 students counted toward its 2011 graduation rate out of an initial freshman class of 107.
Since then, hosts of parents and students have come forward to say BHS administrators have tried to pressure them, too — and that the DOE has turned a blind eye to the misdeeds at one of its beloved, new small high schools.
One mom said she was bullied into transferring her daughter because school officials refused to let the girl attend class for two straight weeks, instead keeping her in the Rubber Room and marking her absent. The reason?
She had dyed her hair red — administrators called it a “distraction to the learning environment” — and her mom wouldn’t cave in to the school’s demands that she change it back, the mother said.
Nearly a dozen families said they had been in touch with 311 or the DOE’s Bronx enrollment office on Zerega Avenue to complain about the school’s practices.
That office is the one that had to approve the transfers and would have clearly known that the high number of transfers — nearly all of them instigated by the school — ran counter to DOE policy.
Logs of calls to 311 — which are shared with the DOE — confirm that there have been complaints about student transfers at BHS going back to 2007.
DOE officials launched a probe only in mid-July, after The Post broke the story.
An Education Department rep only said of the latest charges: “This matter is under investigation. The DOE takes these allegations seriously, and if we found them to be substantiated, we would bring disciplinary charges to those involved.”Additional reporting by Gillian Kleiman
ygonen@nypost.com

Standing up for teachers

By Eugene Robinson, Published: September 17

LINK

Teachers are heroes, not villains, and it’s time to stop demonizing them.

It has become fashionable to blame all of society’s manifold sins and wickedness on “teachers unions,” as if it were possible to separate these supposedly evil organizations from the dedicated public servants who belong to them. News flash: Collective bargaining is not the problem, and taking that right away from teachers will not fix the schools.

It is true that teachers in Chicago have dug in their heels against Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s demands for “reform,” some of which are not unreasonable. I’d dig in, too, if I were constantly being lectured by self-righteous crusaders whose knowledge of the inner-city schools crisis comes from a Hollywood movie.

The problems that afflict public education go far beyond what George W. Bush memorably called “the soft bigotry of low expectations.” They go beyond whatever measure of institutional sclerosis may be attributed to tenure, beyond the inevitable cases of burnout, beyond the fact that teachers in some jurisdictions actually earn halfway decent salaries.

The fact is that teachers are being saddled with absurdly high expectations. Some studies have shown a correlation between student performance and teacher “effectiveness,” depending how this elusive quality is measured. But there is a whole body of academic literature proving the stronger correlation between student performance and a much more important variable: family income.

Yes, I’m talking about poverty. Sorry to be so gauche, but when teachers point out the relationship between income and achievement, they’re not shirking responsibility. They’re just stating an inconvenient truth.

According to figures compiled by the College Board, students from families making more than $200,000 score more than 300 points higher on the SAT, on average, than students from families making less than $20,000 a year. There is, in fact, a clear relationship all the way along the scale: Each increment in higher family income translates into points on the test.

Sean Reardon of Stanford University’s Center for Education Policy Analysis concluded in a recent study that the achievement gap between high-income and low-income students is actually widening. It is unclear why this might be happening; maybe it is due to increased income inequality, maybe the relationship between income and achievement has somehow become stronger, maybe there is some other reason.

Whatever the cause, our society’s answer seems to be: Beat up the teachers.

The brie-and-chablis “reform” movement would have us believe that most of the teachers in low-income, low-performing schools are incompetent — and, by extension, that most of the teachers in upper-crust schools, where students perform well, are paragons of pedagogical virtue.

But some of the most dedicated and talented teachers I’ve ever met were working in “failing” inner-city schools. And yes, in award-winning schools where, as in Lake Wobegon, “all the children are above average,” I’ve met some unimaginative hacks who should never be allowed near a classroom.

It is reasonable to hold teachers accountable for their performance. But it is not reasonable — or, in the end, productive — to hold them accountable for factors that lie far beyond their control. It is fair to insist that teachers approach their jobs with the assumption that every single child, rich or poor, can succeed. It is not fair to expect teachers to correct all the imbalances and remedy all the pathologies that result from growing inequality in our society.

You didn’t see any of this reality in “Waiting for ‘Superman,’ ” the 2010 documentary that argued we should “solve” the education crisis by establishing more charter schools and, of course, stomping the teachers unions. You won’t see it later this month in “Won’t Back Down,” starring Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal, which argues for “parent trigger” laws designed to produce yet more charter schools and yet more teacher-bashing.

I’ve always considered myself an apostate from liberal orthodoxy on the subject of education. I have no fundamental objection to charter schools, as long as they produce results. I believe in the centrality and primacy of public education, but I believe it’s immoral to tell parents, in effect, “Too bad for your kids, but we’ll fix the schools someday.”

But portraying teachers as villains doesn’t help a single child. Ignoring the reasons for the education gap in this country is no way to close it. And there’s a better way to learn about the crisis than going to the movies. Visit a school instead.

eugenerobinson@washpost.com

The Deceit of Joel Klein Continues

Readers of this blog may recall that after Vincent Foster - Attorney for Hilary and Bill Clinton, killed himself or was killed, a man named Joel Klein took his place.Joel threatened people, according to Linda Tripp, so that the Clintons could evade scrutiny from the public eye for all their misdeeds while in the White House.

Mike Bloomberg liked this idea of blocking the public from information, so Bloomberg brought Klein to New York City to be the so-called "Chancellor" to evade public school constituents as he altered - oops, "reformed" - the New York City Department of Education into a hybrid public/private entity. The secrecy was sanctioned by the whole strategy being called a matter of "National Security".
I wrote about it on this blog and on my website:

Former NYC DOE Chief Executive Officer Joel Klein and Former Sec. of State Condoleezza Rice Assess Needs of Public Education From The "National Security" Perspective

Now we see that Joel is still up to his tricks:

SYNERGY: News Corp. Exec Uses News Corp. Paper To Attack Teachers' Strike Without Disclosing News Corp. Testing Contracts

BLOG ››› SEPTEMBER 17, 2012 12:33 PM EDT ››› OLIVER WILLIS

LINK25

In an op-ed in Sunday's Wall Street Journal, News Corp. executive vice president Joel Klein attacked the ongoing teachers' strike in Chicago without disclosing his role in administering $4.7 million in educational testing contracts at the heart of the dispute.

In 2010, News Corp. purchased 90 percent of the education technology company Wireless Generation for $360 million, incorporating that company into the education subsidiary of News Corp. now known as Amplify.

Klein, the former schools chancellor for New York City, washired by Rupert Murdoch to run News Corp.'s education division in July of 2010 and is now the CEO of Amplify. While the Journal -- which is also owned by News Corp. -- identified Klein as Amplify's CEO, neither the paper nor Klein himself disclosed that the company has millions of dollars in contracts for the very testing that is a central issue in the strike.

In May, Chicago Public Schools entered into an agreement with Wireless Generation to provide "math assessment services" and "literacy assessment services" to the school district. The math agreement is for "a total cost not to exceed $1,700,000" while the literacy assessment cites a cost "not to exceed $3,000,000." The Progressive Change Campaign Committee first reported on these contracts in a September 12 blog post.

In his op-ed, Klein downplays the teachers' rationale for taking action, writing that the strike "feels more about attitude -- 'the mayor doesn't respect us' -- than substance." In fact, the Chicago Teacher's Union objects to a reformulation of the existing teacher evaluation system which would make standardized tests -- like those administered by Wireless Generation -- count for 40 percent of the score, which will be used to determine teacher pay and whether certain teachers will be laid off.

Union president Karen Lewis said the tests are "no way to measure the effectiveness of an educator" and that "there are too many factors beyond our control which impact how well some students perform on standardized tests such as poverty, exposure to violence, homelessness, hunger and other social issues beyond our control." The union is seeking such scores to weigh less heavily on the teachers' evaluations.

Indeed, reporting in the Journal has highlighted the centrality of teacher evaluations based on standardized testing to the ongoing dispute between teachers and the city. In a September 10 article the Journal noted that the strike has highlighted "a growing national debate over how best to evaluate teachers, set their pay and fire them."

In previous news stories discussing education reform, the Journal has disclosed its financial connection to News Corp. and Wireless Generation. In a May story on education standards, the Journal wrote about "Wireless Generation, an education-technology company owned by News Corp., which also owns The Wall Street Journal." In a January story on the "Race to the Top" education program, they made a similar disclosure. But the paper has not disclosed the contracts with Chicago Public Schools in their coverage of the strike.

Wireless Generation has previously been the target of controversy linked to its News Corp. ownership. In 2011, New York City rejected a $27 million contract with Wireless Generation, specifically citing the ongoing criminal investigation into phone hacking by their parent company. State Controller Thomas DiNapoli wrote, "in light of the significant ongoing investigations and continuing revelations with respect to News Corp., we are returning the contract with Wireless Generation unapproved."

GEM/ATR Committee: Advice To CTU on Protecting The Hiring Pools

Dear Sisters and Brothers in the Chicago Teachers Union,

The GEM/ATR Committee's advice on how to be vigilant in protecting the integrity of hiring pools:

1. We wish to warn you that, if left unchecked, Chicago Public Schools will probably hire new, inexperienced teachers, from organizations such as Teach for America recruits, instead of teachers from your hiring pool. We are saying this based on our experience in New York City. The administration uses budget formulas which powerfully incentivize principals to hire new teachers instead of the excessed teachers from the closed schools. Our administration then presents the fiction that the excessed teachers are undesirable/unemployable, when in actuality the administration just wants to hire new teachers over older teachers, because they cost less to the schools.

2. Again, from our experience, if there is no enforcement provision and there is no transparency on the issue of hires in your city, your BOE, just like ours, will not fully comply with their agreement. To avoid these problems, there should be a joint committee between the union and a board of education that is supposed to evaluate the actual performance of the agreement (which we supposedly have in N.Y.C.), AND that the results be regularly published so that union members can be informed, in order to mobilize union members to hold board of education leaders accountable.  In New York, ATRs --excessed teachers, are in the dark as to whether the agreement is being enforced. We have just learned through the media that our ranks stand at a record 1,800 teachers in the excess pool. (Just from casual conversations, many of us learn of positions that were open but were not advertised/posted, even though they are supposed to be advertised.) In other words, if you do not have enforcement provisions and consequences for the BOE, they will not fully follow the agreement.

3. Union leaders should be given timely information as to the performance of the agreement.  By timely, we mean specific deadlines upon which specific information is shared (such as the number of excessed teachers, which licenses, number of new hires, the licenses of the excessed teachers, and proof of advertising/posting of every filled position.)

4. If the agreement/contract is not followed by a board of education there should be consequences to the board, such as allowing more input from teachers and parents as to policy decisions. For example teachers picked by the union, or parents picked by PTAs, would be allowed to vote on board of education policy making committees.  To unelected boards of education, we would say: "You should have no fear of getting increased democracy in policy decisions, if you just follow through with the agreement."

In solidarity, the GEM/ATR Committee, of excessed NYC teachers. (For full disclosure, we are unrepresented dues-paying members of the United Federation of Teachers.)                                                                                                 gemnyc@gmail.com

Teachers and Principals: Have You Checked Your Growth Scores Yet?

Resources About State Growth Measures

June 26, 2012

Resources for Interpretation of Growth Scores

New! Frequently Asked Questions about Growth Subcomponent Data

NYSED 2010-11 Growth Model for Educator Evaluation Technical Report

External Briefing Presentation on 2011-12 New York State Growth Scores

Principal’s Guide to Interpreting Your Growth Scores

Sample Principal Report–Annotated

Teacher’s Guide to Interpreting Your Growth Scores

Sample Teacher Report–Annotated

Announcement From GEM/ATR Committee Congratulating Chicago Teacher's Union

  September 15, 2012

Dear Sisters and Brothers in the Chicago Teachers Union,

We applaud you in your strong stance in seeking a strong, valid contract, against the odds, with slanders coming from many directions.  

We understand that a major objective in your contract talks has been securing job placement / recall rights guarantees for laid-off teachers following the closure of schools.  

Recognizing that similar anti-teacher strategies are being used in different cities, we would like to warn you of the negative experiences of excessed teachers from closed or down-sized schools here. There is a big gap between what the New York City Department of Education (DOE) has promised and what it has actually done.  

Here in New York City, the DOE has hosted job fairs for excessed teachers in a pool called the Absent Teacher Reserve. The reality is that job recruiters do not treat ATRs with serious consideration. Instead, the principals and other HR officials are welcoming toward new or newer teachers. A central aspect to the principals’ preference is that the excessed teachers usually pull higher salaries. The principals hire the new, inexpensive teacher.

Likewise, the DOE has continued expensive recruitment campaigns and continues to solicit new, untested teachers. The DOE has brief periods of so-called hiring freezes, during which the actual reality is that very few ATRs are placed, and the DOE has a completely unrestricted open door for new hires.

In any agreement, there is the crucial element of contract or agreement enforcement. Fortunately, we have more faith in your union’s inclination to stand by in word and deed to any agreement that you make regarding excessed teachers in hiring pools.

In solidarity, the GEM/ATR Committee, of excessed NYC teachers. (For full disclosure, we are unrepresented dues-paying members of the United Federation of Teachers.)                                                                                                 gemnyc@gmail.com