Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community

Sunday, January 17, 2016

Ed Boland Writes About His Experience As A Teacher in The Battle For Room 314

Anyone who works in NYC schools can see that we - parents, friends, social workers, teachers, administrators and advocates - are not doing enough to prepare kids to learn by setting up an environment which coincides with the cultures that exist both inside and outside the school.

Kids from families (rich and poor) who live day-to-day with hostile people inside their homes and outside, on the streets, learn to survive in many different ways. The current education system judges and discriminates against children for learning how to survive in the manner they have learned from their parents, or the people they interact with everyday.

There are not enough people or programs to re-direct negative behavior into positive outcomes.

The book "The Battle For Room 314 by Ed Boland seems to address the issue, and I commend him for putting this issue again in the public eye.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com


My year of terror and abuse teaching at a NYC high school


In 2008, Ed Boland, a well-off New Yorker who had spent 20 years as an executive at a nonprofit, had a midlife epiphany: He should leave his white-glove world, the galas at the Waldorf and drinks at the Yale Club, and go work with the city’s neediest children.
The Battle for Room 314: My Year of Hope and Despair in a New York City High School” (Grand Central Publishing) is Boland’s memoir of his brief, harrowing tenure as a public-schoolteacher, and it’s riveting.
Ed Boland
There’s nothing dry or academic here. It’s tragedy and farce, an economic and societal indictment of a system that seems broken beyond repair.
The book is certain to be controversial. There’s something dilettante-ish, if not cynical, about a well-off, middle-aged white man stepping ever so briefly into this maelstrom of poverty, abuse, homelessness and violence and emerging with a book deal.
What Boland has to share, however, makes his motives irrelevant.
Names and identifying details have been changed, but the school Boland calls Union Street is, according to clues and public records, the Henry Street School of International Studies on the Lower East Side.
Boland opens the book with a typical morning in freshman history class.
A teenage girl named Chantay sits on top of her desk, thong peeking out of her pants, leading a ringside gossip session. Work sheets have been distributed and ignored.
“Chantay, sit in your seat and get to work — now!” Boland says.
A calculator goes flying across the room, smashing into the blackboard. Two boys begin physically fighting over a computer. Two girls share an iPod, singing along. Another girl is immersed in a book called “Thug Life 2.”
Chantay is the one that aggravates Boland the most. If he can get control of her, he thinks, he can get control of the class.
“Chantay,” he says, louder, “sit down immediately, or there will be serious consequences.”
The classroom freezes. Then, as Boland writes, “she laughed and cocked her head up at the ceiling. Then she slid her hand down the outside of her jeans to her upper thigh, formed a long cylinder between her thumb and forefinger, and shook it ... She looked me right in the eye and screamed, ‘SUCK MY F–KIN’ D–K, MISTER.’
It was Boland’s first week.
At the time, Boland’s new school was considered a bold experiment — not a charter but an “autonomous” one, given freedom in both management and curriculum. It was endowed in part by the Gates Foundation, and the principal hired only teachers who had once lived abroad.
Boland had taught English in China. This was his favored school — advertised as the last, best hope for kids who had fallen far behind — and he was thrilled to be hired. He went home to his then-boyfriend (now husband) and celebrated over takeout pad Thai and an expensive bottle of red wine.
“I was ready to change lives as a teacher,” he writes.
How wrong he was.
There were 30 kids in his ninth-grade class, some as old as 17. One student, Jamal, was living in a homeless shelter with his mother; most of the other students lived in public housing. There was one white kid in the whole school.
“It was as if Brown v. Board of Education or desegregation had never occurred,” Boland writes.
He had rounded up his students into a semicircle and checked for forbidden items: phones, electronics, sunglasses, clothing in gang colors.
Then someone kicked in the door.
And there, Boland writes, “stood one Kameron Shields in pure renegade glory, a one-man violation of every possible rule. Above the neck alone, he was flaunting four violations: He wore sunglasses and a baseball cap over a red bandanna over iPod headphones. A silver flip phone was clipped to his baggy jeans. Everything he wore was cherry red — the hallmark color of the Bloods.
“He turned his grinning face to the ceiling and howled, ‘WASS ... UP ... N—AS?’
Boland was outmatched. He was petrified. He ran out the clock and asked his fellow teachers who this kid was.
“Oh, yeah, he’s brutal,” one colleague said. Turned out Kameron had thrown a heavy electric sharpener at a teacher’s head the year before, but the principal — whom the teachers sarcastically called their “fearless leader” — refused to expel any student for any reason.
Two weeks in and Boland was crying in the bathroom. Kids were tossing $110 textbooks out the window. They overturned desks and stormed out of classrooms. There were seventh-grade girls with tattoos and T-shirts that read, “I’m Not Easy But We Can Negotiate.” Their self-care toggled in the extreme, from girls who gave themselves pedicures in class to kids who went days without showering.
Kameron was in a league of his own. “I was genuinely afraid of him from the minute I set eyes on him,” Boland writes. After threatening to blow up the school, Kameron was suspended for a few months, and not long after his return, a hammer and a double switchblade fell out of his pockets.
The principal gave up. Kameron was expelled.
“Oh, they getting real tough around here now,” one student said. “Three hundred strikes, you out.”
Here among the kids who couldn’t name continents or oceans, who scrawled, “Mr. Boland is a f—-t” on chalkboards, who listed porn among their hobbies, were a few who had a shot.
There was Nee-cole, who wore thick glasses and pigtails. She was quiet, smart, much more childlike than her peers, and Boland felt for her. He was also intrigued by a tough girl named Yvette, who showed flashes of insight and intelligence yet did all she could to hide it. “PLEASE DON’T TELL ANYONE I WROTE THIS,” she scrawled on one report.
He asked his fellow teachers about the enigma that was Yvette. “One day in class, I intercepted a note,” said a colleague, Tasneen. “It said, ‘Yvette b—s old guys for a dollar under the Manhattan Bridge.’ We punished the girl who wrote it for spreading lies.”
Soon after, the school heard from Child Protective Services. The prostitution rumor was true. Yvette was removed from her home. “She’s not doing it anymore,” Tasneen said, “but she’ll never outrun that story.”
The bookish Nee-cole was also a target, but things were tolerable — until parent-teacher night. Nee-cole’s mother showed up wheeling a suitcase down the hall, listening to Donna Summer on a Discman. She wore off-brand jeans, rainbow leg warmers, a ratty orange vest, dreads festooned with ribbons and shells, and a face tattoo of pin curls where hair should be.
Boland was flummoxed. He closed the classroom door.
She introduced herself as Charlotte and explained Nee-cole’s history: Her daughter had been enrolled in Harlem, but when her mother saw the school was on the city’s list of underperformers, she pulled Nee-cole out and home-schooled her.
“But we didn’t have a home, so I made do and taught her where I could, mostly on the subway, for the year.”
She went on to explain that she had to put Nee-cole in foster care. “I love my child beyond words and am still very involved with her life,” Charlotte said. “Her education is my priority.”
After that meeting, Nee-cole’s life at school was never the same.
“Nee-cole’s mother is a HOBO,” the other kids would say. “Did you get a look at her? Mama look like a homeless clown.”
Boland came to actively loathe most of the student body. He ­resented “their poverty, their ­ignorance, their arrogance. ­Everything I was hoping, at first, to change.”
His colleagues gave him pep talks, reminded him to contextualize this behavior: These kids had no parents, or abusive, neglectful ones. Most lived in extreme poverty. School was all they had, and it was their only hope.
A lifelong liberal, Boland began to feel uncomfortable with his thinking. “We can’t just explain away someone’s horrible behavior because they have had a tough upbringing,” he argued back. “It doesn’t do them — or us — any good.”
Then there was Jesús Alvarez, boyfriend of Chantay and, as Boland writes, “a perfect s--t.” Jesús would stroll by Boland’s classroom and shout, “Bolan’, who you ballin’? It ain’t no chick.”
Boland called in the father, even though he was warned it would do no good. The three sat down, and Boland was surprised.
“Jesús, this is a good school,” the father said. He warned Jesús that it was either school or the street, and Jesús wasn’t tough enough for the street. “You get yourself right, get an education, and show this man some respect.”
It was the one thing that had gone well so far. “I left that meeting brimming with confidence,” Boland writes. “Involving parents was key.”
Next, he turned his attention to Valentina, a transfer student who joined his class in February. She wore tight jeans over what Boland calls “an epic derriere,” and as she walked to her seat, the kids oinked and mooed.
“Step down, all y’all n---as, or I’ll stab you in your neck,” Valentina said. “Don’t get me tight, bitches.”
Boland soon learned Valentina was what the Department of Education calls “a safety transfer” — meaning she was such a threat to her fellow students that she was pulled out of school.
Now here she was, Boland’s newest charge. He was quickly impressed with her observational skills — a bar he had set extremely low, now the victim of some inner-city form of Stockholm syndrome.
Asked to write about an ancient sculpture of two royals, Valentina wrote, “Well, isn’t it obvious that they are a couple? His hand is on her t—y ... The way they sit is ­regal.”
It was the use of the word ­“regal” that blew Boland away. He pulled her aside after class.
“You can’t fool me,” he told her. “I can tell from just that one sheet of paper that you have a very fine mind.”
For that, he received an official complaint of sexual harassment, filed by one Valentina. She claimed Boland said, “You are mighty fine, you turn me on, and I can tell you like fooling around.”
The entire administration knew Boland was gay, yet they still had to follow procedure. He was never to be alone with Valentina again.
By the time he invited a highly decorated Iraq War veteran to speak to class and Valentina greeted him with, “Hey, mister, give me a dollar,” Boland thoroughly despised her.
Nor could he escape the kids outside of school. One winter day, Bolan was mounting his bicycle, on his way home, when he saw a gang fight break out in a parking lot. He saw Jesús in the crowd, and an older man egging the kids on. “That’s it, Nelson, show that punk-ass bitch who’s boss. Whale his ass.”
It was Jesús’ father.
Angry and humiliated, Boland relayed this latest heartbreak to a veteran teacher. “As crazy as sounds,” the teacher said, “that ­father may be trying to teach his son how to survive in a hostile ­environment the only way he knows how.”
Boland didn’t know what to ­believe anymore. At the end of the school year, he quit.
Boland ends his book with familiar suggestions for ­reform: Invest more money, recruit better teachers, retool the unions, end poverty. But there’s no public policy for fixing a broken kid from a broken home, or turning fear into resilience, or saving kids who can’t, or won’t, be saved.
Toward the end of his tenure, Boland asks his sister Nora, a longtime teacher, for help. What is he doing wrong? What could he be doing right? Why can’t he break through to these kids, even the ones who seem to care? How can society absorb such a massive ­human toll?

“I’ve been teaching for a long time now,” Nora tells him. “And my only answer is that there are no easy answers.”

Friday, January 15, 2016

NYSUT and 3020-a

In 2014 I posted the article below after seeing some terrific, wonderful teachers fired for no legitimate reason after a 3020-a where their NYSUT Attorney did not, in my opinion, defend properly.

I want to emphasize that many of the NYSUT Attorneys are very nice people and I like them but I would not choose to have them defend me if I was charged. I do not work for NYSUT, the UFT or the DOE.

I think that an Attorney must fight for the client's rights vigorously.

Betsy Combier
ADVOCATZ
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
betsy.combier@gmail.com
212-794-8902

How Bad Is NYSUT as Providers of Due Process at 3020-a Arbitration?

My opinion is that the NYSUT/UFT "play along to get along" with Mike Bloomberg has caused the destruction of the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of effective, professional, caring teachers and staff of the New York City Board/Department of Education ....all members of the UFT....for at least the past 10 years. Their goal was to get tenured teachers out of public schools because Mike Bloomberg hated tenure protections and the thought that someone could not be fired in a second for no reason other than that the administrator wanted this person gone. This is good business, says Mike and Jack Welch (pictured below).


I guess everyone knows that you do not have to use NYSUT to defend at 3020-a. Right?
You can use a private Attorney and team, use a friend/advocate as your assistant, or you can do the 3020-a yourself  "Pro se"

My telephone number is 212-794-8902 and my email address is betsy.combier@gmail.com; you can call me to ask questions about how 3020-a arbitration works.

Thus you should find out what you need to know by seeking information on your own. A person brought to 3020-a arbitration is given paperwork with Education Law 3020-a when they are charged. Few read it. Everyone should, but teachers seldom are lawyers too, so they rely on their NYSUT Attorney to tell them what it says.

That's a mistake.

Why is it a mistake? Because your Union, the UFT, and the NYSUT lawyers contracted to protect your due process rights at 3020-a, neglect to do that. For example, if you are charged with misconduct, you may get an email from Virginia Lopreto, a criminal attorney who works on contract to NYSUT. If you actually get to speak with Ms. Lopreto you are lucky. She will tell OSI, SCI, OEO that you refuse to speak with any of them, and then you will never hear from her. Here is a letter written by a member who had that experience (I have removed the name of the member, because victim's names are not important):

"Dear Ms. LoPreto:
My name is                   (                    to you because you never got my name right). My case was assigned to you because I am a UFT member who has been a victim of a false accusation. I received an email sent by your secretary, which was a copy of the email you sent to Ron Vance, from the SCI.  The second and last email that you sent to me was a copy of an email you sent to Mr. Vance, stating that I have the right not to answer his questions. After that, I called your office several times with questions that were never answered. In fact, I could never get in touch with you either by phone or in person. You didn't offer me any support, knowing that I didn’t even have knowledge of the accusations leveled against me. I felt very uncomfortable when told by Mr. Vance, at the time that he had been trying to get my declaration over the phone without legal representation or witness,  that if the UFT lawyer will tell me not to provide information to him, that he would end up closing my case. I wanted to share that with you and I needed some of my questions answered, but it never happen. On May 14, I received the report of the investigation and a letter from the superintendent on May 23rd. I faxed both those documents to you. I called your office seeking advice on what to do next and you never even returned my calls. I kept calling until a substitute to your secretary called me back and said that you were not going to continue with my case and that if I wanted to proceed I just needed to go back to the UFT, something you did not even have  the decency to tell me directly. I asked him if he could send an email stating your decision and he replied that you were not going to send me anything.

In sum, I really didn't appreciate your treatment. It is not you not proceeding with the case that is particularly troublesome, but you not even bothering to show due respect and consideration to people without whom you wouldn’t even be here. You work for the union because we make it possible for you to get a salary, and there is just no room or excuse for your lack of courtesy to people you have moral, professional and ethical obligation to defend.
I cannot even say it was a pleasure meeting you because you did not even make that possible."

See an email from NYSUT Attorney Paul Brown, to a client who fired him when she received this:

"From: Paul Brown <pbrown@nysutmail.org>
To: 
Sent: Wed,  2013 
Subject: Re: - WITNESSES

I have an ethical obligation not to put on witnesses that I believe will be damaging to your case.  I have confirmed with one of my supervisors and with several colleagues at my office that the witnesses you suggested will offer little, if any, substantive value and will open the door to many more potential problems. .....
Please call me should you have any further questions.

Paul K. Brown
New York State United Teachers
Below is the Education Law 3020-a (1) and (2)(a):

NY CLS Educ § 3020-a  (2014)


§ 3020-a.  Disciplinary procedures and penalties

   1. Filing of charges. All charges against a person enjoying the benefits of tenure as provided in subdivision three of section [fig 1]
 eleven hundred two, and sections [fig 2] twenty-five hundred nine, [fig 3] twenty-five hundred seventy-three, twenty-five hundred ninety-j, three thousand twelve and three thousand fourteen of this chapter shall be in writing and filed with the clerk or secretary of the school district or employing board during the period between the actual opening and closing of the school year for which the employed is normally required to serve. Except as provided in subdivision eight of section [fig 4] twenty-five hundred seventy-three and subdivision seven of section twenty-five hundred ninety-j of this chapter, no charges under this section shall be brought more than three years after the occurrence of the alleged incompetency or misconduct, except when the charge is of misconduct constituting a crime when committed.
 
2. Disposition of charges.

a. Upon receipt of the charges, the clerk or secretary of the school district or employing board shall immediately notify said board thereof. Within five days after receipt of charges, the employing board, in executive session, shall determine, by a vote of a majority of all the members of such board, whether probable cause exists to bring a disciplinary proceeding against an employee pursuant to this section. If such determination is affirmative, a written statement specifying [i] the charges in detail, [ii] the maximum penalty which will be imposed by the board if the employee does not request a hearing or that will be sought by the board if the employee is found guilty of the charges after a hearing and [fig 1] [iii] the employee's rights under this section, shall be immediately forwarded to the accused employee by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested or by personal delivery to the employee.
New York State School Boards Association is no fan of teachers' rights, either:
See ON BOARD from 2007

However, as NYC has no school board, NYC is not technically a member of NYSSBA. Several years ago I went to the NYSSBA annual conference as Press at the NY Sheraton Hotel, and sat at the only table with any seats, the NYC table. I sat next to Courtenaye Jackson-Chase. At the same table were leading names from the Office of Legal Services, such as Judy Nathan. In the program, my name and the name of the former General Counsel (before Courtenaye), Michael Best, Esq. were listed as representing New York City. I sent the post below to a listserv, nyceducationnews on October 28, 2007:

"To all:
As a paralegal and a non-Attorney, I attended an all day seminar on School Law held at the Sheraton Hotel on Thursday, October 25, 2007. The seminar was part of the New York State School Boards Association conference.
The book that all participants received describes Open Meetings Law and the requirement that all Executive Sessions of a public body be voted on in a full meeting, and minutes are taken during the subsequent Executive Session where a majority votes on probable cause.
Therefore, all the votes taken and teachers terminated by a vote of the PEP members in Executive Session over the past 5 years are contrary to the law. The NYC BOE has required all persons interested in obtaining a copy of the tape of each meeting to file a Freedom of Information request, therefore the NYC BOE has substantiated the belief that the PEP is a public body. A powerless one, as Michael Best wrote to me “The PEP has no administrative or executive functions”.
Further news distressing to anyone in the New York City school district (NYC and boroughs) who would like to have any voice at all in creating policy or deciding complaints/issues: New York City has the largest school system in the nation, but was not represented at the NYSSBA conference. The only attendees listed from NYC Area 13 were me and Michael Best, a presenter of the “Contract For Excellence” session. Two other people from NYC (who kindly sat next to me at my table) were Ms. Judy Nathan and Ms. Courtenaye Jackson-Chase, both listed as “Attorney” for the NYC BOE.
We thus have a quasi-legal system set up to prevent any opposition to a resolution/vote/consent set by the Mayor/Mr. Klein.........
We have no right to get an independent decision on any complaints we may have, as everyone making decisions on grievances/special education hearings belong to Joel and Mike.
Gosh, how could we get in this position?"
David Bloomfield answered with Open Meetings Law, Sections 105 and 106
As we all now know, NYC does not have a school board/employing board and no longer has Executive Sessions at the PEP meetings. When the PEP did hold Executive Sessions, the group violated Open Meetings Law Section 105 by having the Session before the public meeting began. I used to speak at the public meeting part of the monthly PEP meeting, and ask for the reason for that, as well as a tally of each member's vote. Joel Klein would not nicely tell me to sit down, shut up and my time was up. I would say that my time was not up, but he would not give me an answer. Still don't have one.

In fact, if you look at the Notice of Determination of Probable Cause(paperwork sent to all teachers/employees charged with 3020-a), the date of the Executive Session at which probable cause was voted on, is blank. I posted the probable cause notice received by Francesco Portelos with his permission. There is no date for the Executive Session listed. Superintendent Erminio Claudia
Superintendent Cludia

testified at Francesco's 3020-a that there WAS an "Executive Session", namely when she met with "legal" on Francesco's case and they "found" probable cause for his charges. I would suggest that this meeting is not what is cited in the law, Open Meetings Law, or 3020-a(2)(a). Where did she get this version?

So in all cases brought to 3020-a arbitration, probable cause is determined improperly. Without the proper determination of probable cause according to Education Law 3020-a (1) and (2)(a), arbitrators appointed to hear 3020-a cases have no subject matter jurisdiction to decide on whether there is Just Cause for any penalty.

This is what NYSUT doesn't want you to know. In fact, your NYSUT attorney may rush you into a pre-hearing and then a full hearing/resignation/retirement/fine and settlement without any time to discuss the charges against you. NYSUT states in letters to those who opt to hire a private attorney or advocate, or do the 3020-a themselves:

"...changes to the Education Law negotiated by the UFT and the Board supercede the statutory provisions. Even though you are not utilizing NYSUT legal counsel, your case must be processed pursuant to the disciplinary procedures negotiated by the UFT and the Board. You do not have the right for your case to go forward pursuant to the Educational Law as it exists without the negotiated changes contained in Article 21 (G).(scroll to p. 113)."

No mention of probable cause found as required by Education Law 3020-a. But NYSUT isn't saying that the Law isn't there, just that you cannot use it for your case.

Bulloney.

This is, in my thinking, the biggest error of NYSUT representation. Because without a probable cause determination in an Executive Session of the employing board, and a vote by a majority of members, you are left with anyone "finding" probable cause, and charging you with something that may or may not be true. The arbitrator hears only what the NYC DOE wants him/her to hear.

But arbitrators on the NYC permanent panel are paid $1400/day, and if they agree that probable cause has not been properly determined they wont get paid. So the arbitrators deny the dismissal of the case on any grounds, or there will be no payment coming their way.

Teacher discipline and termination are what the Department of Education calls "their business". It's not only a business, it's a partnership. With NYSUT and the UFT.

Tuesday, January 5, 2016

David Suker: A Final Word on His 6-Year Ordeal Ending in His Precedent-Setting Win in Court

David Suker, a teacher/whistleblower of the improper conditions in the classrooms for his at-risk students in the Bronx, gives below an inside look at his life after he was placed in the infamous rubber rooms by the Gotcha Squad.


He never gave up, and won not only his job back, but more than $250,000 as well as the admiration of New York City and all teachers who have, are, or will be similarly charged. There is hope out there.

From David:  

"The saga of my current ordeal, the three year termination of my ability to teach in NYC schools, and subsequent reinstatement by some of the highest courts in New York, specifically the New York State Supreme Court and the Appellate Division, oddly began back in August of 2008 on my way to the Democratic National Convention in Denver to witness history. Barack Obama was being nominated, and as a licensed high school social studies teacher, I wanted to say that I was there. Well that didn't happen.

While riding my Vespa Scooter to the convention from New York City, about 100 miles from Denver I was blindsided by an 18 wheeler from behind. It's safe to say I was lucky that I escaped with my life -- a broken jaw, some really bad scrapes and nothing more. I took three months off to recuperate, but when I came back to teach I was placed in a stairwell, outside of the main office, where the main office to my program, GED-Plus was located, with no teaching responsibilities. At the time I thought this was odd, but I was just glad I was alive and back to making a living. I didn't view this as punishment, but now with hindsight, I see how vindictive this system can be.

The reason I was sitting in the stairwell – I sat there for over a month before the administration of GED-Plus grudgingly sent me back to my site to teach my GED students -- had nothing to do with my competency but did have everything to do with my big mouth. You see, my principal, Robert Zweig, had been appointed Deputy Superintendent to District 79 (the district composed of alternative high schools and programs) a year previous, but his appointment was held up because of allegations that he had a liaison with an assistant principal. The investigation took about a year and I'm pretty sure he was cleared, but I suspect that now he was in a position of even more power, he felt emboldened to go after those teachers who had been speaking out about him and his leadership of the program.

The previous incarnation of GED-Plus was called OES, or Offsite Educational Services, and that was closed in June of 2007. Principal Zweig was promoted, the teachers had to reapply for their jobs, and we were all very nervous. Few people spoke out, but I did and now I see the price was huge. I was put in the Rubber Room for 18 months shortly after being placed back in the classroom in 2009, but no charges were ever brought.

The Rubber Rooms were supposedly closed in June of 2010, and in October of that year I finally went back to teaching. I wasn't sent back to my old site on 145th Street in Harlem where I had previously been so successful, helping get over one hundred students their GED's over a three year period in a one teacher site.

No, I was sent to a dumping ground for teachers and students alike at Bronx Regional High School, a GED-Plus "Hub" with multiple classrooms where our 17-21-year-old students were the most disenfranchised in the system. This ESL/Literacy/Pre-GED site was where I was to be kept an eye on by my principal. I know this because I was standing outside my AP's door on my first day there and I overheard his conversation with her.

Things at this new site were not terrible by NYC standards, but even I was surprised at the lack of concern for moving our students into more advanced programs. All the administration cared about was attendance and enrollment. At the end of the year I was given an Unsatisfactory rating and a $1,000 fine for the ten absences. Most of my absences revolved around the care for my dad who has Parkinson's, but Zweig didn't bother to ask.

Then Occupy happened. I was arrested at the lead of the march across Brooklyn Bridge and four more times. I plead guilty to one violation, and was found guilty of of another because I ignored the lawful order to get off the bridge. I was happily an "Occupier" and teacher and felt the two could coincide. That thought didn't last very long. At the time of my third arrest, the DoE removed me from the classroom, placed me in a "working" Rubber Room and started a full-on 3020-a termination hearing against me.

The DOE started digging up the most minuscule offenses from my past to charge me with. When even that wasn't enough to silence my criticism of the DOE and its policies affecting at-risk youth, a "memo" was sent. The DoE wanted to know where my daughter lived because she was at a NYC high school and in 10th grade, and I was living part-time in Long Island, taking care of my dad.

Without my knowledge, they interrogated my daughter at least three times, finally getting her to admit that she lived in the Bronx with her mom. My daughter never told me or her mother about any of this because of the shame and responsibility that she felt for getting me in trouble. They sent undercover investigators to her house and to the management company for the apartment in which she lived. They also knew her mom's and my dad's automobile license numbers and were secretly watching them for some substantial amount of time, which I learned from all the details in the Special Commission of Investigations report that I first saw during the middle of my 3020-a proceedings.

This final charge of "defrauding" the DoE was what got me fired. The problem with that charge is that I never committed fraud, plus the charges went back years ago, to when she was in kindergarten, 1st grade, and 5th grade, when I applied and enrolled my daughter into the three public schools that she attended. This fraud charge was erroneous because I was living in multiple addresses in the districts where my daughter’s schools were located and I didn’t have a permanent address from the time my daughter was in kindergarten.

There is a three year limit for which you can bring 3020-a charges and this "fraud" charge was clearly past that point, because my daughter was in her 2nd semester of 10th grade. They tried getting around this by arguing that this was "criminal" conduct, but never attempted to prove this was a criminal offense to the arbitrator, let alone in criminal court.

The fraud charge was thrown out in 2013 by the New York Supreme Court and the remaining charges were remanded to another DOE arbitrator for punishment less than termination. Here is an excerpt from the Supreme Court decision from Judge Alice Schlesinger:

"As this Court stated earlier, the school’s leadership did not want petitioner Suker to remain there as a teacher. They did not like him or approve of his actions. They believed he was insubordinate, that he did not conduct himself properly, that he was getting arrested too often, and probably that he was not a team player. It is possible that much of that is true. But with the exception of the two episodes involving disruptive students, which had occurred almost three years earlier in 2009 and had not resulted in discipline, no one has claimed that David Suker is not a good and/or effective teacher.

Finally, it should be noted that the conduct spelled out in Charge 3, regarding a false address for his daughter, never involved Suker’s own school and never would have been discovered but for the DOE’S decision to target Suker to see if an investigation could find something to be used against him, which it did. But that “something” should not be a basis for terminating this tenured teacher, for the reasons already discussed.”



But the DOE refused to give up, and appealed the case to the Appellate Court, where they lost once again, wasting another two years of my life and thousands more in taxpayers’ dollars.

The lesson that I've garnered from this more than seven year odyssey is that the system is irrevocably broken, but that at least a few teachers can seek out and find justice, myself included. Imagine though for a second what happens to the student that is caught up in a similar Orwellian nightmare, which I'm guessing is not all that uncommon.

If I almost succumbed to multiple threats over the past several years and I'm a veteran, father, and "educated professional," with everything to live for, then what are our students and their parents facing? It's those nightmares that I try to avoid when I fall asleep at night, but the reality isn't so kind.

Thank you for listening. :)"

-- David Suker

Former Teacher Theresa Reel Won $450,000 Settlement in 2012 After Being Abused at the School For Legal Studies in Brooklyn

NYC settles with teacher who claimed students harassed her

A former teacher at a Brooklyn high school who claimed she was sexually harassed and verbally assaulted by her students has agreed to a $450,000 settlement from the city of New York, her attorney and school officials told CNN.
As part of the settlement, Theresa Reel, 52, resigned from the School for Legal Studies in Brooklyn in exchange for having poor ratings on her employment record cleared, her attorney said.
The settlement was reached ahead of a trial that was scheduled to begin earlier this month.
"I think we had a very strong case," said attorney Joshua Parkhurst, "but this way my client can go on with her life."
Reel told CNN she was subjected to continuous verbal assaults and sexual harassment by students, who she claimed touched her breasts and wrote insults against her on a desk, shortly after she began working at the school in 2005.
The educator said she reported the students' behavior to the school multiple times, but the principal's response was worse than inadequate.
"I was told I wanted to make the school look bad, I was called a troublemaker," she said. "That was the worst for me: that my employer reacted this way. I felt so worthless."
In May 2008, Parkhurst wrote the New York City Department of Education to complain about the harassment allegations and the school's response, and to ask for compensation. He said his client in some instances had been reprimanded or threatened with discipline if she insisted the school administration take action in response to an incident.
The department responded that in each instance of reported misconduct, the students involved were "disciplined and/or dealt with appropriately," and that no poor job performance marks against Reel were "a result of reporting any incident involving a student."
The department also said that in the course of its investigation, it was advised of an occasion in which Reel "wore a low-cut, V-neck, lace top while teaching one of her classes." The senior counsel wrote that "she should dress in an appropriate manner when working at school and teaching her classes."
Reel said she made multiple requests for a transfer from the school before filing a discrimination lawsuit.
In May of this year, a judge ruled that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to decide the case and set the trial date for September 10. The city made its settlement offer before the trial began.
The education department said it does not comment on ongoing lawsuits or settlements, but the New York City Law Department issued a statement saying the agreement was based "on an assessment of the City's best interest in this case, which included obtaining an agreement from the plaintiff to leave the DOE's employment and not seek to be employed by our school system again."
When she took the job at the Brooklyn high school, Reel said, she had already been teaching at the high school level for seven years.
"I am not a 22-year-old without any experience. I know how to handle a class," she told CNN on Friday, but this experience was so bad that it brought her to the brink of suicide.
"Every school year I hoped the situation would get better but it didn't," Reel said. "I just didn't see the light at the end of the tunnel. I was emotionally and physically drained."
Now, she says, she is happy to go on with her life.
"I also hope what I did will empower other school teachers to go forward with similar cases."
Reel said she is "relieved" by the settlement and would like to look for a new job, probably in another state.

Sunday, January 3, 2016

Workplace Bullying

MORE General Meeting Saturday, January 16 12-3PM

Jia Lee, MORES Candidate for UFT President



MORE's First General Meeting of 2016- Saturday, January 16th 12-3pm
A discussion led by UFT Presidential Candidate, Chapter Leader, and Opt-Out Parent Jia Lee about the impact on our profession from teacher ratings based on test scores, value added measures, and check-box rubrics. We will explore the alternatives: peer review, student learning objectives, portfolio assessments, long term mentoring, inter-disciplinary/inter-grade collaboration, among other ideas.
CUNY Graduate Center - 34th st and 5th ave midtown NYC
Room: 5414
We will use some of our time together to prepare for the Spring UFT Elections
Pizza, coffee, soft drinks will be served
Childcare will be available by reservation- please email more@morecaucusnyc.org
The Stronger Together Caucus of NYSUT, our statewide union caucus is hosting a conference in Long Island. Saturday, January 9th 9am-2pm
Restoring Power to the Teacher
Jia Lee will join Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association and ST Caucus President Beth Dimino for a morning panel. This will be followed by workshops and time to meet participants from Labor Notes, Young Teachers Collective, Buffalo Teachers Federation, and other NYSUT locals that are part of St Caucus.

JFK Middle School
200 Jayne Blvd, Port Jefferson Station, NY 11776

MORE will have a table at the event if you want to join in person, pick up our latest newsletters, and buy shirts or buttons



MORE-UFT
Movement of Rank and File Educators · United States
This email was sent to betsy.combier@gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here.
You can also keep up with MORE-UFT on Twitter or Facebook.