Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community

Saturday, October 8, 2016

The Principals'/Supervisors'/APs' Union, CSA, Protects Its' Own - If You Play The Game Right

The Council for Supervisors and Administrators is a very tight ship when it comes to fighting for their own Executive Board Members. It is very hard to go after a principal on the Executive Board who is scamming the public, committing fraud, perjury, or any other wrong. And, if a principal is charged, the CSA picks the arbitrator best suited to getting this administrator off the hook. Commendable! Not.

If only this defense was the right thing to do. With approval from the UFT and NYSUT, CSA is given the authority to do grievances, U-Rating appeals and 3020-a hearings exactly the way they want:

1. witnesses come in and lie - they say that they "saw" something when they didn't, all part of a script prepared ahead of time to get rid of an employee who is creating a problem;

2. principals may testify by telephone at appeals, however the American Arbitration Association rules require the agreement of both sides for a witness to testify by phone. In NYC Appeals the employee is not given a choice;

3. Principals have the right to pursue budgetary requirements of keeping spending within certain limits (i.e. do not pay too much for a senior teacher), and keeping parents from filing lawsuits by protecting the bully student and charging the teacher with the crime, and, other behaviors such as:


  • Name calling, put-downs, and assorted verbal abuse. 
  • Malicious Re-Assignment to different grade levels or course loads
  • Withholding of needed job information and then holding the teacher accountable for it Isolating the teacher from colleagues by room assignments or by direct requests to colleagues so that colleagues disappear from interaction with the target teacher
  • Giving unachievable amounts of work, over loads of problem cases, or larger class sizes than others with no supports
  • Being shut out of desirable special projects or projects with stipends or status. 
  • Constantly being made to move to a new classroom, work from a cart, or do additional non-teaching duties
  • Being called into ambush meetings where the teacher is caught with no witnesses and berated or threatened.
  • Labelling the teacher as negative for asking any questions in meetings or in emails
  • Overt berating in meetings or in front of colleagues and students. 
  • Undermining with parents by not backing in parent-school interactions
  • Low evaluation scores without actual prescribed observations or reading standards data supplied.
  • Short deadlines for surprise data collection or project assignments.
  • Criticism of evidence based practices in favor of newer or different unproven methods
  • Agressive physical behavior approaching and occasionally including physical attack.

Of course we cannot forget the money incentives to do well. Principals get monetary rewards for getting their schools to "do better" - either honestly, or by scrubbing, cheating, or lying.... Any way they can, getting  Performance Differentials:

Input your File#  and  your Last Name 


  Multi Year Performance Differential to be Paid 6/30/15

   Principals receive an additional $2,500 for winning two consecutive years and an additional $7,500 for winning three consecutive years or three out of five years.  Assistant Principals receive half of those amounts for meeting the same criteria.  If a Principal who has received a multi-year performance increase of $7,500, whether as a result of three consecutive performance increases or three out of five years, and continues to receive a performance increase the following year(s) the Principal continues to receive a $7,500 multi-year performance increase for each consecutive year won.  Similarly, an Assistant Principal meeting the same criteria will continue to receive $3,750.  The Multi Year Performance Differential will be paid on the 6/30/2015 paycheck for active members and on the 7/9/2015 Supplemental Payroll for members that have retired or separated from service.

  Please follow the link below to determine if you are on the list of Multi Year Performance Differential recipients provided to us by DOE.  If you believe you are eligible for the Multi Year Performance Differential and are not on this list please contact Monica McDonald at monica@csa-nyc.org  and provide the following information:

Name, File # and the years that you received the CSA Performance Differential along with the DBN of the school for each year. 

 Most importantly, all of the people who you see below are protected from any harm or litigation simply because they are CSA insiders, Executive Board Members.
Rushell White, Principal of MS 226

 See Rushell White, for instance, who is pictured above at her school MS 226, and below on the CSA Executive Board. 

 I have posted many stories about her already:

MS 226 Principal Rushell White Key Words: Making the School Look Good Through Discrimination, Retaliation, and Harassment

Why is JHS 226 Principal Rushell White Still in Her Position Despite Documented Wrong-Doing? (March 19, 2016)


CSA Executive Board


Staten Island (below)


Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, October 6, 2016

State Senator Jeffrey Dinowitz and His Chief of Staff Allegedly Blocked Minority Out-of-Zone Students From Enrolling in Riverdale's PS 24


Jeffrey Dinowitz
AP Verdi says that Dinowitz wanted to keep black and hispanic kids out.

PS 24 AP Manny Verdi Sued Melodie Mashel, Superintendent of District 10; Mashel Quits


State Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz Is Accused of Blocking Minority Students From Enrolling at PS 24 in Riverdale


Betsy Combier

Racial Bias Claim Looms Over Bronx School as Administrators Exit
PS 24
So far, the turmoil at a public school in the Bronx has cost two principals and a district superintendent their jobs, has sparked a lawsuit and has a local assemblyman defending himself against claims that he is trying to keep minority children out of the school. And it’s not over yet.
At the heart of the dispute at Public School 24, the Spuyten Duyvil School, are assertions by Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz and others that administrators — specifically a former principal, Donna Connelly, and the current assistant principal, Manuele Verdi — have allowed hundreds of students who live outside the school’s zone to enroll, causing overcrowding.
Last spring, Mr. Dinowitz sent his chief of staff to participate in the kindergarten registration process at the school and to scrutinize parents’ proofs of residence, in an effort to block out-of-zone students from enrolling. After an investigation, the city’s Education Department found fault with the superintendent, Melodie Mashel, and the then interim principal, Andrea Feldman, for letting the assemblyman’s chief of staff take part in the process and review parents’ and students’ personal information. In recent weeks, Ms. Mashel resigned, and Ms. Feldman was demoted and removed from the school. Their departures were previously reported by The Daily News.
In the meantime, Mr. Verdi, the assistant principal, has filed a complaint in federal court against the Education Department, claiming that Mr. Dinowitz’s real purpose was to prevent minorities and low-income children from enrolling in the school. P.S. 24 serves the Riverdale and Spuyten Duyvil neighborhoods, which are whiter and wealthier than the immediately adjoining Kingsbridge and Marble Hill neighborhoods.
The complaint does not present evidence that anyone who lives in the school zone has been prevented from enrolling, but it portrays Mr. Dinowitz’s focus on enrollment as tinged with bias.

It cites a meeting in November 2009 between Mr. Dinowitz, Mr. Verdi and Dr. Connelly, the former principal, who had recently arrived at the school. According to the complaint, Mr. Dinowitz said that people were misrepresenting their addresses to get into P.S. 24 and that he could tell which children were not from Riverdale “by the way they walk, talk and wear their pants.”
In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Dinowitz said he “never said anything like that,” and he characterized Mr. Verdi’s complaint as “lie after lie.”
“This is about overcrowding, period,” he said. “That’s it. That’s what this is all about.”
Dr. Connelly, however, said that she recalled Mr. Dinowitz using those words.
“He was referring to kids who were not from the community and kids that were black or Hispanic,” she said.
P.S. 24 enrolls children from kindergarten through fifth grade. The school’s population is 42 percent white, 41 percent Hispanic, 8 percent Asian and 7 percent black. Twenty-seven percent of students receive free or reduced-price lunch. On the most recent round of state tests, 57 percent of third through fifth graders were proficient in reading, while 62 percent were proficient in math, compared with 38 percent and 36 percent citywide.
The elementary schools in nearby Kingsbridge are all largely Hispanic, and the vast percentage of their students receive free or reduced-price lunch. One, P.S. 207, which serves prekindergarten through second grade, is on the state’s list of persistently dangerous schools. While one of the schools, the Milton Fein School, also does well on annual state tests, the other school with children of test-taking age lags.
P.S. 24’s enrollment has increased dramatically in the past decade, rising to 1,030 students this year from 715 students in 2006-7. The department said the building was now at 122 percent capacity.
Dr. Connelly said that the increase, which began before she arrived, was caused by population growth, not a rise in the number of non-zoned students being enrolled.
According to the Education Department, the percentage of non-zoned children enrolled in kindergarten at P.S. 24 fell to about 10 percent in 2015-16 from 13 percent in 2010-11 (not counting the gifted and talented program), while the number of zoned students in kindergarten has grown by 36 percent.
Dr. Connelly said that some non-zoned students were assigned to P.S. 24 by the department. In other cases a parent might come into the school around November, hoping to transfer a child from a low-performing school. If there were seats available in the student’s grade, Dr. Connelly said, she would sometimes let the student in.
She said that accounted for only a small number of children.
“But it was still looked upon as some kind of a threat that I was letting children into the school that don’t belong at P.S. 24,” she said.
Mr. Dinowitz disagreed that population growth could account for the increase in enrollment.
“There has not been a population boom in the neighborhood,” he said.
Mr. Dinowitz’s own two children attended P.S. 24 in the 1990s, even though he lived outside the school zone.
Asked about that, he said it was irrelevant to the present situation, because the school was underused at the time.
“If the school had empty seats, fine, but the school doesn’t have empty seats,” he said.
In the 2015-16 school year, the debate over P.S. 24’s enrollment increase reached a crisis when the school lost its lease on an annex that housed fifth graders. Amid finger-pointing and a dispute about whether Dr. Connelly threw out teachers’ desks, she abruptly announced that she was retiring in October last year.
After her departure, Mr. Dinowitz and others, including the district superintendent, Ms. Mashel, and Ms. Feldman, the interim principal, met at the school in January this year, according to Mr. Verdi’s complaint and a report from the Education Department’s Office of Special Investigations. Mr. Dinowitz again complained about out-of-zone students.
It was then suggested that someone from Mr. Dinowitz’s office could go to the school during the registration process in late March and early April.
Randi Martos, Mr. Dinowitz’s chief of staff, ended up taking part and reviewed families’ documents. Department policy requires parents to provide two documents showing proof of residence, but parents were told they needed three, according to Mr. Verdi’s lawsuit and the Education Department’s investigative report. There is no evidence any zoned families were turned away.
The department’s investigation determined that Ms. Mashel had shown poor judgment and that Ms. Feldman had failed to supervise the registration process and allowed Ms. Martos to review parents’ and students’ personal information. Neither woman responded to a phone call requesting comment.
Despite his concerns about overcrowding, Mr. Dinowitz has opposed calls to build an addition to the school. In the interview, he said the overcrowding problem could be solved simply by enforcing enrollment policies.
The battles have left parents frustrated. Bob Heisler, a former president of the parent association, said he did not believe Mr. Verdi’s charges of racial bias, but he criticized Mr. Dinowitz and other local politicians for showing “no leadership over the years” in dealing with the increased demand for school seats.
“I personally feel that some of the local politicians want to keep Riverdale as they have seen it — the way they remember it from their own childhood — and they’re not open to the changes in the demographics that are going on in that community,” he said.


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

The Teacher Pension Perk For Those Who Can Get It: Tax Deferred Annuity

What the NYPOST does not say, is that teachers approaching retirement and who have high salaries are being charged with incompetency and/or misconduct for no valid reason.

Was the non-defense of the UFT at grievances and in 3020-a a secret side-deal between the Department of Education and the UFT?

Betsy Combier
 betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Teachers are juicing their pensions, and it cost you $1B


UFT President Mike Mulgrew, NYC Mayor Bill deBlasio, Chancellor Carmen Farina


















A little known pension perk available only to New York City teachers cost taxpayers an astonishing 

$1.2 billion last year, a watchdog group reported Wednesday.

The sweet deal guarantees that teachers who sock away money for retirement in a special Tax Deferred Annuity (TDA) receive a 7 percent annual return. In stark contrast, banks currently pay depositors just 1 percent or less on most savings accounts.
And city taxpayers are the de facto guarantors for the high rate of return — on the hook to make up the difference if the annuity falls short of the guarantee.
Knowing a good thing when they see it, increasing numbers of teachers are stashing their cash in the no-lose annuity, the Citizens Budget Commission found.
It said that there are now 137,000 participants in the plan, including 51,000 retirees. But only 3,000 are drawing on their funds.
The rest, according to the commission, are watching their nest eggs grow at a fixed rate available to no other city employee.
And that’s over and above the teachers’ regular pensions.
“You don’t get a guaranteed rate of return with your 401(k). But teachers do” in that special annuity, said CBC research director Charles Brecher.
“It’s a good, positive math lesson for teachers. It’s a bad, negative math lesson for taxpayers. The teachers get this huge taxpayer subsidy. The city should treat the teachers like everyone else.”
Former city labor director James Hanley said the guaranteed 7 percent — which he negotiated down from 8.25 percent in 2009 — is indefensible.
“Nobody else has such a system. This is a little ridiculous. It’s tough to sustain in the long term,” Hanley warned.
The annuity is a voluntary program to supplement traditional government pensions.
Other city employees have them — without the guaranteed 7 percent return.
The sweet deal kicked in when the state Legislature in 1988 allowed teachers to designate all or part of their pension contributions to the fixed-return fund, which at that time was paying 8.25 percent, then close to the return of federal-government bonds.
After the 2008 stock-market crash, the fixed-rate option grew in popularity. In 2007, the annuity fund stood at $7.4 billion. Last year, it held $18.7 billion.
Taxpayer subsidies have also grown, from $238 million in 2007 to $1.2 billion last year.
The CBC urged the city to end the 7 percent guarantee, particularly for new hires.
The CBC pointed out that while government pensions are protected by the state Constitution, the annuity isn’t.
Any changes would require taking on the powerful teachers union.
Mike Mugrew , president of the United Federation of Teachers, argued that taxpayers have actually come out ahead.
“The CBC report neglects to mention that over the last 25 years, the city has actually made a profit from this fund, since its investment returns over that period have exceeded the guaranteed rate of return promised by the TDA,” he said.
Mayor de Blasio’s office had no immediate comment.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Preet Bharara Sued The NYC Department of Education in June 2016 For Discriminating Against Black Teachers At Pan American International High School

From the Complaint:

"In August 2012, Superintendent Mendez selected Minerva Zanca as Pan American’s new principal. During the 2012-2013 school year, Pan American employed 27 teachers, three of whom were black. Throughout that school year, Principal Zanca purposely targeted John Flanagan and Heather Hightower, two untenured black teachers, for unsatisfactory lesson ratings. According to Assistant Principal Anthony Riccardo, Principal Zanca decided to give Mr. Flanagan and Ms. Hightower unsatisfactory ratings before she had seen the lesson she was supposed to evaluate."

 Good work, Mr. Bharara!

 Betsy Combier
 betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials
Principal Minerva Zanca

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Sues New York City Department Of Education For Discrimination And Retaliation At Pan American International High School

LINK

Lawsuit Alleges That the Department Discriminated Against Black Teachers Who Worked at the School and Retaliated Against an Assistant Principal Who Spoke Out Against the Discrimination

Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that the United States has filed a lawsuit against the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (the “DOE”) for engaging in a pattern and practice of discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII. The Government alleges that during the 2012-2013 school year, the DOE permitted Principal Minerva Zanca and Superintendent Juan Mendez to discriminate against every black teacher at Pan American International High School (“Pan American”) and retaliate against an assistant principal who spoke out against the discrimination.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said: “It is nearly unthinkable that, in this day and age, one of the largest and most diverse school districts in the United States would allow racial discrimination and retaliation to flourish. Yet that is what we allege happened at Pan American International High School. Federal civil rights laws prohibit this misconduct. This suit seeks to remedy the violations that occurred at Pan American and ensure that the New York City Department of Education protects its employees’ civil rights in the future.”

As alleged in the Complaint filed in Manhattan federal court:

In August 2012, Superintendent Mendez selected Minerva Zanca as Pan American’s new principal. During the 2012-2013 school year, Pan American employed 27 teachers, three of whom were black. Throughout that school year, Principal Zanca purposely targeted John Flanagan and Heather Hightower, two untenured black teachers, for unsatisfactory lesson ratings. According to Assistant Principal Anthony Riccardo, Principal Zanca decided to give Mr. Flanagan and Ms. Hightower unsatisfactory ratings before she had seen the lesson she was supposed to evaluate.

In connection with her reviews of Mr. Flanagan and Ms. Hightower, Principal Zanca made derogatory racial comments to Assistant Principal Riccardo. Specifically, Principal Zanca stated that Hightower “looked like a gorilla in a sweater,” asked whether Assistant Principal Riccardo had seen Flanagan’s “big lips quivering” during a meeting, complained that she could “never” have “fucking nappy hair” like Hightower, and stated that she had difficulty not laughing at Flanagan because he reminded her of a Tropicana commercial where a black man “with those same lips” danced down a supermarket aisle.

Principal Zanca also discriminated against Lisa-Erika James, a tenured black teacher, by cutting the highly successful theater program Ms. James oversaw. On multiple occasions during the 2012-2013 school year, Principal Zanca attempted to cancel student productions. First, she refused to pay for expenses associated with a production. When money for the production was obtained from other sources, Principal Zanca then claimed that the school could not pay overtime wages for more than five hours of rehearsal per week. Pan American in fact had sufficient money to pay for more rehearsal, and Principal Zanca simply reallocated that money to other projects. Ultimately, the second student production of the 2012-2013 school year was cancelled.

During the spring of 2013, when Assistant Principal Riccardo refused to give an unsatisfactory rating to a lesson taught by Ms. Hightower, Principal Zanca yelled at Assistant Principal Riccardo, accused him of “sabotaging her plan,” and called school security to have him removed from the building. Subsequently, Principal Zanca initiated two complaints against Assistant Principal Riccardo with the DOE’s internal investigatory offices. Those offices determined that Principal Zanca’s allegations did not warrant any charges against Assistant Principal Riccardo. In June of 2013, Principal Zanca gave Assistant Principal Riccardo, Mr. Flanagan, and Ms. Hightower annual performance ratings of “unsatisfactory.”

The allegations that Principal Zanca engaged in discrimination and retaliation were brought to the attention of Superintendent Mendez, but the DOE did not take any disciplinary action against Principal Zanca. Even after the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found reasonable cause to believe that the DOE had discriminated and retaliated against James, Riccardo, and Hightower, Principal Zanca was allowed to remain in charge of Pan American. Neither Ms. Hightower, Mr. Flanagan, Ms. James, nor Mr. Riccardo worked at Pan American after the 2012-2013 school year.

Title VII authorizes the Department of Justice to commence an action in the United States District Court against the DOE to remedy discrimination and retaliation for opposing discrimination. The Complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as compensatory damages on behalf of Mr. Flanagan, Ms. James, Ms. Hightower, and Assistant Principal Riccardo.

In October of 2013, Mr. Flanagan filed a lawsuit against the DOE, Principal Zanca, Superintendent Mendez, and others. That suit was docketed as Flanagan v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ. et al., No. 13 Civ. 8456. On August 21, 2015, Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV recommended the denial of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Flanagan’s Title VII claims for discrimination and retaliation. The DOE has not objected to Judge Francis’s recommendation, and the deadline for doing so has expired. The United States anticipates moving to intervene in Flanagan and to consolidate that case with its own.

The case is being handled by the Office’s Civil Rights Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorney Caleb Hayes-Deats is in charge of the case.

Complaint:

PREET BHARARA
United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York By: CALEB HAYES-DEATS
Assistant United States Attorney 86 Chambers Street, Third Floor New York, New York 10007 Telephone: (212) 637-2699
Fax: (212) 637-2686
caleb.hayes-deats@usdoj.gov

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

16 Civ. 4291

Complaint

Plaintiff the United States of America (the “United States”), by and through its attorney, Preet Bharara, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, alleges upon information and belief as follows:
INTRODUCTION

1. The United States brings this civil action to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., as amended (“Title VII”). As set forth more fully below, the United States alleges in this action that Defendant the New York City Department of Education has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination and retaliation based on race in the hiring, retention, and employment conditions of teachers at Pan American International High School (“Pan American”).

JURISDICTION & VENUE

2. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-6(b) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 & 1345.
3. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), the Southern District of New York is the proper venue for this matter because Defendant is located in this District.
PARTIES

4. Plaintiff is the United States of America.

5. Defendant the New York City Department of Education (the “DOE”) is a person within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(a), and an employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000e(b).

PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF DISCRIMINATION

6. The DOE oversees approximately 1,800 schools and 1.1 million students, making it one of the largest school districts in the United States.
7. The DOE has nearly 135,000 full-time employees.
8. Pan American is located at 45-10 94th Street, Queens, NY 11373, and serves between 300 and 400 students.
9. Defendant is responsible for establishing the terms, conditions, and other practices that bear upon the employment of teachers at Pan American.
10. During the 2012–2013 school year, Pan American employed approximately twenty-seven teachers, eight of whom were untenured.
11. Three of Pan American’s twenty-seven teachers were black. Two of those teachers, John Flanagan and Heather Hightower, were untenured. The third, Lisa-Erika James, was tenured.
12. Anthony Riccardo was the Assistant Principal at Pan American during the 2011– 2012 and 2012–2013 school years.
13. Prior to the 2012–2013 school year, James, Flanagan, Hightower, and Riccardo had consistently received satisfactory performance reviews at Pan American and other schools where they had taught.
14. Following the 2011–2012 school year, Pan American’s principal moved to another position within the DOE.
15. In August of 2012, Minerva Zanca became Pan American’s principal.
16. Juan Mendez, the superintendent of high schools for District 28, selected Ms. Zanca for that position.
17. Under DOE policy, if an untenured teacher receives a rating of unsatisfactory for a school year, that teacher may be discontinued from their employment with the DOE.
18. In the fall of 2012, Principal Zanca explained to Assistant Principal Riccardo that the best method for discontinuing a teacher was to give them multiple unsatisfactory ratings following lesson reviews. According to Principal Zanca, teachers cannot grieve unsatisfactory ratings for lessons, and consistently giving them such ratings will create a record that justifies an unsatisfactory rating for the entire school year.
19. During the fall of 2012, Principal Zanca and Assistant Principal Riccardo reviewed several of Flanagan’s and Hightower’s lessons and rated them unsatisfactory. According to Assistant Principal Riccardo, while other teachers also received unsatisfactory lesson ratings, Flanagan’s and Hightower’s reviews were distinguished by the fact that Principal Zanca would inform him that she intended to give an unsatisfactory rating before she had seen the lesson in question.
20. After one lesson review, Principal Zanca, Assistant Principal Riccardo, and Hightower spoke and agreed that, because Assistant Principal Riccardo had previously taught Hightower’s subject, he would meet with her to help her improve future lessons. Following this conversation, Principal Zanca privately told Assistant Principal Riccardo that he had “better not make [Hightower] a better teacher.”
21. Beginning in December of 2012, Principal Zanca began to make derogatory racial comments to Assistant Principal Riccardo about Hightower and Flanagan. Specifically, Principal Zanca (1) stated that Hightower “looked like a gorilla in a sweater,” (2) asked whether Assistant Principal Riccardo had seen Flanagan’s “big lips quivering” during a meeting, (3) complained that she could “never” have “fucking nappy hair” like Hightower, and (4) stated that she had difficulty not laughing at Flanagan because he reminded her of a Tropicana commercial where a black man “with those same lips” danced down a supermarket aisle.
22. Throughout the winter and spring of 2013, Principal Zanca continued to give both Flanagan and Hightower additional unsatisfactory lesson ratings.
23. James taught Pan American’s theater courses. During the 2011–2012 school year, James oversaw two students productions.
24. Pan American scheduled its first student theater production of the 2012–2013 school year for February of 2013. On the day the students were scheduled to perform the production, Principal Zanca’s assistant called James and informed her that Principal Zanca would not pay for certain costs associated with the production and that James needed to cancel the production. When James attempted to speak to Principal Zanca about this decision, Principal Zanca refused. Ultimately, James agreed to pay the costs out of her own pocket, and the production was not cancelled.
25. Subsequently, Principal Zanca informed James that Pan American could not pay the overtime wages required to allow theater students to rehearse for more than five hours per week. As a result of the reduction in rehearsal hours, the second student production of the 2012– 2013 school year was cancelled. Pan American in fact had sufficient money to pay the overtime wages required for more rehearsal time, and Principal Zanca used additional money that had been budgeted for the theater program to buy Smart Boards.
26. Later during the spring of 2013, Assistant Principal Riccardo refused to give an unsatisfactory rating to a lesson of Hightower’s that he had reviewed. Principal Zanca yelled at Assistant Principal Riccardo, accused him of “sabotaging her plan,” and called school security to have him removed from the building.
27. Principal Zanca initiated two complaints against Assistant Principal Riccardo with the DOE’s internal investigatory offices. Those offices determined that Principal Zanca’s allegations did not warrant any charges against Assistant Principal Riccardo.
28. On May 8, 2013, when Assistant Principal Riccardo was absent, Principal Zanca arranged to have Eduardo Medrano, an assistant principal at another high school, review a lesson taught by Flanagan. Assistant Principal Medrano did not review any lesson by any other teacher at Pan American during the 2012–2013 school year. Assistant Principal Medrano rated Flanagan’s May 8, 2013, lesson unsatisfactory.
29. On June 3, 2013, Flanagan filed a complaint regarding Principal Zanca with the DOE’s Office of Equal Opportunity (“OEO”).
30. Later in June of 2013, Principal Zanca gave unsatisfactory ratings to Hightower and Flanagan for the 2012–2013 school year. No other untenured teacher at Pan American received an unsatisfactory rating for the 2012–2013 school year.
31. Also during June of 2013, Principal Zanca refused to offer James a position as a teacher in Pan American’s summer program even though James had a right to such a position as a full-time, tenured teacher at Pan American.
32. On June 24, 2013, Assistant Principal Riccardo issued a written statement recounting Principal Zanca’s mistreatment of Hightower, Flanagan, and James, including the derogatory racial comments Principal Zanca made regarding Hightower and Flanagan.
33. On June 25, 2013, Principal Zanca rated Assistant Principal Riccardo’s performance during the 2012–2013 school year as unsatisfactory.
34. In late June of 2013, James, Hightower, and Riccardo filed complaints regarding Principal Zanca with OEO.
35. On June 26, 2013, Flanagan sent a letter to Superintendent Mendez responding to his unsatisfactory rating for the 2012–2013 school year and alleging that Principal Zanca had discriminated against him based on his race.
36. On July 1, 2013, a DOE employee signed to indicate receipt of Flanagan’s June 26, 2013, letter to Superintendent Mendez.
37. During late June and early July of 2013, various media outlets reported on Principal Zanca’s mistreatment of Hightower, Flanagan, and James.
38. On July 3, 2013, before OEO had opened its investigation, Superintendent Mendez wrote in an email to other high-ranking DOE officials that Assistant Principal Riccardo’s allegations were “unfounded” and that Assistant Principal Riccardo was “attempting to retaliate for receiving an unsatisfactory rating and discontinuance.” According to Superintendent Mendez, Principal Zanca “deserves our support.”
39. On July 8, 2013, while OEO’s investigation was ongoing, Superintendent Mendez wrote an email to OEO’s Executive Director. In that email, Superintendent Mendez stated that the allegations that Principal Zanca engaged in racial discrimination “are manufactured and untrue.” Superintendent Mendez also stated, “If you need further details, feel free to contact me.”
40. On July 17, 2013, Superintendent Mendez discontinued Flanagan’s employment with the DOE without considering Flanagan’s June 26, 2013, letter.
41. In late July or early August of 2013, James, Riccardo, and Hightower filed timely charges against the DOE with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). Flanagan filed a timely EEOC charge against the DOE in August or September of 2013.
42. After learning of the EEOC charges filed against the DOE by James, Riccardo, Hightower, and Flanagan, OEO administratively closed its investigation without issuing any findings.
43. In August of 2013, Assistant Principal Riccardo met with Superintendent Mendez and discussed his allegations against Principal Zanca. Superintendent Mendez agreed to change Assistant Principal Riccardo’s performance rating for the 2012–2013 school year to satisfactory on the condition that Assistant Principal Riccardo resign from his position, agree not to seek appointment as a teacher, and waive all claims against the DOE or its employees “arising out of the unique and particular facts of this matter.”
44. In October of 2013, Flanagan filed a lawsuit against the DOE, Principal Zanca, Superintendent Mendez, and others. That suit was docketed as Flanagan v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ. et al., No. 13 Civ. 8456 (LAK) (JCF).
45. On February 4, 2014, the EEOC stopped processing Flanagan’s complaint and issued a right-to-sue letter.
46. Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5, the EEOC investigated the charges filed by James, Riccardo, and Hightower and, on May 9, 2014, found reasonable cause to believe that the DOE had discriminated and retaliated against James, Riccardo, and Hightower. The EEOC attempted unsuccessfully to achieve through conciliation a voluntary resolution of the matters, and subsequently referred the charges to the United States Department of Justice.
47. Neither Hightower, nor Flanagan, nor James, nor Riccardo worked at Pan American after the 2012–2013 school year.
48. Principal Zanca remained in charge of Pan American during the 2013–2014 and 2014–2015 school years. The DOE did not take any disciplinary action against Principal Zanca based on her conduct towards Flanagan, James, Hightower, and Riccardo.
49. Superintendent Mendez remains the superintendent of high schools for District

Conditions Precedent to Suit

50. All conditions precedent to the filing of this suit have been satisfied.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Pattern or Practice of Discrimination)

51. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
52. The acts, omissions, policies, and practices described in paragraphs six through forty-nine above constitute a pattern or practice of employment discrimination on the basis of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e- 3(a). This pattern or practice denies black teachers the full exercise of the rights secured by Title VII. Unless enjoined by the Court, the DOE will continue to engage in practices that are the
same as or similar to those that are alleged in this Complaint.

VII. Unless enjoined by the Court, the DOE will continue to engage in practices that are the same as or similar to those that are alleged in this Complaint.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Discrimination Against Flanagan)

53. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
54. The DOE violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) by discriminating against Flanagan on the basis of race.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Retaliation Against Flanagan)

55. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
56. The DOE violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) by retaliating against Flanagan for engaging in protected action, including but not limited to filing a complaint with the DOE’s OEO on June 3, 2013.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Retaliation Against Riccardo)

57. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
58. The DOE violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) by retaliating against Riccardo for engaging in protected action, including but not limited to refusing to give Hightower an unsatisfactory rating in the Spring of 2013 and issuing a written statement on June 24, 2013, that recounted Principal Zanca’s mistreatment of Hightower, Flanagan, and James.

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Discrimination Against Hightower)

59. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
60. The DOE violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) by discriminating against Hightower on the basis of race.

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Discrimination Against James)

61. The allegations in paragraphs one through fifty are repeated and realleged as though set forth fully herein.
62. The DOE violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) by discriminating against James on the basis of race.
WHEREFORE, the United States demands judgment:

(a) declaring that the DOE engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination based on race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000e-3(a);

(b) enjoining the DOE from engaging in discriminatory and retaliatory employment practices in violation of Title VII;
(c) ordering the DOE to take such other steps as may be necessary to prevent and remedy employment discrimination and the patterns or practices of discrimination in employment identified above;
(d) ordering the DOE to provide remedial relief, including but not limited to sufficient damages to compensate Flanagan, Hightower, James, and Riccardo and make them

whole for the losses they have suffered as a result of the discrimination and retaliation alleged in this Complaint; and
(e) granting the United States its costs, disbursements, and such further relief against defendant as the Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: June 9, 2016
New York, New York

PREET BHARARA
United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Attorney for Plaintiff

By: /s/ Caleb Hayes-Deats
CALEB HAYES-DEATS
Assistant United States Attorney 86 Chambers Street, Third Floor New York, New York 10007 Telephone: (212) 637-2699
Fax: (212) 637-2686
caleb.hayes-deats@usdoj.gov


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)