Skip to content

UFT 2007 Contract

November 13, 2006 am30 6:48 am

In these pages over the next two weeks I will discuss aspects of the proposed new contract.

Let me start at the end. We should ratify this deal. But we should be clear about what we are ratifying. The agreement is mediocre. We don’t lose anything major, nor do we gain much. The money almost keeps up with inflation. We don’t win back anything we lost in the last, awful contract. And there are a couple of provisions that make me nervous.

Then why ratify? Because, it is mediocre, it almost keeps up with inflation… We are not strong enough, our union is not strong enough at this juncture to have done substantially better. We can use the time to strenghten ourselves. We must.
I have posted the Memorandum of Agreement and will be adding the salary schedules when I have a chance. I will add the data directly (I would prefer not to borrow images that can be fuzzy on some monitors).

And as I said at the top, I will be discussing different aspects and provisions over the next couple of weeks.

6 Comments leave one →
  1. November 13, 2006 am30 7:21 am 7:21 am

    What does one do when the UFT contract is percieved to be holding back school reform? I personally do not believe it is but others tend to run back it “the contract” whenever change is asked of them?

  2. November 13, 2006 am30 7:55 am 7:55 am

    My first instinct was to answer flippantly. But I can do better. There are some people who are upset that non-managers should have any control of their own working conditions. Many managers themselves, of course. But also many others who absorb the ideology (which is prevalent here).

    When I hear “the UFT contract” as part of the question, I understand that the question is ideologically driven (thus my first instinct).

    I suspect that one reason the DoE likes the Teaching Fellows so much is that many of them come from backgrounds where at will employment is the rule. Tenure is what many critics of “the contract” are really aiming at.

    “When change is asked of them” Hm. That depends on the change, doesn’t it? Give up our lunch? I wouldn’t. Extend our day? Come in on weekends? Teach four classes in a row?

    Actually, there are many schools, including a large number of small schools, where the staff has agreed to modify part of the contract. This is allowed.

    But there are other small schools where the administrators and a few teachers try to dictate to the rest of the staff. The rest of the staff complies where the union is weak, and are miserable. But where the union functions! In those schools teachers run to the contract when their rights are being threatened. More teachers need to learn how to do that.

  3. Norm permalink
    November 14, 2006 am30 5:20 am 5:20 am

    Your logic makes sense in the context you frame it. Why not take the money and run for now? I question these points:

    “We are not strong enough, our union is not strong enough at this juncture to have done substantially better. We can use the time to strenghten ourselves. We must.”

    I can see an army making a strategic retreat when you know your generals are capable of leading you to victory at some point. if the generals were in charge at a time when the army grew weak, should they be held accountable and can you expect them to be able to lead the way back?

    Why has the UFT leadership, which has been in control forever, had no ability to keep the union from being so weak? Given that fact, and assuming they will continue to be in power, what makes you think they have somehow come up with the magic formula to do what they have not been willing or able to do up to now? Is there a magic bullet? Or must we go back to the basic organizing that built the union in the early days?

    If the answer is the latter, I claim that the current leadership is so satisfied and entrenched and sitting out of harm’s way that they have no reason to be hungry enough to do that gut level work. If they were ever threatened by a serious opposition, something we are very far from seeing, that might do the trick. Which is why I claim that trying to build such a viable movement in the UFT will have the biggest impact on accomplishing what you want to see. In that light I can say that a NO vote would be such a sign as opposed to accepting that we are just too weak to fight. That attitude is so counter to strengthening the union. Can you imagine the conditions the organizers of the UFT faced when a relative few walked out on strike for the first time? That is the kind of toughness and spirit that is needed.

  4. November 15, 2006 am30 3:30 am 3:30 am

    Jonathan:

    I didn’t seem to get an answer from our union on the ATR issue. I wonder why?

    I did hear the buyout that DOE wants to give is $10,000? Is that correct and are they on drugs?

  5. November 15, 2006 am30 8:36 am 8:36 am

    Norm,

    your comment deserves a longer response than “I disagree.” I will try to come back to it.

    Chaz, I haven’t heard a number on the buyout, and there shouldn’t be one yet, which wouldn’t stop the City from floating numbers. I wouldn’t be shocked if it was as low as $10k.

    Who did you address your ATR question to? (and what was the question?)

    Jonathan

Trackbacks

  1. How to Keep Everyone Happy: Negotiations between New York City Mayor’s Office and the Teachers Unions | NYC Mayor's Office & Teacher's Union CBA Proposa

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: