March for Justice on Staten Island
My union and my caucus have called for participation in the march on Staten Island. Saturday, August 23, noon, Bay St and Victory Blvd, near the ferry terminal.
There’s been a flurry of opposition, partly on social media, partly fueled by the New York Post and the like.
Perhaps as a result, the UFT webpage notice is weaker than the UFT action alert (which we received August 14, over the signatures of LeRoy Barr and Ellie Engler). We should not be afraid of the opposition we are seeing. On the contrary, it should strengthen our resolve.
The UFT Action Alert (with flyer – cannot locate it at uft.org) (8/14):
Join the UFT at the March for Justice for Victims of Police Brutality
Please join Rev. Al Sharpton and the family of Eric Garner at a march to demand justice for victims of police brutality.
Date: Saturday, Aug. 23
Time: 11 a.m.
Place: Intersection of Victory Blvd. and Bay St., Staten Island (site where Eric Garner was killed) Directions »
Complimentary transportation will be available from the Brooklyn end of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge at 10 a.m. The march will begin at noon and proceed to the intersection of Hamilton Avenue and Richmond Terrace (site of the Staten Island Police Department), where a rally will take place until
3 p.m.
The UFT webpage notice (8/20?):
March for Unity and Justice
Members of the UFT will be joining the NAACP, Local 1199 and others on Staten Island for a march for unity and justice. We can come together as a community by respecting each other and listening to all voices. The march begins at 12 p.m. at Victory Blvd. & Bay St. and proceeds to Hamilton Ave. & Richmond Terrace for a rally. The march organizers are providing free transportation from the Brooklyn end of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge at 10 a.m.
JD2718 
I’m very disappointed that you actually support using member funds for this police bashing march led by Al Sharpton, a racial arsonist, anti-Semite, and tax deadbeat.
Funds? The amount is trivial.
I think we should be discussing whether or not to support the march. Isn’t that the real point?
And whether Sharpton’s presence (and I’m no fan) is so overpowering that there is no need to address the underlying issue.
But how could these be questions? How can we see disproportionate violence used in the arrest of Black men, not once, not twice, not… how many times should I type this so we understand there is a pattern?
And what will we do? Wait for a better march? That’s a long time waiting for Blacks in New York.
The victims are our students, our colleagues. We have a chance to stand up. We should take it.
No way, Jose. I support the Garner family, but we as a union should not be involved with anything led by Al Sharpton. What’s next a David Duke sponsored event?
How do you support the Garner family? I’ll do it by going to what the media are calling “the Eric Garner march”
You got another idea?
Yes, make a monetary contribution to the family (not Sharpton). Call your legislators. Write blogs. If you want to march do so with another sponsor.
give ceaser what belongs to ceaser… persons ain’t politics.
one means “caeser”. i guess.
no, wait. caesar. i promise never to do this again.
What you think and do as a private citizen is your right but when you represent 80,000 members and decide, without consulting those members, to take a controversial action that requires using member funds for an Al Sharpton directed action is just plain wrong.
If you were arguing against anyone going to the march, I would have an easier time responding. We have a clear disagreement.
But focusing on the process is weak. The decision is controversial because those who oppose it (including you) say it is. And despite what I think about this leadership’s weaknesses, deciding to support or not support a rally during the summer is something that I believe is reasonable for them to do without calling an emergency Delegate Assembly.
They could have called for an Exec Board e-mail ballot? Sure, and maybe that would have been better – but it wouldn’t have changed the outcome. (New Action’s not unanimous on this – there might have been one or two no votes or abstentions. Unity members might privately disagree, but the only protest would have been those failing to respond to the ballot – 100% of Unity Exec Board members responding would have concurred)
But yeah, if your disagreement is political, I would prefer to discuss the politics, not the process.