James Eterno writes:
The UFT will claim their behind the scenes strategy worked here. Let's hope this is not just an exception. It took an enormous effort just not to have one disastrous interim acting principal appointed permanently.In fact it was the students who led the action.
But oh the distortions coming from the UFT leaders -- I'm too kind to call them outright lies -- but when I heard Manhattan borough rep Dwayne Clark get up at an ex bd meeting and defend the actions of District 4 rep in the CPE1 situation I almost spit up my Philly cheese steak sandwich - (well actually I was already in the process of doing so anyway - which is why some of us are eating BEFORE the Ex Bd meeting.)
Clark defended the district rep and uft reaction and there should be push back. When Peter and I met with with CPE1 people over a year ago a major complaint was UFT seeming to side with admin. I mean why else ask MORE to meet other than UFT wasn't helping? That it took you guys showing up a year and a half later is a sign of dysfunction in the UFT- maybe intentional dysfunction since we hear similar complaints from other districts. In most places there is little support and admin wins.
Why do so many teachers say UFT officials do not take their side but seem to take the side of admins?
The UFT hierarchy does not view itself as teacher advocates but as mediators between the rank and file and school, district and central administration. For them to say they are working behind the scenes means they are negotiating -- but are they making minimal demands like the fact that almost the entire staff of CPE1 came under investigations that led nowhere and 3020a charges against teacher leaders makes Garg unacceptable as principal and the UFT must say that privately and publicly.
DOE communications to parents of CPE1 and to the activists show that they are not looking to remove Garg - which is not acceptable. (The DOE is offering "instructional support." Like master teachers in progressive ed need more PD.)
In fact, Jonathan Halabi helped parents write the reso rejected by the DA and the Ex Bd and sent it to Leroy Barr saying that everything in that reso is negotiable except for return of teachers and Garg must go -- he got no response.
In fact the UFT will never call for a principal removal due to CSA being an ally -- that's like Trump allying with ISIS.
Our reps on ex bd must continue to pound this point.
UFT passivity in face of massive assault on teachers = complicity.
James Eterno touches on this at the ICE blog where he reports on the end of the Jahoda reign at Townsend Harris HS
At the April Delegate Assembly, the UFT refused to support a resolution raised by the elected Delegate from CPE 1calling in part for the Union to work to remove Principal Garg from that school. The Union believes that back channel communication with the DOE is the best way to go. UFT Secretary Howie Schoor in speaking against the CPE 1 resolution said that once we pass a resolution calling for the principal to be removed, it stops all communication with the Board of Ed. That strategy is questionable after both the Delegate and Chapter Leader from CPE 1 have been removed from the school. Directly going after school union representatives is not acceptable...Watch the UFT take credit when in fact they should have been going after Jahoda after she gave Bronx HS CL Peter Lamphere 2 U ratings and wiped out the math dept.
The UFT had years to hound the DOE on leaving her out there but did nothing. Then put her in THHS? Wasted almost a full academic year?
The DOE can do that because UFT allows them to without repercussions. If some process was in place - checks and balances on who gets appointed, principals like Garg would never have been able to set foot in CPE 1 in the first place.
The UFT leadership plays the dangerous game of offering up bogus and superficial support.
See NYC Educator: UFT Delegate Assembly--We Still Love CPE 1, But We Still Won't Pass a Resolution in Favor of CPE 1
At this Monday's Ex Bd meeting, MORE/NA must hold the leadership's feet to the fire.