By JAVIER C. HERNANDEZ
Published: October 17, 2008
A federal judge on Friday upheld New York City’s policy prohibiting public school teachers from wearing political buttons in the classroom, but said the teachers could place campaign material into colleagues’ mailboxes and hang posters on bulletin boards maintained by their union, as long as they were in areas off-limits to students.
The split decision came after the union, the United Federation of Teachers, sued over a city rule that requires teachers to remain neutral about politics while on duty to avoid any sense of pressure among students to echo their views. The union, which has endorsed Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, argued that the longstanding regulation had never been enforced and that it curtailed teachers’ right of free speech.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District Court in Manhattan said that it should be up to individual school districts to determine whether buttons in the classroom interfered with learning. He cautioned, however, that “school officials may not take a sledgehammer to freedom of expression and then avoid all scrutiny by invoking alleged professional judgment.”
The judge said that while a majority of students would probably understand that a button represented a teacher’s personal view, there would be “inevitable misperceptions on the part of a minority.”
Ann Forte, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, said, “We won on the issue that was most paramount to us,” and she called the mailbox and bulletin board rulings “secondary issues.”
Norman Siegel, the civil liberties lawyer representing the teachers’ union, said that the union was pleased about Judge Kaplan’s recognition of some First Amendment rights for teachers and that it would continue to push for the right to wear buttons.
There have been conflicting court rulings over how far the government can go in regulating what teachers say in the classroom ever since the Supreme Court’s Tinker case, four decades ago, which proclaimed that neither teachers nor students “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
Schoolchildren have historically been recognized as a distinctly vulnerable group, and schools have enjoyed such paternalistic powers as requiring school uniforms. Courts generally see teachers as role models given extraordinary trust and holding a special influence over their students.
The government, like any business, has the authority to tell its employees what to do so that it can continue to operate effectively. A teacher cannot spend each English period talking about baseball, or each physics class teaching false scientific theories.
The city argued that when a teacher wears a political button in the classroom, it creates an environment of intimidation and hostility toward students who do not share that view. The union, by contrast, argued that students would be able to distinguish between personal and institutional views.
Samuel Issacharoff, a professor of law at New York University, said: “The line we seek to draw is that individuals who are public employees retain the rights of full citizenship in society and do not lose them as a result of being state employees. On the other hand, they can’t use their state employment to accentuate the power of their political views. That’s the tension.”
That tension has been the subject of court cases in several states. The University of Illinois recently came under fire for urging its employees to refrain from attending political rallies and from displaying campaign bumper stickers on campus.
Part of the trouble in arriving at clear legal conclusions is the inevitable gray area that emerges when considering teachers’ roles as instructor and individual. Should teachers be allowed to write letters to the editor? Should they be able to wear buttons while walking from their classroom to the car?
Last week, the unresolved nuances were on display at Middle School 61 in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, where an oversize portrait of Mr. Obama that had been hanging near the entrance of the school was taken down under pressure from the Department of Education. The banner showed the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other black luminaries framed by a blue sky and looking down on the man who could become the nation’s first black president.
“It only gave images of hope,” said Asher Rison, a teacher at the school. “It wasn’t about politics.”
The Department of Education disagreed, saying that whatever the intent, the banner amounted to political favoritism prohibited under the department’s rules.
At schools across the city this week, the fuzzy free-speech questions were reflected in conversations with students, parents and teachers.
At Community School 134 in the Bronx, Ken Chanko, a teacher of writing who wore a small Obama button on his jacket as he left school on Thursday, said that such miniature adornments seemed acceptable, but that large posters should not be permitted.
“I think there is a fine line,” Mr. Chanko said. “I think you can overreact from either perspective.”
Keyshawn Baker, 11, who graduated from the school last year, said that a teacher’s views displayed on clothing would not affect him. “I have my personal opinion about who I should support,” he said.
But Anita Faucette, whose son is in fourth grade at Public School 16 in the Bronx, said she would prefer that teachers keep their political preferences to themselves. “The children are impressionable and young,” she said. “They mimic what they see or they hear.”
At Middle School 61, where the Obama banner was hung, David Rampersad, a Verizon field technician whose 11-year-old daughter attends the school, said that students “should be exposed to politics” but that “they might feel pressure to swing a certain way.”
“They’re too young for this pressure,” he added. “They need to be focused on whatever they are learning in school.”
Ann Farmer and Jason Grant contributed reporting.
Showing posts with label UFT Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UFT Elections. Show all posts
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Saturday, October 11, 2008
UFT Press Release On Educators Wearing Political Campaign Pins in Schools
From: Davene Stern [mailto:dstern@uft.org]
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:49 PM
To: UFT Press
Cc: UFT Press
Subject: UFT Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Department of Education Ban On Educators Wearing Political Campaign Pins in Schools
Ron Davis (212) 598-9201 October 10, 2008
(917) 796-1301
UFT Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Department of Education Ban
On Educators Wearing Political Campaign Pins in Schools
With only weeks to go before the November 4 elections, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) today filed a federal court lawsuit claiming that a New York City Department of Education policy banning educators from wearing campaign pins in schools violates their constitutional rights to free speech and political expression.
The union representing New York City’s public school educators filed the complaint in U.S. District Court in Manhattan seeking a temporary restraining order against the policy, which city schools Chancellor Joel Klein urged principals to enforce in an October 1 e-mail message to administrators in the city’s 1,500 public schools – even though it has not been followed for decades.
The plaintiffs are UFT President Randi Weingarten; Miriam DelMoor, a technology teacher at the George F. Bristow School, CS 134, in the Bronx; Anthony Thompson, a physical education and health teacher at the Wakefield School, PS 16, in the Bronx; Frank Soriente, a common branches teacher at PS 121 in Queens; and David Pecoraro, a social studies teacher at Beach Channel High School in Queens. The named defendants are the New York City Board of Education and Chancellor Klein.
Weingarten outlined the union’s case for reporters during a press conference before she and attorney Norman Siegel and attorneys from the law firm of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP filed the papers at the Southern District courthouse at 500 Pearl Street. She noted that the union has operated in the same way with respect to political speech in schools over two decades, carefully balancing teachers’ responsibilities as professionals and as citizens.
The UFT sent an email message to its union representatives – known as chapter leaders – in city public schools on September 23 regarding the wearing of political buttons during school hours, the hanging of posters and the distribution of other political materials along with regular union distributions. That email message is virtually identical to that which was sent to chapter leaders in 2000 and 2004.
About two days later, the chancellor’s office contacted the UFT to say that the wearing of campaign buttons and the distribution of political materials is prohibited by Chancellor’s Regulation D-130, which requires all Department of Education staff to “maintain a posture of complete neutrality with respect to all candidates” while on duty or in contact with students. It also prohibits the use of school facilities and supplies, including school mailboxes and even bulletin boards designated for UFT use, to express support for any political candidate except “as an integral part of regularly published staff newspapers or newsletters.” That was followed by the chancellor’s October 1 Principal’s Weekly e-mail notice to administrators.
“The ban on members wearing lapel pins is bad enough,” Weingarten told reporters. “Now the Department of Education wants to restrict the communications between the UFT and its members through the regular channels utilized for such communications such as union bulletin boards and employee mailboxes, both of which are out of students’ view.
“The ‘what if’ scenarios the Chancellor has raised have not happened in two decades,” Weingarten continued. “Why would they create shibboleths now simply to deny educators freedom of expression?”
“It doesn’t matter whether you support Democratic Senator Barack Obama or Republican Senator John McCain,” Weingarten said. “As voters, we all should have the right to express our views. By suppressing political expression, the Department of Education is sending the wrong message to our students. We are just weeks away from a landmark presidential election that is being discussed in classrooms and at dinner tables across the nation. Students can only benefit from being exposed to and engaged in a dialogue about current events, civic responsibilities and the political process.”
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:49 PM
To: UFT Press
Cc: UFT Press
Subject: UFT Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Department of Education Ban On Educators Wearing Political Campaign Pins in Schools
Ron Davis (212) 598-9201 October 10, 2008
(917) 796-1301
UFT Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Department of Education Ban
On Educators Wearing Political Campaign Pins in Schools
With only weeks to go before the November 4 elections, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) today filed a federal court lawsuit claiming that a New York City Department of Education policy banning educators from wearing campaign pins in schools violates their constitutional rights to free speech and political expression.
The union representing New York City’s public school educators filed the complaint in U.S. District Court in Manhattan seeking a temporary restraining order against the policy, which city schools Chancellor Joel Klein urged principals to enforce in an October 1 e-mail message to administrators in the city’s 1,500 public schools – even though it has not been followed for decades.
The plaintiffs are UFT President Randi Weingarten; Miriam DelMoor, a technology teacher at the George F. Bristow School, CS 134, in the Bronx; Anthony Thompson, a physical education and health teacher at the Wakefield School, PS 16, in the Bronx; Frank Soriente, a common branches teacher at PS 121 in Queens; and David Pecoraro, a social studies teacher at Beach Channel High School in Queens. The named defendants are the New York City Board of Education and Chancellor Klein.
Weingarten outlined the union’s case for reporters during a press conference before she and attorney Norman Siegel and attorneys from the law firm of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP filed the papers at the Southern District courthouse at 500 Pearl Street. She noted that the union has operated in the same way with respect to political speech in schools over two decades, carefully balancing teachers’ responsibilities as professionals and as citizens.
The UFT sent an email message to its union representatives – known as chapter leaders – in city public schools on September 23 regarding the wearing of political buttons during school hours, the hanging of posters and the distribution of other political materials along with regular union distributions. That email message is virtually identical to that which was sent to chapter leaders in 2000 and 2004.
About two days later, the chancellor’s office contacted the UFT to say that the wearing of campaign buttons and the distribution of political materials is prohibited by Chancellor’s Regulation D-130, which requires all Department of Education staff to “maintain a posture of complete neutrality with respect to all candidates” while on duty or in contact with students. It also prohibits the use of school facilities and supplies, including school mailboxes and even bulletin boards designated for UFT use, to express support for any political candidate except “as an integral part of regularly published staff newspapers or newsletters.” That was followed by the chancellor’s October 1 Principal’s Weekly e-mail notice to administrators.
“The ban on members wearing lapel pins is bad enough,” Weingarten told reporters. “Now the Department of Education wants to restrict the communications between the UFT and its members through the regular channels utilized for such communications such as union bulletin boards and employee mailboxes, both of which are out of students’ view.
“The ‘what if’ scenarios the Chancellor has raised have not happened in two decades,” Weingarten continued. “Why would they create shibboleths now simply to deny educators freedom of expression?”
“It doesn’t matter whether you support Democratic Senator Barack Obama or Republican Senator John McCain,” Weingarten said. “As voters, we all should have the right to express our views. By suppressing political expression, the Department of Education is sending the wrong message to our students. We are just weeks away from a landmark presidential election that is being discussed in classrooms and at dinner tables across the nation. Students can only benefit from being exposed to and engaged in a dialogue about current events, civic responsibilities and the political process.”
Friday, December 14, 2007
UFT Election Analysis: How New Action Did in the Past
UFT ELECTION PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS
(as of April 8, 2001)
by Marian Swerdlow
UFT Delegate FDR High School
member, Teachers for a Just Contract/Class Action
The opinions expressed are those of Marian Swerdlow and do not necessarily reflect those of other members of TJC or Class Action.
Some of the results of the 2001 UFT election are now available, and we can compare them to the results in the last election in 1999.
Total number of members:
1999: 135,452 2001: 145,431
Total number of votes:
1999: 47,995 (34%) 2001: 53,385 (38%)
Votes for Weingarten (Unity):
1999: 35,596 (74.2%) 2001: 40,636 (76.6%)
Votes for Shulman (New Action):
1999: 11,366 (23.7%) 2001: 11,411 (21.1%)
Votes for Macklin (01) and Pessin (99) (PAC:
1999: 1,033 (2.1%) 2001: 1,338 (2.3%)
New Action won back all six high school executive board seats it won in the last election.
A little analysis: We can see that New Action did not lose any absolute support to either Unity or Progressive Action. In absolute numbers, Shulman lost fewer than fifty votes. What happened was that Unity gained in absolute numbers, hence its increased percentage. We may have a better idea where that increase in absolute numbers came from when we see some of the results by divisions. We also see that the membership of the union grew considerably, by about 10,000
members (around 7%). The fact that new hires continue to enter the workplace, while retirees continue to vote in union elections, accounts for some of this increase, although the information is not available to tell how much.
Some personal opinion: There is enough blame to go around for these shameful results. It may be tempting for some to blame New Action. They did run a campaign that was too brief, desultory, and unimaginative. I would argue, however, that they ran the best campaign their activist base permitted. Which leads to the question of why their activist base is so inadequate for the job of challenging Unity effectively.
New Action certainly has not strenuously reached out to attract activists. In fact, it makes it difficult for new people to get involved in New Action. They don't make it as easy as possible to contact them, they don't advertise their meetings and they don't have open meetings. They don't have activities for activists to get involved in, or to do in their chapters. The main activity they offer to activists is putting literature in mailboxes. Not the way to build leadership.
On the other hand, even if they did everything possible to attract, involve and develop activists, it is by no means clear they would be successful. The membership has grown dependent on being told what to do from above. If the leadership calls a rally at City Hall, they will show up in heartening numbers. But they have no initiative, no desire to organize themselves. They may want things to happen, but they don't want to be the ones to make them happen. That is not the fault of New Action. Nor is it patently clear New Action, or anyone, could change that. But New Action has done little or nothing to try.
New Action has approached this election, as every other, with the assumption that Unity was its best organizer, that by its failures, Unity would convince people to vote for New Action. Some New Action leaders felt that taking place as it did in our fourth month without a contract, they would increase their share of votes in this election. That did not turn out to be the case. The reason may be that the membership has grown accustomed to working without a contract: we have worked almost one-third of the last ten years under expired contracts. It is no longer something extraordinary. We have diminished expectations. I think the members accept Weingarten's argument that the best thing to do is to wait out Giuliani. The alternative is militancy, and most members don't accept that alternative.
Ed. Note:
Rumors that New Action is blaming its defeat on critcisms leveled at them by Ed. Notes have not been confirmed. We do know that they will NOT change the way they do things, no matter what the outcome of elections. See next issue for more analysis.
To Our Union Leaders: 92,000 people DID NOT vote for you
(as of April 8, 2001)
by Marian Swerdlow
UFT Delegate FDR High School
member, Teachers for a Just Contract/Class Action
The opinions expressed are those of Marian Swerdlow and do not necessarily reflect those of other members of TJC or Class Action.
Some of the results of the 2001 UFT election are now available, and we can compare them to the results in the last election in 1999.
Total number of members:
1999: 135,452 2001: 145,431
Total number of votes:
1999: 47,995 (34%) 2001: 53,385 (38%)
Votes for Weingarten (Unity):
1999: 35,596 (74.2%) 2001: 40,636 (76.6%)
Votes for Shulman (New Action):
1999: 11,366 (23.7%) 2001: 11,411 (21.1%)
Votes for Macklin (01) and Pessin (99) (PAC:
1999: 1,033 (2.1%) 2001: 1,338 (2.3%)
New Action won back all six high school executive board seats it won in the last election.
A little analysis: We can see that New Action did not lose any absolute support to either Unity or Progressive Action. In absolute numbers, Shulman lost fewer than fifty votes. What happened was that Unity gained in absolute numbers, hence its increased percentage. We may have a better idea where that increase in absolute numbers came from when we see some of the results by divisions. We also see that the membership of the union grew considerably, by about 10,000
members (around 7%). The fact that new hires continue to enter the workplace, while retirees continue to vote in union elections, accounts for some of this increase, although the information is not available to tell how much.
Some personal opinion: There is enough blame to go around for these shameful results. It may be tempting for some to blame New Action. They did run a campaign that was too brief, desultory, and unimaginative. I would argue, however, that they ran the best campaign their activist base permitted. Which leads to the question of why their activist base is so inadequate for the job of challenging Unity effectively.
New Action certainly has not strenuously reached out to attract activists. In fact, it makes it difficult for new people to get involved in New Action. They don't make it as easy as possible to contact them, they don't advertise their meetings and they don't have open meetings. They don't have activities for activists to get involved in, or to do in their chapters. The main activity they offer to activists is putting literature in mailboxes. Not the way to build leadership.
On the other hand, even if they did everything possible to attract, involve and develop activists, it is by no means clear they would be successful. The membership has grown dependent on being told what to do from above. If the leadership calls a rally at City Hall, they will show up in heartening numbers. But they have no initiative, no desire to organize themselves. They may want things to happen, but they don't want to be the ones to make them happen. That is not the fault of New Action. Nor is it patently clear New Action, or anyone, could change that. But New Action has done little or nothing to try.
New Action has approached this election, as every other, with the assumption that Unity was its best organizer, that by its failures, Unity would convince people to vote for New Action. Some New Action leaders felt that taking place as it did in our fourth month without a contract, they would increase their share of votes in this election. That did not turn out to be the case. The reason may be that the membership has grown accustomed to working without a contract: we have worked almost one-third of the last ten years under expired contracts. It is no longer something extraordinary. We have diminished expectations. I think the members accept Weingarten's argument that the best thing to do is to wait out Giuliani. The alternative is militancy, and most members don't accept that alternative.
Ed. Note:
Rumors that New Action is blaming its defeat on critcisms leveled at them by Ed. Notes have not been confirmed. We do know that they will NOT change the way they do things, no matter what the outcome of elections. See next issue for more analysis.
To Our Union Leaders: 92,000 people DID NOT vote for you
Monday, March 12, 2007
Jerry Frohnhoefer, ICE Candidate for Vocation HS VP Bio
I've been teaching English at AV with a short stint at Cardoza HS for the past twelve years.I have been the journalism teacher for the past four and college advisor for the last two and a half. I have been chapter leader at AV for three and a half years, and as such initiated the first fight against the workshop model in the City. We, at AV were able to get serious modifications on the rigid "Columbia" model under the tunnel vision rule of Reyes Irizarry. Our school was one of the school's last year that spoke up against the lack of including Christian religious holiday during these called "spring break". We as a school were also quite active in speaking up on the failure of BloomKlein to respect veterans Day in our schools when all other city and state employees by law had either the day off or a day with pay at their discretion. I also worked for private not-not-for profit groups including Catholic Charities, ENTER INC. (a drug and alcohol free program in East Harlem for seven years, and a street club supervisor for Hotline Cares., also in East Harlem. I have also been an active member of the NYC 23-25 Gladiators, a n amateur boxing club in East Harlem and have served on the Ethics Committee of the Metropolitan ABF. Jerry F.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
2007 UFT ELECTIONS ICE-TJC CANDIDATES
2007 UFT ELECTIONS ICE-TJC CANDIDATES
OFFICERS (11)
All UFT members vote including retirees.
PRESIDENT: Kit Wainer (CC)
SECRETARY: Camille Johnson (D)
ASST SECRETARY: Ellen Schweitzer (CC)
TREASURER: Marilyn Beckford (CC)
ASST TREASURER: Yelena Siwinski (CC)
VICE PRES (ELEM): Lisa North (CC)
VICE PRES (MIDDLE): Josh Kahn (D)
VICE PRES (ACAD HIGH): Arthur Colen (CC)
VICE PRES (VOC HIGH): Gerard Frohnhoefer(CC)
VICE PRES (SPEC ED): Joseph Wisniewski
VICE PRES (AT LARGE): Ellen Fox (retired CC)
EXECUTIVE BOARD (DIVISIONAL SEATS)
ELEMENTARY (11)
These names appear only on the elementary school ballots.
Haley Archibald
Renee Jones
Gloria Brandman
Andrew Rosenberg
Mary Hoffman
Steve Baldari
Joan Seedorf (CC)
Brian Jones
Ethel Mogielnicki
Patricia Dobosz
Victor Mogielnicki
MIDDLE (5)
These names appear only on the middle school ballots.
Frank LoCicero
Michael Mascitti
Angel Gonzalez
Edna O’Keefe
Glenn Rand
HIGH (6)
These names appear only on the high school ballots.
James Eterno (CC)
Jeff Kaufman (CC)
Peter Lamphere (Former D)
Sam Lazarus (CC)
Nick Licari (CC)
Marian Swerdlow (D)
FUNCTIONAL (14)
These names appear only on the functional ballots - every category aside from division - including retirees, secretary, paras, social workers, teachers assigned to the region, etc.
Doreen Nash
Ellen Schoenfeld
Cary Abrams
Bill Palmer (D)
Victor Treschan
Vera Pavone
Robert Martini
Antonella Balsam
Ira Goldfine (retired CC)
Pete Bronson
Kimberly Partington
Maria Giamundo
Deborah Poleshuck (D)
Bob Norman (retired CC)
EXECUTIVE BOARD (AT LARGE SEATS) (42)
All UFT members vote including retirees.
Rachel Barr
Barbara Kaplan-Halper (CC)
Dave Poleshuck (D)
Jonathan Lessuck (former CC)
Pete Bobrick
Barbara Frazier (former CC)
Carolyn Eubanks (D)
Michael Fiorillo (CC)
Joan Heymont (former D)
John Lawhead
Maria Colon (former CC)
Tom Maher (CC)
Tom Crean
Louis Bedrock
John Elfrank-Dana (CC)
Megan Behrent (D)
Katherine Flori
Jeff Brace (CC)
Steve Gallo
Michael Krokondelas
Martin Haber (D)
Angela DeSouza
Diana Hrisinko
Diane Friedline
Norm Scott (retired CC)
Arthur Goldstein (D)
Al Zucker (D)
Joanne Hindy
Marcy Licari (CC)
Janet Iadanza
Bill Linville
John Yanno (CC)
Adam Mazor
Byron Licari
Shannon Ham
Andrea Miller
Kim Mussman
Joe Mudgett (D)
Louise Warren (retired CC)
Mike Wotypka
Eugene Prisco
Larry Taylor (CC)
In addition, there are a number of candidates for AFT/NYSUT delegates, voted on at-large by all union members.
OFFICERS (11)
All UFT members vote including retirees.
PRESIDENT: Kit Wainer (CC)
SECRETARY: Camille Johnson (D)
ASST SECRETARY: Ellen Schweitzer (CC)
TREASURER: Marilyn Beckford (CC)
ASST TREASURER: Yelena Siwinski (CC)
VICE PRES (ELEM): Lisa North (CC)
VICE PRES (MIDDLE): Josh Kahn (D)
VICE PRES (ACAD HIGH): Arthur Colen (CC)
VICE PRES (VOC HIGH): Gerard Frohnhoefer(CC)
VICE PRES (SPEC ED): Joseph Wisniewski
VICE PRES (AT LARGE): Ellen Fox (retired CC)
EXECUTIVE BOARD (DIVISIONAL SEATS)
ELEMENTARY (11)
These names appear only on the elementary school ballots.
Haley Archibald
Renee Jones
Gloria Brandman
Andrew Rosenberg
Mary Hoffman
Steve Baldari
Joan Seedorf (CC)
Brian Jones
Ethel Mogielnicki
Patricia Dobosz
Victor Mogielnicki
MIDDLE (5)
These names appear only on the middle school ballots.
Frank LoCicero
Michael Mascitti
Angel Gonzalez
Edna O’Keefe
Glenn Rand
HIGH (6)
These names appear only on the high school ballots.
James Eterno (CC)
Jeff Kaufman (CC)
Peter Lamphere (Former D)
Sam Lazarus (CC)
Nick Licari (CC)
Marian Swerdlow (D)
FUNCTIONAL (14)
These names appear only on the functional ballots - every category aside from division - including retirees, secretary, paras, social workers, teachers assigned to the region, etc.
Doreen Nash
Ellen Schoenfeld
Cary Abrams
Bill Palmer (D)
Victor Treschan
Vera Pavone
Robert Martini
Antonella Balsam
Ira Goldfine (retired CC)
Pete Bronson
Kimberly Partington
Maria Giamundo
Deborah Poleshuck (D)
Bob Norman (retired CC)
EXECUTIVE BOARD (AT LARGE SEATS) (42)
All UFT members vote including retirees.
Rachel Barr
Barbara Kaplan-Halper (CC)
Dave Poleshuck (D)
Jonathan Lessuck (former CC)
Pete Bobrick
Barbara Frazier (former CC)
Carolyn Eubanks (D)
Michael Fiorillo (CC)
Joan Heymont (former D)
John Lawhead
Maria Colon (former CC)
Tom Maher (CC)
Tom Crean
Louis Bedrock
John Elfrank-Dana (CC)
Megan Behrent (D)
Katherine Flori
Jeff Brace (CC)
Steve Gallo
Michael Krokondelas
Martin Haber (D)
Angela DeSouza
Diana Hrisinko
Diane Friedline
Norm Scott (retired CC)
Arthur Goldstein (D)
Al Zucker (D)
Joanne Hindy
Marcy Licari (CC)
Janet Iadanza
Bill Linville
John Yanno (CC)
Adam Mazor
Byron Licari
Shannon Ham
Andrea Miller
Kim Mussman
Joe Mudgett (D)
Louise Warren (retired CC)
Mike Wotypka
Eugene Prisco
Larry Taylor (CC)
In addition, there are a number of candidates for AFT/NYSUT delegates, voted on at-large by all union members.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Lessons for UFT Activists From LA Union?
A radical change for two union militants
The former dissidents, now powerful insiders, shaped the tough tactics that got L.A. teachers more than just a raise.
By Joe Mathews
Times Staff Writer
February 15, 2007
At United Teachers Los Angeles, veteran classroom instructors Joel Jordan and Joshua Pechthalt were longtime outsiders, considered a bit too radical for a union long known for its progressive politics.
Now, as leaders at the nation's second-largest teachers union, they are applying their ideas in ways that could reshape Southern California's politics and schools.
On Tuesday came the largest practical demonstration of the union's new approach to date: a three-year union contract.
The agreement was sealed after months of unusually confrontational rhetoric and aggressive public protests staged by the union's leaders. And the deal's details — particularly its mandate for class size reduction and new job protections for union activists — reflect the long-standing emphasis by Pechthalt, Jordan and their allies on broadening UTLA's advocacy beyond salary and benefits.
"This contract is a representation of our vision, in a concentrated and limited form," Jordan said after a news conference to announce the agreement.
In the months ahead, union leaders say, they intend to use a similar approach in two other big battles: the March 6 elections, which could reshape the Los Angeles school board, and the implementation of a state law that, if it survives court challenges, could grant Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and perhaps the union itself greater influence over the district.
UTLA's more aggressive stance is personified by A.J. Duffy, the dapper, occasionally bombastic union president who communicates with the membership and tussles with the press. But according to people both inside and outside UTLA, the strategy has been shaped by the little-known Jordan and Pechthalt, self-described "union militants" who now hold key leadership posts.
Jordan, a top staffer, and Pechthalt, a vice president, have long ties to activist politics and to Villaraigosa, a former UTLA staffer who once represented Pechthalt in a grievance against the Los Angeles Unified School District. Along with Duffy and two other allies, Pechthalt and Jordan were unexpectedly swept into power in elections two years ago by a membership frustrated at stalled contract talks.
Their dissident status had been cemented over two decades. They staged demonstrations without the approval of union leadership. They supported bilingual education when California voters didn't, opposed standardized testing as it became popular and questioned whether homework was necessary. They published a newsletter criticizing the labor movement and their own union, particularly its focus on electing school board members to secure power and good contracts.
Instead, they said, UTLA should reinvent itself as the base for a social movement that would engage in aggressive organizing of parents and communities, confront even friendly politicians and use militant tactics rarely employed by staid public employee unions.
"UTLA has never realized its full potential, which is to organize at schools, with teachers, parents and the community," Pechthalt said. "We need to create a broader movement for public education."
But this approach has caused alarm among some in the union and in political circles. Rank-and-file teachers and even other UTLA officers suggest that in their zeal to change the organization, the new union leaders have neglected some of the nuts and bolts of unionism.
"UTLA is a labor union and has the structure and mechanisms and funding and politics of a labor union," said Warren Fletcher, a union chairman at City of Angels School downtown, who has been both ally and critic of Pechthalt and Jordan. "I'm concerned that we're approaching things from the perspective of some sort of grand movement."
Jordan, 64, an avuncular alternative-school teacher, and Pechthalt, a funny, mustachioed social studies teacher, met 20 years ago. They were introduced by a mutual friend, UCLA professor Robert Brenner, a classmate of Jordan's at Beverly Hills High School.
A trumpet player in his youth, Jordan became radicalized during the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley, where he was a student. He left graduate school to teach in the Oakland public schools. He quit to drive a truck and later became an organizer in Los Angeles for Teamsters for a Democratic Union. By 1980, Jordan had returned to teaching. He eventually took a job at Mid-City Alternative School and stayed close to Brenner.
"We both developed the same sort of emphasis, a first principle that the activity and organizing of the membership of a union, rather than the leadership, is the key to power," Brenner said.
Pechthalt, 53, took a class from Brenner at UCLA during the 1980s on social theory and comparative history. Pechthalt was the son of radicals. His father, a Colombian immigrant, was a chicken farmer turned politician who briefly moved the family back to South America when Pechthalt was a child. His mother, a bookkeeper, actively opposed the Vietnam War.
Brenner had a lasting impact on Pechthalt. The professor argues that the world economy and global capitalism are in decline, a view that Jordan and Pechthalt say they share.
"Joel and I developed a critique of the narrow trade union perspective," Pechthalt said. "With the tightening of the economic pie, the only way to challenge that was to build a broad-based social movement for public education."
During UTLA's last strike, a nine-day walkout in 1989, Pechthalt and Jordan organized a rally in Exposition Park with Villaraigosa's help. In 1992, Pechthalt led a one-hour wildcat strike at Manual Arts High School, which included 30 teachers and 1,500 students, to protest cuts. The district tried to discipline Pechthalt; Villaraigosa guided his successful grievance.
About the same time, Pechthalt and Jordan began publishing A Second Opinion, a newsletter that frequently criticized UTLA. Among their contributors were other dissidents, including Julie Washington, now a vice president, and David Goldberg, now union treasurer.
"We need to once more begin transforming the image of teachers as friendly Caspar Milquetoast do-gooders into a unified, mobilized and proud bunch of unionists," Pechthalt and Jordan wrote in August 2004.
By then, Jordan was running a campaign to take over the board of directors and three officer positions with a slate of dissidents called United Action. The slate did not field a presidential candidate, and did not think Duffy, the only challenger to incumbent John Perez, stood a chance.
But Duffy, an unsinkable sort who favors fine suits and two-tone shoes, was undeterred. The son of a Brooklyn insurance executive, he was slow to learn to read and "was a tremendous disappointment to my parents," he said. In his 20s, Duffy moved to Philadelphia, where he lived in a commune and started a day-care center.
After moving to Los Angeles, Duffy earned his teaching credential. He taught social studies at Drew Middle School near Watts and special education at Franklin High in Highland Park. He frequently ran afoul of principals but sharpened his fighting skills in grievances.
Though campaigning for the union presidency on his own, Duffy found he agreed with Pechthalt and Jordan on the need for militancy; United Action endorsed Duffy, and vice versa.
Their timing was good. In February 2005, the frustrated membership elected the entire slate, including Duffy.
The new leaders claimed some victories for their new approach. They persuaded teachers to wear red shirts on Tuesdays as a sign of union solidarity. They pushed the district to reduce some of the mandatory assessments of students that teachers complain take class time. They also supported other unions. Duffy and Pechthalt were arrested during a demonstration in favor of airport hotel workers last September.
The leaders' philosophy also led them to a deal they came to regret with Villaraigosa to support state legislation granting him more influence over the school district.
They opposed his initial bid for a full takeover, instead pressing him behind the scenes to pursue a partnership with the union. The compromise legislation, AB 1381, was negotiated behind closed doors in Sacramento. That secrecy, along with provisions granting more power to the superintendent, upset some of UTLA's rank and file, and opponents gathered signatures for a referendum on the deal.
After AB 1381 became law (it has since been blocked by a judge), members voted to overturn the union's support of the agreement, leaving UTLA an official opponent of the law its own leaders negotiated.
"Many of the current officers of UTLA do not have a clue what the rank-and-file membership has to say about educational reform or raising student achievement or protecting public education and does not seem to take the time to even bother to find out," former union vice president Becki Robinson wrote to The Times after the deal.
The reversal left Villaraigosa deeply skeptical of the union's ability to deliver on any agreement, said sources close to the mayor. In school board races this spring, the mayor and the union are backing different candidates.
Union officers saw the contract fight, in part, as a chance to make amends for AB 1381 — and mobilize as they had promised.
They sponsored a tour of campuses to highlight overcrowding and held two massive rallies of teachers. They broadcast radio ads calling for smaller classes and more authority for parents. And they repeatedly threatened to strike.
"We have to destroy this district," Duffy, 62, told teachers last month at Nightingale Middle School in Northeast Los Angeles. "We have to pull it apart. We have to dismantle it. The only way to do it is with conflict."
The contract was sealed Monday, as the union began a strike authorization vote. District officials said negotiations gained momentum when Jordan personally joined the talks.
The deal produced a 6% raise — less than the 9% the union had previously demanded but more than some school board members thought was prudent. Union leaders, for their part, emphasized their gains on non-salary issues that were often the subject of articles in the old dissident newsletter.
The contract includes both reductions in and caps on class sizes (which will average about one or two fewer students per class). It gives new protection to teachers active in UTLA; anyone transferred for their union activities can appeal to a mediator.
Said their ally Washington, who was on the negotiating committee: "This is just a beginning."
*
joe.mathews@latimes.com
*
Begin text of infobox
Pushing militancy
For 15 years, teachers Joshua Pechthalt and Joel Jordan, now top officials of United Teachers Los Angeles, published a newsletter called A Second Opinion. Among the frequent contributors were current union vice president Julie Washington and treasurer David Goldberg. In articles with headlines such as "The Illusion of Reform Through 'Cooperation,' " A Second Opinion argued that the union should eschew conciliation in favor of more militant public actions. Some excerpts:
On the need to make the union part of a greater social movement:
"Such a movement in the street would of necessity involve those most affected by and involved in education, teachers and support personnel, parents, students and community — as well as other users and providers of human services. Its methods would be mass demonstrations, job actions and direct action, not just traditional lobbying."
— Unsigned editorial, September-October 1991
On the failure to pursue a strike during a previous contract dispute:
"In the final analysis, UTLA leaders refused to lead a strike because they were more concerned about embarrassing our 'friends' in Sacramento than about fighting for a decent contract."
— Editorial, April 1993
On strikes:
"We also have to take on the notion that the people of Los Angeles will view a strike negatively. We can do that by championing genuine school reform that raises per-pupil spending, lowers class size, creates smaller, more humanistic schools and challenges the illusion of reform…. If parents see that UTLA is the only organized force willing to fight for real school reform, we will gain their support whether we strike or not."
— Pechthalt, March-April 2000
On the value of school board elections:
"The current state of negotiations underscores the failure of President Perez and the other officers to offer a strategy that builds the power of the union to win a good contract and improve conditions at the schools. Rather, Perez has prioritized using the union's resources to endorsing candidates, winning friends at the school board and the state Legislature, and then relying on them to deliver the goods."
— Pechthalt, January-February 2005
On testing:
As long as poverty remains pervasive and funding for public education a low priority, we must view the clamor to raise test scores with skepticism. The market mentality that pits students against one another for limited college slots and the possibility of a decent life, while teachers feverishly teach to tests so they can move up the career ladder, is the antithesis of what real education should be."
— Pechthalt, April-May 1998
On former Supt. Roy Romer
Arrivederci Romer
Goodbye, we're not your fools
District of a million administrators
Mini districts full of your dictators
Money spent on bureaucratic waste
Far from our schools
Arrivederci Romer
It's time for us to part
Beaudry, Belmont, Broad call out to haunt us
You make our class size swell so you can taunt us
The Rockies beckon. Can't you hear them calling in your heart?
— Brian Wallace, retired teacher, fall 2004
On the Iraq war:
"The values of tolerance, respect for diversity, alternatives to violence, and critical thinking that we try to instill in our students are also in jeopardy…. Corporate media domination has allowed the Bush administration to get away with selling the American public an ever-shifting package of justifications for war without subjecting them to closer scrutiny."
Jordan, April 2003
JOE MATHEWS, Times Staff Writer
latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-utla15feb15,0,4087307.story?coll=la-home-local
The former dissidents, now powerful insiders, shaped the tough tactics that got L.A. teachers more than just a raise.
By Joe Mathews
Times Staff Writer
February 15, 2007
At United Teachers Los Angeles, veteran classroom instructors Joel Jordan and Joshua Pechthalt were longtime outsiders, considered a bit too radical for a union long known for its progressive politics.
Now, as leaders at the nation's second-largest teachers union, they are applying their ideas in ways that could reshape Southern California's politics and schools.
On Tuesday came the largest practical demonstration of the union's new approach to date: a three-year union contract.
The agreement was sealed after months of unusually confrontational rhetoric and aggressive public protests staged by the union's leaders. And the deal's details — particularly its mandate for class size reduction and new job protections for union activists — reflect the long-standing emphasis by Pechthalt, Jordan and their allies on broadening UTLA's advocacy beyond salary and benefits.
"This contract is a representation of our vision, in a concentrated and limited form," Jordan said after a news conference to announce the agreement.
In the months ahead, union leaders say, they intend to use a similar approach in two other big battles: the March 6 elections, which could reshape the Los Angeles school board, and the implementation of a state law that, if it survives court challenges, could grant Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and perhaps the union itself greater influence over the district.
UTLA's more aggressive stance is personified by A.J. Duffy, the dapper, occasionally bombastic union president who communicates with the membership and tussles with the press. But according to people both inside and outside UTLA, the strategy has been shaped by the little-known Jordan and Pechthalt, self-described "union militants" who now hold key leadership posts.
Jordan, a top staffer, and Pechthalt, a vice president, have long ties to activist politics and to Villaraigosa, a former UTLA staffer who once represented Pechthalt in a grievance against the Los Angeles Unified School District. Along with Duffy and two other allies, Pechthalt and Jordan were unexpectedly swept into power in elections two years ago by a membership frustrated at stalled contract talks.
Their dissident status had been cemented over two decades. They staged demonstrations without the approval of union leadership. They supported bilingual education when California voters didn't, opposed standardized testing as it became popular and questioned whether homework was necessary. They published a newsletter criticizing the labor movement and their own union, particularly its focus on electing school board members to secure power and good contracts.
Instead, they said, UTLA should reinvent itself as the base for a social movement that would engage in aggressive organizing of parents and communities, confront even friendly politicians and use militant tactics rarely employed by staid public employee unions.
"UTLA has never realized its full potential, which is to organize at schools, with teachers, parents and the community," Pechthalt said. "We need to create a broader movement for public education."
But this approach has caused alarm among some in the union and in political circles. Rank-and-file teachers and even other UTLA officers suggest that in their zeal to change the organization, the new union leaders have neglected some of the nuts and bolts of unionism.
"UTLA is a labor union and has the structure and mechanisms and funding and politics of a labor union," said Warren Fletcher, a union chairman at City of Angels School downtown, who has been both ally and critic of Pechthalt and Jordan. "I'm concerned that we're approaching things from the perspective of some sort of grand movement."
Jordan, 64, an avuncular alternative-school teacher, and Pechthalt, a funny, mustachioed social studies teacher, met 20 years ago. They were introduced by a mutual friend, UCLA professor Robert Brenner, a classmate of Jordan's at Beverly Hills High School.
A trumpet player in his youth, Jordan became radicalized during the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley, where he was a student. He left graduate school to teach in the Oakland public schools. He quit to drive a truck and later became an organizer in Los Angeles for Teamsters for a Democratic Union. By 1980, Jordan had returned to teaching. He eventually took a job at Mid-City Alternative School and stayed close to Brenner.
"We both developed the same sort of emphasis, a first principle that the activity and organizing of the membership of a union, rather than the leadership, is the key to power," Brenner said.
Pechthalt, 53, took a class from Brenner at UCLA during the 1980s on social theory and comparative history. Pechthalt was the son of radicals. His father, a Colombian immigrant, was a chicken farmer turned politician who briefly moved the family back to South America when Pechthalt was a child. His mother, a bookkeeper, actively opposed the Vietnam War.
Brenner had a lasting impact on Pechthalt. The professor argues that the world economy and global capitalism are in decline, a view that Jordan and Pechthalt say they share.
"Joel and I developed a critique of the narrow trade union perspective," Pechthalt said. "With the tightening of the economic pie, the only way to challenge that was to build a broad-based social movement for public education."
During UTLA's last strike, a nine-day walkout in 1989, Pechthalt and Jordan organized a rally in Exposition Park with Villaraigosa's help. In 1992, Pechthalt led a one-hour wildcat strike at Manual Arts High School, which included 30 teachers and 1,500 students, to protest cuts. The district tried to discipline Pechthalt; Villaraigosa guided his successful grievance.
About the same time, Pechthalt and Jordan began publishing A Second Opinion, a newsletter that frequently criticized UTLA. Among their contributors were other dissidents, including Julie Washington, now a vice president, and David Goldberg, now union treasurer.
"We need to once more begin transforming the image of teachers as friendly Caspar Milquetoast do-gooders into a unified, mobilized and proud bunch of unionists," Pechthalt and Jordan wrote in August 2004.
By then, Jordan was running a campaign to take over the board of directors and three officer positions with a slate of dissidents called United Action. The slate did not field a presidential candidate, and did not think Duffy, the only challenger to incumbent John Perez, stood a chance.
But Duffy, an unsinkable sort who favors fine suits and two-tone shoes, was undeterred. The son of a Brooklyn insurance executive, he was slow to learn to read and "was a tremendous disappointment to my parents," he said. In his 20s, Duffy moved to Philadelphia, where he lived in a commune and started a day-care center.
After moving to Los Angeles, Duffy earned his teaching credential. He taught social studies at Drew Middle School near Watts and special education at Franklin High in Highland Park. He frequently ran afoul of principals but sharpened his fighting skills in grievances.
Though campaigning for the union presidency on his own, Duffy found he agreed with Pechthalt and Jordan on the need for militancy; United Action endorsed Duffy, and vice versa.
Their timing was good. In February 2005, the frustrated membership elected the entire slate, including Duffy.
The new leaders claimed some victories for their new approach. They persuaded teachers to wear red shirts on Tuesdays as a sign of union solidarity. They pushed the district to reduce some of the mandatory assessments of students that teachers complain take class time. They also supported other unions. Duffy and Pechthalt were arrested during a demonstration in favor of airport hotel workers last September.
The leaders' philosophy also led them to a deal they came to regret with Villaraigosa to support state legislation granting him more influence over the school district.
They opposed his initial bid for a full takeover, instead pressing him behind the scenes to pursue a partnership with the union. The compromise legislation, AB 1381, was negotiated behind closed doors in Sacramento. That secrecy, along with provisions granting more power to the superintendent, upset some of UTLA's rank and file, and opponents gathered signatures for a referendum on the deal.
After AB 1381 became law (it has since been blocked by a judge), members voted to overturn the union's support of the agreement, leaving UTLA an official opponent of the law its own leaders negotiated.
"Many of the current officers of UTLA do not have a clue what the rank-and-file membership has to say about educational reform or raising student achievement or protecting public education and does not seem to take the time to even bother to find out," former union vice president Becki Robinson wrote to The Times after the deal.
The reversal left Villaraigosa deeply skeptical of the union's ability to deliver on any agreement, said sources close to the mayor. In school board races this spring, the mayor and the union are backing different candidates.
Union officers saw the contract fight, in part, as a chance to make amends for AB 1381 — and mobilize as they had promised.
They sponsored a tour of campuses to highlight overcrowding and held two massive rallies of teachers. They broadcast radio ads calling for smaller classes and more authority for parents. And they repeatedly threatened to strike.
"We have to destroy this district," Duffy, 62, told teachers last month at Nightingale Middle School in Northeast Los Angeles. "We have to pull it apart. We have to dismantle it. The only way to do it is with conflict."
The contract was sealed Monday, as the union began a strike authorization vote. District officials said negotiations gained momentum when Jordan personally joined the talks.
The deal produced a 6% raise — less than the 9% the union had previously demanded but more than some school board members thought was prudent. Union leaders, for their part, emphasized their gains on non-salary issues that were often the subject of articles in the old dissident newsletter.
The contract includes both reductions in and caps on class sizes (which will average about one or two fewer students per class). It gives new protection to teachers active in UTLA; anyone transferred for their union activities can appeal to a mediator.
Said their ally Washington, who was on the negotiating committee: "This is just a beginning."
*
joe.mathews@latimes.com
*
Begin text of infobox
Pushing militancy
For 15 years, teachers Joshua Pechthalt and Joel Jordan, now top officials of United Teachers Los Angeles, published a newsletter called A Second Opinion. Among the frequent contributors were current union vice president Julie Washington and treasurer David Goldberg. In articles with headlines such as "The Illusion of Reform Through 'Cooperation,' " A Second Opinion argued that the union should eschew conciliation in favor of more militant public actions. Some excerpts:
On the need to make the union part of a greater social movement:
"Such a movement in the street would of necessity involve those most affected by and involved in education, teachers and support personnel, parents, students and community — as well as other users and providers of human services. Its methods would be mass demonstrations, job actions and direct action, not just traditional lobbying."
— Unsigned editorial, September-October 1991
On the failure to pursue a strike during a previous contract dispute:
"In the final analysis, UTLA leaders refused to lead a strike because they were more concerned about embarrassing our 'friends' in Sacramento than about fighting for a decent contract."
— Editorial, April 1993
On strikes:
"We also have to take on the notion that the people of Los Angeles will view a strike negatively. We can do that by championing genuine school reform that raises per-pupil spending, lowers class size, creates smaller, more humanistic schools and challenges the illusion of reform…. If parents see that UTLA is the only organized force willing to fight for real school reform, we will gain their support whether we strike or not."
— Pechthalt, March-April 2000
On the value of school board elections:
"The current state of negotiations underscores the failure of President Perez and the other officers to offer a strategy that builds the power of the union to win a good contract and improve conditions at the schools. Rather, Perez has prioritized using the union's resources to endorsing candidates, winning friends at the school board and the state Legislature, and then relying on them to deliver the goods."
— Pechthalt, January-February 2005
On testing:
As long as poverty remains pervasive and funding for public education a low priority, we must view the clamor to raise test scores with skepticism. The market mentality that pits students against one another for limited college slots and the possibility of a decent life, while teachers feverishly teach to tests so they can move up the career ladder, is the antithesis of what real education should be."
— Pechthalt, April-May 1998
On former Supt. Roy Romer
Arrivederci Romer
Goodbye, we're not your fools
District of a million administrators
Mini districts full of your dictators
Money spent on bureaucratic waste
Far from our schools
Arrivederci Romer
It's time for us to part
Beaudry, Belmont, Broad call out to haunt us
You make our class size swell so you can taunt us
The Rockies beckon. Can't you hear them calling in your heart?
— Brian Wallace, retired teacher, fall 2004
On the Iraq war:
"The values of tolerance, respect for diversity, alternatives to violence, and critical thinking that we try to instill in our students are also in jeopardy…. Corporate media domination has allowed the Bush administration to get away with selling the American public an ever-shifting package of justifications for war without subjecting them to closer scrutiny."
Jordan, April 2003
JOE MATHEWS, Times Staff Writer
latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-utla15feb15,0,4087307.story?coll=la-home-local
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)