Notes From Washington DC: WTU President George Parker sanctioned by AFT

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=12bcd692752bdccb&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui%3D2%26ik%3D47843a658e%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12bcd692752bdccb%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbRwA-cGQaKSlMUaD7U2ybKo_HyTgA

http://thewashingtonteacher.blogspot.com/

OCT 20, 2010

An Open Letter To WTU members

Dear Washington Teachers' Union Members,

For years, we fought to make sure teacher voices were heard and due process rights were protected. Our actions were required when WTU “Holdover” President George Parker refused to act. Under his leadership, jobs were lost, unfair IMPACT evaluations were created and teachers suffered professional disrespect. Candi Peterson- a WTU Trustee board member and building representative - created theWashingtonteacher.blogspot.com, a reputable DC education online voice for teachers and school personnel in 2008. She has been an intelligent teacher voice and foundation for numerous DC education stories. Nathan Saunders, WTU’s two term General Vice President- spoke expertly as the legitimate opposition voice on education reform efforts which hurt DC students, parents, and teachers. We accurately forecasted teacher/school personnel terminations, oppressive working conditions and performance based mutual consent. We provided facts, analysis, and solutions. We created rallies and demonstrations after Parker “sold out” WTU members.  We worked alongside parents to challenge disproportionate school closings in Ward 5 and some of our poorer sections of the city. This current election, which is more than six months overdue, was forced by our court action e.g. Saunders et al. v. WTU. Visualize our mutual progress if you entrust your vote and WTU resources to us!

We do better because we know better. The WTU can be a voice for members and can negotiate a better contract and improve working conditions. Without a change in President, the current state of confusion, failure to hold union meetings, ineffective advocacy, and weakness will continue to endanger your job and positive working conditions that facilitate teaching and learning. With the current union president - you have no voice. Nathan is the only candidate for union President with world class training in how to be a successful teachers union President. He is a Harvard Law School- Harvard Trade Union Program graduate and earned a Masters degree in Law and Ethics from the National Labor College/University of Baltimore.

If you are wrongfully terminated, it will be too late. Elect a strong President with excellent credentials and experience supported by an effective executive board who support a participative union democracy.Remember, Nathan and Candi have been fighting for you all along! Vote Saunders Slate ! Check out our website @ www.votesaunders2010.com An X mark is all it takes. Place your ballots inside the secret ballot and then send it off in the mailer provided. If you still have not received a ballot call the American Arbitration today @ 800-273-0726.

Nathan A. Saunders: WTU election of officers to be held immediately

Nathan A. Saunders

Candidate for President

Washington Teachers’ Union

P.O. Box 54122 Washington, DC  20032

(o) 202.563.2144 

 email: votesaunders2010@gmail.com     web: www.votesaunders2010.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Friday, August 6, 2010

WTU election of officers to be held immediately

 VOTING Begins This September.

WTU General Vice President Nathan A. Saunders’ efforts help halt disenfranchisement of hundreds of teachers and the WTU Executive Board’s illegal, disciplinary actions. 

CONTACT:        Nathan Saunders, (202) 213-7081;

  Jay P. Holland, Brian J. Markovitz, 301-220-2200

On August 4, 2010, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) issued a favorable ruling for WTU teachers on the status of the WTU election.    AFT exercised its right, as the national union, to hear and decide the issues in lieu of additional litigation from General Vice President Nathan A. Saunders who is currently running for WTU President. 

AFT determined:

1.  An immediate and firm election schedule with voting starting on September 18, 2010 and culminating with the counting of ballots on October 4, 2010;

2.  All WTU members in good standing as of June 2010 will be eligible to vote;

3.  That credible evidence existed that Saunders’ was illegally disciplined by the Executive Board and restored Saunders’ salary and benefits and his right to continue as the General Vice President during the pendency of the election, and

4.  The AFT Executive Council will maintain jurisdiction over the election process, thereby ensuring conformity with their official ruling.

Saunders said, “I am very pleased with the result.  The restoration of my salary obviously lifted a great economic burden off my family’s shoulders.  But more importantly, any further delay in the election could have disenfranchised hundreds of eligible teachers from voting.  Fortunately, that did not come

to pass with AFT’s decision to properly constitute the electorate.  This is huge for the democratic process and the legitimacy of the election.”

Saunders was represented by Jay P. Holland, Esq. and Brian J. Markovitz, Esq.  of Joseph, Greenwald and Laake, LLC .  Mr. Holland noted, “The teachers are the biggest winners in this result because they will have an immediate election.  I want to personally thank AFT President Randi Weingarten for her efforts, which were instrumental in curtailing any further delay.”  Mr. Markovitz said, “AFT clearly recognized the political nature of the disciplinary action against Mr. Saunders.  Fortunately, the ruling thwarted the sitting WTU President’s attempt to bolster his reelection chances by rendering ineligible those teachers who exited the system recently, including those let go this July.” 

Elections Committee Chairperson Claudette Carson, a co-plaintiff represented by Michael J. Gan, Esq. and Mark Gisler, Esq. of Peer, Gan & Gisler LLP, was invaluable in advocating that teachers employed by DCPS through June 2010 would maintain their right to vote. “I am very excited about the upcoming election and look forward to a healthy exchange of ideas with President [George] Parker during the election process.  I want teachers to know that I can fight for their jobs just like I fought for my own,” Mr. Saunders said. 

From Socialist Worker Online - http://socialistworker.org/2010/04/22/lies-to-attack-dc-teachers

Telling lies to attack teachers in D.C.

Brian Tierney looks at the furor over the attempts of Washington, D.C., school officials to hide a budget surplus in order to cut teacher jobs and push a union-busting contract.

April 22, 2010

APPROVAL OF a supposed "breakthrough" teachers' contract for Washington, D.C., teachers is in doubt after anti-union schools chancellor Michelle Rhee admitted that she kept a $34 million budget surplus hidden during negotiations with the union.

Now, a leading critic of the agreement within the union can claim vindication as he seeks votes in May's election for president of the Washington Teachers Union (WTU).

A tentative agreement reached in early April between the D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) and WTU was hailed as a "breakthrough" by so-called school reformers because it allows teachers to opt out of tenure protection in exchange for merit pay that could boost the current maximum annual salary from $87,000 to $147,000.

To pay for the deal, the D.C. schools will get $64.5 million from four private foundations, including the anti-union Walton and Broad foundations, which have been deeply involved in the creation of charters schools outside traditional public school systems. WTU President George Parker worked closely with American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten to negotiate the deal, which took three years to complete.

While granting a 20 percent wage increase for teachers over five years, the proposed contract would not only concede merit pay and privatization of teacher pay, but allows Rhee to retain her prerogative to fire teachers.

Rhee has been a leading national champion of school reform and the charter school movement, which aims to destroy public education though privatization and ruthless attacks on teachers unions. Merit pay--which ties teachers' salaries to unrealistic standards of student performance--is one of the main weapons in the school reformers' union-busting arsenal.

In 2007, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty abolished the school board and named Rhee chancellor of DCPS. Last fall, Rhee faced angry protests by teachers, parents and students after she laid off 266 teachers at the beginning of the school year, citing a supposed budget shortfall.

Rhee continued to claim that a budget gap precluded her from rehiring teachers. In February, as contract talks with the WTU were accelerating, Rhee learned that DCPS in fact had a $34 million surplus--but failed to disclose that fact to union negotiators. The source of the surplus, according to D.C. budget officials, is an accounting error.

"What is curious to many is that Rhee, who knew about this supposed math error much earlier this year, was not transparent and did not provide this information to the D.C. Council," wrote D.C. school social worker Candi Peterson on her blog.

Now, Rhee says she needs the budget surplus money to pay for teacher raises in the proposed contract--even though she already has commitments from the foundations to help make payroll.

Rhee may think she can get away with this because of the blank check she's been given by her powerful backers--which include influential media figures, well-funded school reformers, Mayor Fenty, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and even President Barack Obama. But this mess could stick to her anyway.

Teachers and D.C. City Council members were fuming following the budget surplus announcement, and the WTU renewed its court challenge to the legitimacy of Rhee's layoffs last year. The WTU's initial lawsuit to get the layoffs reversed was defeated after a judge sided with Rhee.

There's major fallout in D.C. politics, too. Rhee's leading critic is City Council President Vincent Gray, who hopes to defeat Fenty in the upcoming mayoral race. The council needs to determine what "strings are attached" to the private money used to fund raises, Gray said. And following Rhee's announcement about the surplus, Gray said, if he were a laid-off teacher, "I'd be about ready to put my hands around somebody's throat. People lost their jobs under a budget deficit that didn't exist."

Similarly, council member Harry Thomas said, "It is unconscionable that teachers have lost their jobs because of faulty data, and it is morally reprehensible to turn around and then use those dollars to fund pay raises." Thomas added: "I will be examining all legislative remedies available to reinstate the teachers who were dismissed."

Meanwhile, the budget scandal turned to farce when D.C.'s chief financial officer, Natwar Gandhi, disputed the chancellor's claims, saying that the surplus now being tapped to fund teachers' raises really doesn't exist after all. Mayor Fenty and Rhee are now sparring with Gandhi's office, claiming that he's backtracking on the initial budget analysis.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

THIS LATEST twist has thrown the entire tentative contract agreement into question a mere week after it was presented to teachers.

WTU President Parker and AFT President Weingarten, who were originally urging WTU members to ratify the contract, are now holding off on the vote until the city confirms that there is sufficient money to fund the baseline 20 percent raises over five years in the collective bargaining agreement.

If the WTU does reject the contract in the wake of the budget-surplus scandal, it will send a shock wave through the union--not only at the local level, but also in the AFT itself.

AFT President Weingarten has staked her credibility on the proposed deal, which, if approved, will inevitably be seen as a model for other local union negotiations. Since Obama took office, Weingarten has tried to straddle a defense of traditional teacher contract gains, like tenure protection, with support for Obama's Race to the Top program, which dangles $4.3 billion in federal money to states and city school districts if they remove barriers to merit pay and charter schools.

In D.C., Weingarten tried to have it both ways--preserving tenure for those who want it, while allowing Rhee to tie the schools' fate to the agenda of private donors. Now, however, Weingarten has been thoroughly embarrassed by the budget surplus debacle.

"This is a very serious situation," said Weingarten. "It's serious for the kids who lost their teachers and for the teachers who lost their jobs. The moment that she knew there was no budget crisis, she had an ethical obligation to disclose that."

Even if it turns out that there is enough money for the new teacher contract, the agreement contains a number of concessions to Rhee's privatization agenda.

Of course, Parker and Weingarten touted the raises in the tentative agreement as a significant victory for teachers, many of whom will be tempted to approve the contract on that basis. If passed, the contract would be a big boost for Parker, who hopes to be reelected in May's WTU election. The pay increase is considerable, especially in relation to surrounding districts, where many teachers are facing pay cuts.

Nevertheless, the 20 percent hike over five years is the window dressing for an agreement that would advance Rhee's crusade to enforce merit pay throughout DCPS. The proposed deal would also allow Rhee to retain her powers to lay off teachers and cut spending.

What's more, IMPACT, Rhee's unpopular teacher evaluation system, would remain in place under the new agreement. IMPACT assesses student progress on standardized tests to determine a teacher's effectiveness. School reformers call this approach the "value-added" model of teacher evaluation, reflecting the reformers' intent to commodify education.

IMPACT is also a tool for union-busting. Since taking office, Rhee has used evaluations based on students' standardized test scores to fire teachers, including vocal critics of her agenda. She also bypassed negotiations to implement a dismissal plan that gives "low-performing" teachers 90 days to improve or face termination.

As one teacher observed on a popular teachers' blog: "Michelle Rhee has given herself a great storeroom full of weapons to get rid of teachers, and we have little or no recourse. What is a 20 percent raise if I'm going to be fired in July under IMPACT? Please read carefully, and don't let the money fool you."

The merit pay program included in the proposed deal also poses major risks for the union. It would allow teachers to make an additional $20,000 to $30,000 a year--in exchange for forfeiting job security and raising student test scores. But those who participate are first on the chopping block when budget cuts cause layoffs: those in the merit pay program would give up hiring options to teachers who opt out of the plan.

For their part, teachers who opt out of merit pay and face job loss, but cannot find a new position, could choose between a $25,000 buyout, early retirement or another year on the job to give them time to find alternative work. But even these options are tied to government and budgetary approval. And in any case, "low-performance" teachers who lose their positions would have none of these options.

In short, the proposed contract is a scheme to divide teachers and undermine tenure rights--which is why it is being funded by the likes of the union-hating Walton family and real estate billionaire Eli Broad.

For most teachers in the district, the involvement of private donors is a major cause for concern. If passed, the contract would allow the leading national forces behind the dismantling of public education to carry out their plan on DPCS.

As Paul Abowd of Labor Notes observed, [1] "Rhee is a good investment for the foundations' corporate-style overhaul of education, which seeks to bust the unions, dismantle schools and turn them over to private charter operators."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

THE WTU and AFT are again focusing on a court challenge of the layoffs. But a bolder fight needs to be waged, one that mobilizes rank-and-file teachers and couples militant action with legal battles in the courtroom.

Rhee is not invincible: despite her powerful backers, among D.C. residents, her approval ratings have plunged considerably over the past year.

But Fenty and Rhee are unlikely to be stopped as long as they continue to enjoy a docile WTU leadership in Parker's presidency. Parker has given a Rhee a free hand to attack the union, push for charters and resegregate D.C. schools. In 2008, Rhee went so far as to praise Parker as "a great union leader" and a "a great union president."

Thus, the May union election will likely be a referendum on Parker's record in dealing with Rhee. Parker's main challenger is Nathan Saunders, the current WTU vice president.

Saunders, who ran on the same slate as Parker in the last union election, broke with his former ally when Parker failed to stand up to Rhee. Saunders charges Parker with being an ineffective union president who has allowed teachers to lose job security, pay raises and benefits.

"I am not campaigning against an individual," Saunders wrote on his Web site. "Rather [I'm campaigning] against reactionary and political responses which continue to unnecessarily burden teachers and yield minimal gains toward a positive public education experience for our children." Saunders continued: "Teachers must be committed to reclaiming our voice in the 'reform' debate as the experts in public education."

A great deal is at stake in both the coming union election and the contract vote--which, depending on the outcome of the budget debate, could be many weeks away. The choice that WTU members make in both will have a major impact on the ongoing war over the future of D.C. public schools.

Reports on Rhee in DC

Commentary at Ed Notes:

From Gotham links on Friday:

• D.C.’s CFO and Michelle Rhee are sparring over whether the school system’s surplus exists.
• Randi Weingarten said she’s “really disgusted” by the D.C. situation, and the union is going back to court.

Here are some reports from Candi Peterson in DC. Follow events on her blog.
4/16/10

Today George Parker, WTU President and Randi Weingarten, AFT President announced their plans to reopen new filings for the RIF'd teachers lawsuit as reported by Loose Lips. What appears strange to me are the premediitated series of events below.

The WTU tentative agreement was signed by Chancellor Rhee and WTU President George Parker on March 19, 2010, the very same day that George Parker withdrew the legal appeal previously filed by the WTU on behalf of RIF'd teachers.

Adding even more insult is the fact George Parker didn't seek the required approval from the WTU Executive Board to withdraw this legal appeal, until six days later on March 25th. These coinciding dates appear all too convenient.

Don't you think this is worth further inquiry by your newspaper, station, blog or organization ?

Candi Peterson

WTU Board of Trustees

Please check out the video on this story about DC teacher firings on The Washington Teacher blog.

Visit: http://thewashingtonteacher.blogspot.com/

D.C. teacher firings prompted by bad math

By: Leah Fabel
Examiner Staff Writer
April 14, 2010

Michelle Rhee (Examiner File Photo) (Examiner)

Erroneous budget calculations brought on the firing of 266 D.C. Public Schools teachers in the fall, Chancellor Michelle Rhee told the D.C. Council Tuesday.

The news came as a surprise to council members as well as Washington Teachers' Union President George Parker, all of whom met with Rhee to discuss funding for the recently proposed teachers contract.

That contract -- yet to be approved -- has been hailed as a breakthrough in urban education reform because of its ability to differentiate salary by success in the classroom. It is now in jeopardy as teachers, council members and school officials are faced with the appearance of giving raises on the backs of fired teachers.

"If I were one of the fired teachers, I would be ready to put my hands around someone's throat and squeeze till there was no air left," said Council Chairman Vincent Gray, locked in a mayoral race with Rhee-backer Mayor Adrian Fenty. "At the end of the day, some people's pay raises [would be] funded with someone else's job."

Rhee contested Gray's remark after the meeting, again defending the firings at the very time she hoped to push forward with the new contract, three years in the making.

"The information we were provided [before the firings] was that we had $43 million in budget pressure. We took action based on the information we had at the time," Rhee said.

That information stood up in court, Rhee pointed out. Fired teachers who brought a lawsuit against D.C. Public Schools in the fall could not convince a judge that the layoffs were unfair or unnecessary.

Rhee said revised budget figures came to light in February -- after the firings -- showing that the district had about $34 million more than budgeted salary figures. The excess came not because of the firings, she said, but because the budget figures provided by the D.C. chief financial officer's office used $81,000 as an average teacher salary, when in fact it is closer to $73,000 with benefits.

Councilman Marion Barry called Rhee's revelation "the worst mess involving the city government that I've seen in my 31 years in city government."

Parker called the news a "bombshell." He requested that Rhee reinstate the fired teachers -- a call that school officials deemed unrealistic.

Rhee remained steadfast in moving forward with the contract, which awaits approval by teachers and the D.C. Council if it receives a green light from the city's budget office.

"We certainly need to lay out how this happened, but it shouldn't derail it at all," Rhee said

For Immediate Release Contact: Nathan A. Saunders

Phone: 202.213.7081

Distribution to all DC Public School Teachers E-mail: nasaunders@aol.com

Media Contacts and other significant stakeholders

April 14, 2010

Statement by Nathan A. Saunders

Wrongfully Terminated Teachers Should Seek Restitution and Damages

Washington, D.C. - On Tuesday, April 13, 2010 DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee disclosed her lie against 266 wrongfully terminate teachers which she has secreted for months. WTU President George Parker was present and silent. Our responsibility as honest brokers, fellow teachers and union members is to make sure those wrongfully terminated teachers and their families receive what we all would want- a new non AFT and non WTU affiliated attorney for restitution of all rights and privileges with damages. We now know that our fellow teachers’ hardship and blood money is the base funding for the Rhee and Parker tentative agreement (TA) - a scheme for national glory not local progress.

One week prior to their televised tentative agreement press conference under AFT’s watchful eyes, Parker orchestrated the withdrawal of WTU’s DC Court of Appeals challenge to Rhee regarding the 266 wrongfully terminated teachers. Parker and Rhee’s collusive behavior is not coincidental, but intentional. From inception, Parker’s filing of the wrongfully terminated teachers lawsuit was late, incomplete and did not protect all of the teachers’ rights. He did not use critical information gleamed from exhaustive DC City Council hearings and curiously did not require Chancellor Michelle Rhee under oath. Teacher court spectators were humiliated. Rhee has a free hand to abuse because of Parker’s weak representation, slovenly behavior and reactionary leadership. He cannot represent teachers in any manner because he is not trustworthy and Rhee can depend on it. Two years ago, I, as a WTU fiduciary agent, took public action by charging senior AFT officials, Parker and Rhee with collusion. It centered on Parker helping Rhee to discipline (terminate) certain teachers, clandestine agreements and abusing DCPS personnel records. Fighting for teacher job security and rights has been difficult when opponents use high priced press agents, billionaires, and anti-union foundations with more access to AFT than to dues paying members. As the millions at stake have increased, old union tactics of threats, salary reductions, and violence are becoming more commonplace in WTU.

Today, Parker attempts to backtrack with a public statement announcing his outrage with Rhee’s revelations. She could not have done it without his support. As the General Vice President, I am calling on all teachers to boycott future Tentative Agreement presentations. If a ballot for ratification ever arrives- VOTE NO. AFT’s undisclosed conflict of interest to WTU members exists by receiving funding from the same or similarly situated foundations desirous of funding WTU’s teacher raises (AFT’s Innovation Fund).

This TA is not educationally or fiscally sound, and yields future economic opportunities for the individuals and organizations other than DCPS teachers and children. Neither George Parker nor Michelle Rhee is worth jeopardizing any teacher’s economic security or students’ success. Teachers should focus on IMPACT teacher evaluations- Rhee’s new terminating tool- whereby hundreds will lose their jobs quickly. Any attempt by Parker to blame Rhee solely for this debacle without acknowledging his culpability is another repeat offense against DCPS teachers and students.

##

This is a copy of Randi's response letter to my open letter to her. When I didn't post it right away, the AFT posted a comment on my blog stating that it was available on the Washington Teachers Union's blog. This is amazing to me. While I will eventually post it I have some other more pressing news to report right now. Check it out as sent to me from her public affairs division (attached). At least we know how to get an answer from Randi. Candi

Hi, Candi,

Randi Weingarten wanted to thank you for reaching out to her on Monday, and wants to make sure you receive this response to your open letter. We're hoping you'll post this on your blog, as well.

Thanks, we'll talk soon.

George Jackson, Sr. Associate

Public Affairs

P: 202/393-4275

M: 202/494-8178

F: 202/879-4556

E: gjackson@aft.org

American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO

555 New Jersey Ave NW

Washington, DC 20001

202/879-4400

www.aft.org

for reaching out

DC Watches Rhee and Fenty in The Mail

Deception

Dear Deceived:

In the last issue of themail, I wrote that Chancellor Rhee and Mayor Fenty had lost the trust of DCPS and government employees. And that was before the events of Monday and Tuesday that Dorothy recounts below. Fenty told the council on Monday that he had no idea how the Washington Teachers Union contract was funded in the budget he had submitted. Rhee told councilmembers on Tuesday that, although she had claimed in October 2009 that DCPS would have a $43 million deficit in fiscal year 2010 that required her to fire 388 DCPS employees, including 266 teachers, she now claimed that DCPS would actually have a fiscal year 2010 surplus of $34 million that would fund teachers’ raises and retroactive pay raises in fiscal year 2011.

Rhee and Fenty have been busy inventing consecutive cover stories ever since. The problem, they claimed, was an arithmetic error, a miscalculation, that made them really think there would be a deficit. The problem was all the Chief Financial Officer’s fault; the CFO makes a good fall guy. There wasn’t really a problem, since the false budget numbers the city presented to a judge fooled him, and convinced him that the phony deficit was real, and that it justified firing the teachers. The judge’s accepting DCPS’s fake numbers proves the fake numbers were real. There wasn’t really a problem for the teachers union, since unions aren’t built on a brotherhood of workers protecting each other and looking out for their common interest, and the surviving teachers should be happy to take raises funded by blood money, by firing their fellow union members. Union members should look to the future, and forget the wrong done to their fellow union members in the long-ago past, just a few months ago. The problem wasn’t Fenty’s and Rhee’s failure to inform the council or the public when they “discovered” a $34 million surplus in the DCPS budget, since the DCPS and the mayor have no duty to inform the public or the council of anything.

Why hasn’t any cover story lasted for more than a few hours? Because all the cover stories lead to one conclusion. Fenty and Rhee will say anything they need to say to justify doing what they want to do, and they don’t care about the real-life damage they do to government workers or city residents. Rhee was asked whether she would consider using the surprising surplus to rehire wrongfully fired teachers, and her response was screw them.

Now the city council begins its process of overseeing the city’s budget, and it has to do its oversight with an entirely new attitude, informed by its experience with Rhee and the DCPS budget. It has to expect that any budget submitted to it for any agency, department, or program is susceptible to manipulation with the intent to deceive, to deceive them or the public.

Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com

###############

Rhee’s Disclosure
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com

On Tuesday morning, I attended the administrative meeting that councilmembers held with School Chancellor Michelle Rhee and Washington Teachers Union President George Parker in order to be briefed on the newly negotiated WTU contract. The meeting, held in Chairman Vincent Gray’s fifth floor conference room at the Wilson Building, followed by one day the council’s contentious budget hearing with the mayor, City Administrator Neil Albert, and Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi. At that Monday hearing, Mayor Fenty and City Administrator Neil Albert were unable to point to any line item in the budget where the contract raises promised to the teachers were funded. They were stumped when they were pressed on whether the $140 million cost of the contract was adequately funded in the FY 2011 budget that the Mayor had submitted to the council on April 1, and Mayor Fenty told the council that Chancellor Rhee would be able to explain the funding to them on Tuesday.

At the Tuesday meeting, attendees included Rhee; Parker; Councilmembers Gray, Alexander, Barry Bowser, K. Brown, M. Brown, Catania, Evans, Graham, Mendelson, and Wells; DC Auditor Deborah Nickles; senior staffers from the office of the Deputy Mayor for Education, and representative from the American Federation of Teachers. Rhee astounded everyone there when she announced that DC Public Schools would fund the contract by using a “newly found” surplus of $34 million for this fiscal year. Some of the atmosphere of the meeting was given in reports in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/14/AR2010041404847.html) and the Washington Examiner (http://tinyurl.com/ybcqc7a). Here are some other emotional reactions by Councilmembers to Rhee’s revelation. Barry: “It is clear to me that we didn’t need to have a RIF.” Catania: “I don’t have any confidence in your [Rhee’s] numbers.” Catania: “A cynic . . . [would not that it is] too convenient that an appropriate number of teachers were RIFed [in order] to fund the pay increases [in the WTU contract]. Catania: “I am suspicious of the process.” Graham: “Why did you [Rhee] wait until this moment to say this?” Gray: “We [the councilmembers] are all stunned.” K. Brown: “Looks like shenanigans.” Gray: “If I was one of the 266 individuals [teachers] who had lost their jobs, I would be ready to put my hands around someone’s throat and squeeze.” Gray: “People lost their jobs over a budget deficit which did not exist.” Wells: “This was an error, or was it manufactured.” Gray: “Some people’s pay raise [under the new WTU contract] was funded by someone else’s job.”

###############

DC Teachers’ Tentative Agreement: “Buyer Beware”
Nathan A. Saunders, General Vice President, WTU, nasaunders@aol.com

DCPS Chancellor Michelle Rhee and WTU President George Parker announced a tentative agreement (TA) after three years amid protests of a group of wrongfully terminated teachers and now former union members, who lost their medical benefits, life insurance, and voting rights. Since that time, the news media has been regurgitating the well prepared press package without investigation or analysis. Despite their unfounded reports of soon-to-be-rich public school teachers, the TA delivers less. Teachers have not received mailed copies of the TA and the Internet version at WTUlocal6.org does not include the side agreement letters, yet it advertises “the entire” TA.

Teachers’ rights in the contract are ambiguous and vague, and use unresolved terms. The words “tenure” and “seniority,” while preserved, are irrelevant, as their meaning is gutted and without substance. A troubling section is Performance Based Pay; it is incomplete and states it will be developed later — yet Performance Based Excessing is oppressive — establishing quick terminations within sixty days. For Rhee, the contract is specific, binding, and punitive; for teachers, it is incomplete, indefinite, and unenforceable. Rhee has made the jobs of the DC city council, mayor, foundations, and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) child’s play with Article 40, et. seq. (P.103):

ARTICLE 40 - SUFFICIENT FUNDS

40.1 The Parties agree that all provisions of this Agreement are subject to the availability of funds.

40.2 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a promise that Congress, the DC Council, or any other organization shall appropriate sufficient funds to meet the obligations set forth in this Agreement.

40.3 DCPS agrees to provide financial certification that DCPS can meet the obligations of this contract before moving toward final approval. The parties agree that the failure to provide the funds to meet the obligations of the Agreement pertaining to base salary, benefits (defined as the provisions governing optical, dental and legal benefits), and mutual consent, is a material breach of contract by DCPS. The consequences of that breach will be settled by a court or an arbitrator, unless otherwise negotiated by the Parties.

The TA creates no financial liability on any entity. It does not have the full faith and credit security of the DC government. As a result, teachers are not guaranteed a 21 percent raise or a 0 percent raise but teachers will jeopardize 100 percent of their current salary. Because of Article 40, CFO Gandhi could approve the TA’s financial soundness without using his calculator, that is, if he and others (DC city council and the US Congress) are as eager to shortchange teachers as Rhee and Parker. Article 40 language is an entirely new low standard to WTU contracts. Nothing is certain including the bonus, the base salary, the promise or the requirement for the DC Government to even appropriate the funds! Teachers risk everything without any assurances. Article 40.1 and 40.2 are failure to pay escape clause provisions which would cause any breach of contract lawsuit to wilt. Article 40.3 is unnecessary gibberish as all breach of contract issues are court adjudicated based on common law principles. The “Article 40 style trickery” permeates the entire TA. Those believing the courts would not allow a bad deal to exist must think again. Courts do not inquire into the value of promises negotiators make to one another. The number or quality of promises made by DCPS or WTU is not the business of the court. Therefore, teachers could ratify a bad deal and have no legal recourse.

Rhee’s education philosophy translates into “terminating teachers helps children,” and teachers voting for ratification will be endorsing her. Churning teachers in and out of classrooms will affect students negatively. Some voters for ratification may be seduced by Wal-Mart and Enron foundation money, but they could join ranks of the DC unemployed. Teaching jobs are hard to find even for experienced, certified teachers — ask the protesters. With the DC government running a $530 million deficit and calls to reduce DCPS spending, ratifying an unsecured, non-pensionable, and unenforceable TA could create hundreds of unemployed teachers. Most teachers, who are committed to students’ well being, the teaching profession, and their family’s economic security, will say no to ratification.

###############

Michelle Rhee: Time to Call It Quits
Richard Urban, Rurban@RUforDC.com

Michelle Rhee reported to the DC city council on Tuesday that she knew in February that there were surplus funds available. However, she did not report that information to the council. This revelation comes on the heels of the contention that Ms. Rhee knew very well that teachers would have to be laid off (266 were laid off) to accurate her hiring of nine hundred new teachers. Michelle Rhee has shown contempt for honesty and transparency.

In November 2007, ULTRA Teen Choice, the nonprofit that I co-founded, was told to stop our programs at DC Public Schools (http://www.ultrateenchoice.org/c_LSRT_&_DCPS_emails_631_English.htm) because “there is a moratorium on all outside health providers.” It turned out that there was no such moratorium. I attempted to ring the alarm bell about an administrator who subverts rules and due process to suit her own agenda. It turned out that Ms. Rhee was upset that I did not support new health standards that required teaching that same sex relationships are normal, beginning in the sixth grade. This spring, I found out that Ms. Rhee, instead of following DC law, which specifies that after-school providers that work with DCPS do not have to have their own liability insurance, forces providers to carry a million dollars in liability insurance. When I brought up the point that DC Code does not require this insurance, the out-of-school time office simply said that those were the rules that the Chancellor was applying, law or no law.

Ms. Rhee has repeatedly shown contempt for oversight, transparency, due process, parental rights, and teachers rights. In the name of supposed reform, she has created distrust among administrators and teachers. She has blocked many community organizations that want to help youths in DC Public Schools from working in the schools. At Ludlow Taylor elementary school, she met with parents who didn’t have children in DCPS while ignoring parents whose children were currently enrolled there. Ms. Rhee has accused teachers in DC Public schools of sexual misconduct, while covering up for her fiancee, Kevin Johnson, who was accused of making sexual advances on AmeriCorps students under his supervision (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/21/hill-report-names-dc-schools-chief/). It is time for Michelle Rhee to call it quits, and for DC Public Schools to be returned to the control of an elected school board.

It's okay! Michelle Rhee found $34 million in the pocket of her winter coat. Get this incompetent, lying, teacher-hating weasel out of our lives D. C. Council members!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041302834.html

Budget that prompted D.C. teacher firings is now being used to fund teacher raises

By Bill Turque
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 13, 2010; 2:27 PM

Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee, who laid off 266 teachers in October to help close what she said was a $43 million budget gap, told the D.C. Council on Monday that raises for educators under a proposed labor contract would be paid for in part by a $34 million surplus in that same budget.

Council members expressed astonishment at Rhee's disclosure, which came during a morning meeting to discuss the tentative contract settlement with the Washington Teachers' Union announced last week. It is likely to revive charges among some council and union members that Rhee manipulated last year's budget process to execute the layoffs, and could well complicate deliberations over the proposed labor deal. The pact must be ratified by both the union and the council.

"This just gets curiouser and curiouser," said council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1).

Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray said it appeared that the layoffs, which triggered weeks of stormy public hearings, students protests, teacher rallies and a union lawsuit, might have been unnecessary. He also said the council should have been apprised of the surplus, which Rhee said she learned about in January -- about two months after the terminated teachers were dropped from the District payroll.

Gray, who is challenging Rhee's boss, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) in the September mayoral primary, said if he were a laid-off teacher, he'd be livid. "I'd be about ready to put my hands around somebody's throat," he said.

He added: "People lost their jobs under a budget deficit that didn't exist. That's what I heard today."

Rhee said that based on data she received from Noah Wepman, then the school system's chief financial officer, the budget gap was legitimate and that she had no choice but to address it. She added that the District's contention was upheld by a judge in the union's lawsuit challenging the layoffs.

"The evidence very clearly showed that at the time we had a budget pressure," Rhee said.

Teachers union President George Parker, who also attended the meeting, said he was not aware of the surplus. He left the session without comment.

The meeting started with what appeared to be heartening news for the council, which had raised numerous questions at a Monday budget hearing about how the proposed contract -- which promises teachers a 20 percent pay increase over five years -- would be financed in a tight fiscal environment.

Rhee said that raises in the first two years of the five-year agreement, which are retroactive base salary hikes of 3 percent each for 2008 and 2009, would be paid for by $22 million in unspent federal funding. Rhee explained that the third year of the pact, which calls for a 4 percent raise in the current fiscal year, would be financed by a $34 million surplus. She said that spending on teacher salaries was running at lower-than-expected rates, creating an unexpected pot of money.

Council members were incredulous.

"It's just too convenient," said council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), who likened the school system's budgeting process to a "three-card monte game."

Council member Michael A. Brown (I-At Large) asked Rhee whether she would be willing to consider reinstating the 266 laid-off teachers in light of the new budget situation. Rhee said no.

"Because we are in a completely different situation now," she said.

Members also expressed unhappiness with District Chief Financial Officer Natwar M.Gandhi, who made no mention of the surplus at Monday's hearing, which lasted more than five hours.

"That is a problem. That is a huge, huge, huge problem," Brown said.

The story that keeps giving: Rhee/Johnson/Huffner (Rhee ex)/White House

New documents: White House scrambled to justify AmeriCorps firing after the fact

By: BYRON YORK
Chief Political Correspondent
November 23, 2009

Just hours after Sen. Charles Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa released a report Friday on their investigation into the abrupt firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin, the Obama White House gave the lawmakers a trove of new, previously-withheld documents on the affair. It was a twist on the now-familiar White House late-Friday release of bad news; this time, the new evidence was put out not only at the start of a weekend but also hours too late for inclusion in the report.

The new documents support the Republican investigators' conclusion that the White House's explanation for Walpin's dismissal -- that it came after the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, unanimously decided that Walpin must go -- was in fact a public story cobbled together after Walpin was fired, not before.

Walpin was axed on the evening of June 10, when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who told Walpin he had one hour either to resign or be fired. The next day, congressional Republicans, led by Grassley, objected, charging that Walpin's dismissal violated a recently-passed law requiring the president to give Congress 30 days' notice before dismissing an inspector general.

Pressed for the reason Walpin was fired, Eisen told House and Senate aides that the White House conducted an "extensive review" of complaints about Walpin’s performance before deciding to dismiss him. According to the new report, Eisen told Congress that "his investigation into the merits of removing Gerald Walpin involved contacting members of the Corporation for National and Community Service [CNCS] board to confirm the existence of a 'consensus' in favor of removal." But Republican investigators later discovered that during that "extensive review," the White House did not even seek the views of the corporation's board -- the very people whose "consensus" purportedly led to Walpin's firing.

Other than board chairman Alan Solomont, the Democratic mega-donor and Obama supporter who originally told the White House of his dissatisfaction with Walpin, "no member of the CNCS board had any substantive input about whether the removal of Gerald Walpin was appropriate," according to the report. Only one other board member, vice-chairman Stephen Goldsmith, was even called by the White House, and that was on June 10, a few hours before Walpin was fired. According to the report, Goldsmith told investigators that "the White House had already decided to remove Walpin and wanted to confirm [Goldsmith's] support for the action."

The new documents show the White House scrambling, in the days after the controversy erupted, to put together a public explanation for the firing. On June 11, less than 24 hours after Walpin received the call from Eisen, the board held a conference call. The next day, Ranit Schmelzer, who is part of the corporation's press office, sent an email to board members giving them talking points to use if contacted by reporters seeking information about the matter.

"Indicate that you support the president's decision to remove IG Walpin," was Schmelzer's first instruction to the board. Then: "If asked why he was removed, indicate that the president lost confidence in Mr. Walpin." And then: "If the reporter continues to press, say that you can't get into details on a personnel matter, but you understand there were some performance-based issues." Finally, Schmelzer advised the board to avoid "getting into any specifics about IG Walpin's performance-based issues. The WH has stayed away from this and has counseled us to do the same."

The next day, June 13, after having instructed board members that the correct answer was to express support for the firing, the White House, for the first time, solicited the members' actual views on the matter. In an email to the board headlined "Time-sensitive request from White House Counsel re IG matter," corporation general counsel Frank Trinity wrote, "I was just contacted by Elana Tyrangiel, Associate Counsel to the President, seeking your assistance in responding to questions from members of Congress about President Obama's removal of Gerald Walpin as inspector general. Specifically, the White House Counsel's office would like to compile statements from board members and CNCS staff who were present at the inspector general's presentation to the board immediately before the public board meeting last month." Trinity said each member would receive a call from White House lawyer Tyrangiel, who "will prepare statements for your review for accuracy."

The mention of Walpin's "presentation to the board" was a reference to a May 20 board meeting that played a key part in the White House's evolving explanations for Walpin's firing. After initially explaining that President Obama no longer had the "fullest confidence" in Walpin, the White House later changed its story to say that Walpin, who was 77 years old at the time, had become "confused, disoriented [and] unable to answer questions" at the May 20 meeting. Later, the White House cited other "performance-based" issues. But Republican investigators concluded that the key motive behind the firing was unhappiness with Walpin's aggressive investigation of misuse of AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the mayor of Sacramento, California who is a prominent political ally of President Obama.

Through it all, the White House and top management of the corporation struggled to keep the story straight. By June 18, a week after the firing, with news coverage dying down -- it had never been very intense in the first place -- they felt they had succeeded. "I understand how much work you are doing to prevent and control damage from the IG matter," Solomont wrote in an email to Eric Tanenblatt, a board member who had talked to the press. "I want you to know how much I personally appreciate all your efforts."

Rhee Ex-Husband "Wins" WAPO Contest

As to why Huffman won the "contest", the following posting at the WaPo website explains:

"The Teach for America twitter feed has been campaigning for him and he has over 6,000 people in just one of the several TFA facebook groups. Google him and you'll see a couple of major politicians tweeting for him including Kevin Johnson Democrat Mayor of Sacramento and some major education blogs. It's clear he's invested a great deal of time in this. One wonders though if his supporters will stick around after he wins."

---

From: nyceducationnews@yahoogroups.com [mailto:nyceducationnews@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leonie Haimson
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:39 PM
To: nyceducationnews@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [nyceducationnews] New WaPo 'pundit' is Rhee's ex; Hiatt responds

More inside the beltway echo chambers. TFA public affairs officer and Rhee’s ex chosen as new “pundit” for Washington Post.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/1109/New_WaPo_pundit_is_Rhees_Ex.html?showall

New WaPo 'pundit' is Rhee's ex; Hiatt responds

Earlier, I mentioned that the Washington Post named Kevin Huffman the winner of its first-ever "America's Next Great Pundit" contest.

But it should also be noted that Huffman's ex-wife is schools chancellor Michelle Rhee, an editorial page favorite and cover star of the first revamped Post magazine. In that 4,200-word piece on Rhee in September, the author mentioned that she didn't want to discuss aspects of her personal life, including Huffman and their two children.

However, when Time profiled Rhee last year, Huffman spoke on the record about their relationship.

The summer after her second year of teaching, Rhee met Kevin Huffman, a fellow Teach for America member. They married two years later and had two daughters, Starr and Olivia, now 9 and 6. They moved to Colorado to be closer to Rhee's parents, but the marriage faltered. Huffman and Rhee separated, agreeing to joint custody of the kids. And then Rhee got the offer to run Washington's schools. Huffman, now head of public affairs for Teach for America, had no illusions about the challenges Rhee would face. But when he heard about the job offer, he decided to follow her to D.C. "Even though moving didn't sound like a whole lot of fun," he says, "the reality is that I genuinely believed that she had the potential to be the best superintendent in the country. Most people think about their own longevity, about political considerations." He adds, "Very few people genuinely don't care about anything other than the end result for kids. Michelle will compromise with no one when it comes to making sure kids get what they deserve."

With 4,800 contestants, from all 50 states, it's interesting that the winner ends up being someone familiar with the world of D.C. politics, as opposed to someone far outside the Beltway.

However, Fred Hiatt, the Post's editorial page editor, pointed out to POLITICO that Huffman was voted in by viewers and readers across the country. "I don't think his personal life was a factor." Hiatt said he didn't know Huffman before the contest and doesn't know of anyone at the Post who did.

And would Huffman have to disclose that he was married to Rhee?

"As with any columnist, we would expect him not to write about areas in which he has a personal conflict, or to disclose the conflict if he chooses to write about such areas," Hiatt said.

Posted by Michael Calderone 02:01 PM

WTU Loses Court Challenge To Layoffs
A D.C. Superior Court judge has ruled against a bid by the Washington Teachers' Union (WTU) to roll back the Oct. 2 layoffs of 266 DCPS teachers and staff.
In an opinion issued late Tuesday morning, Judge Judith Bartnoff said WTU had failed to prove any of its core arguments against Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee's decision to conduct a RIF (reduction in force) due to a $43.9 million budget shortfall. She said that given the District's financial situation, a reversal of the layoffs would force Rhee and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty to make other cuts in the DCPS, harming the public interest.
"The District asserts, and the plaintiff has not disputed, that in that event, other staff would be subject to a RIF--even further into the school year--or programs that have been deemed essential would have to be cut," Bartnoff wrote. "Such an action would not benefit DCPS, its teachers, students or staff, or the wider District of Columbia community."
No word yet on whether WTU plans to appeal.
The union argued that the RIF was not a budget-driven layoff but an illegal mass firing, and that the shortfall cited by Rhee was a sham and a pretext for dumping older teachers. As a mass firing, WTU contended, the action was subject to arbitration under the District's collective bargaining agreement with the WTU.
The union charged that Rhee, in essence, went on an illegal hiring spree over the spring and summer, bringing more 900 new teachers on board knowing that she would need to make cuts later.
But Bartnoff said the union failed to provide any substantive evidence that DCPS packed the system with teachers it could not pay for until the D.C. Council cut its 2010 budget by $21 million on July 31. In contrast, she singled out Rhee's chief of staff, Lisa Ruda, as "a very credible witness" in her testimony on DCPS' budget problems after the council cut.
Bill Turque

No Use In Studying For This Test

By Courtland Milloy
Wednesday, October 14, 2009

It's teachable-moment time again for D.C. public school students, so let's get started. Question: Firing 229 teachers six weeks into the school year is:

A) Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee's way of showing students how to throw a teacher under the bus.

B) How adults play Halloween tricks on kids.

C) Dumb as chalk.

"What upset us the most was seeing our teachers fired and then escorted from the building by D.C. police," Jessy Beach, 17, a senior at McKinley Technology High School, told me. "The students were saying, 'Shouldn't you guys be out catching criminals?' The police wouldn't even let us hug our teachers or say goodbye. It was horrible."

The correct answer is: all of the above.

Beach was one of several McKinley students who organized classmates for a protest march to D.C. school headquarters and on to city hall last week. The way the students saw it, Rhee had used a relatively small budget shortfall as a ruse to get rid of older teachers and make way for the 900 new ones she had hired over the summer.

The protest continued Saturday at a D.C. Council hearing on youth issues.

"We had a great science teacher who knew how to handle our class and make learning fun," said Dayna Downs, 13, an eighth-grader at Alice Deal Middle School. "Now he's been replaced with a less-experienced teacher, and the class is acting a lot differently. Some students don't listen anymore. Some talk while the new teacher is trying to talk because they want our old teacher back."

It is said that youngsters pay as much attention to what adults do as to what we say and that kids are especially alert to contradictions. On one hand, school officials say students should behave like ladies and gentlemen. On the other hand, Rhee and Mayor Adrian Fenty, who gave her near-dictatorial powers over the schools, have behaved like bullies, callous and inconsiderate.

Question: Can you spell hypocrite?

No one argues about the need to improve D.C. public schools. And Rhee has certainly won her share of accolades over the past two years as a full-speed-ahead, damn-the-torpedoes reformer. Her early attacks on the Washington Teachers' Union suggest that she thinks incompetent teachers are the main reason so many students do poorly.

Question: Is she right?

Students I interviewed say their schools have far more unsung heroes in the teaching ranks than loafers. McKinley's Sheila Gill, a counselor for 32 years, was cited as an example. Her extensive contacts at colleges and in the community helped thousands of students get scholarships and jobs that they might otherwise have missed out on.

"A lot of times, it's who you know, not just what you know," Beach said. "The ability to help students meet the right people won't show up on some teacher evaluation form."

Gill was among those fired.

Question: What has Rhee done?

Fenty has credited her with bringing about a near-miraculous rise in student test scores -- during her first year on the job, no less. But Rhee has alienated many teachers along the way, including, no doubt, many of the good ones she will need to keep gains coming. The enduring questions about how Rhee made her layoff decisions has only made teachers and students more suspicious.

"It's a fact that there is a complete lack of transparency about what's going on in the school system," said Ikechukwu Umez-Eronini, 17, a senior at McKinley and one of the protest leaders. "You can't get a straight answer about anything -- not about the firings, the school budget or the test scores. What's really missing, as I see it, is self-respect among city leaders and the courage to take responsibility for their actions."

Question: Can you raise an academic bar if you don't have an ethical leg to stand on?

"We have a science test coming up, and I'm worried about failing because our new teacher doesn't know where we are in our work," Dayna Downs said at the hearing.

D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray replied: "I don't think you'll fail. The question is: Are we failing you?"

Can you spell duh?

E-mail: milloyc@washpost.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/13/AR2009101303289_pf.html

Rhee, Union May Be Close to Deal

Chancellor Might Drop New Pay Idea To Get Other Teacher-Removal Powers

Union President George Parker puts a contract deal with D.C. Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee at just 50-50. (Susan Biddle - The Washington Post) Enlarge Photo Buy Photo

By Bill Turque

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, September 11, 2009

D.C. Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee and the Washington Teachers' Union are close to an agreement that would give the District more power to remove ineffective teachers, but both sides say the negotiations could still collapse, and the union's president places the chances of actually closing a deal at no better than 50-50.

Neither Rhee nor Washington Teachers' Union President George Parker would elaborate on the unresolved issues, citing a confidentiality agreement. Interviews in recent weeks with sources on both sides of the bargaining table emphasize that nothing is final and that any agreement would require the approval of teachers. But they also say that the deal taking shape has evolved substantially over the past year, with both Rhee and the union poised to yield ground on key issues.

Gone, for example, is the two-tiered, "red-and-green" salary plan that garnered Rhee national attention when she unveiled it last summer. It would have paid some teachers as much as $130,000 annually -- with help from private foundations -- but required them to relinquish tenure protections for a year to qualify for the top pay scale, exposing them to dismissal without possibility of appeal. Gone also, city and union sources say, is Rhee's attempt to weaken tenure provisions as they are currently written, which grant teachers with at least two years' experience due-process rights in the event they are fired.

The nearly two-year negotiations are widely viewed as a potentially precedent-setting showdown between an aggressive new generation of urban education leaders, led by Rhee, and the American Federation of Teachers, WTU's politically potent parent organization. Although the major players decline to disclose details, they agree that their bargaining has reached the endgame.

"There are a few very critical issues that both sides have very strong opinions about," Parker said in an interview Wednesday. "The question is whether we can craft language that both sides can live with. We're at 50-50."

Rhee said the two sides are "very close" and characterized the talks as "down to a couple of smaller issues."

"Would either side say it is definitely going to happen? No," she said in an e-mail Wednesday. "However, we're further than we've been."

The pay package under discussion calls for a 20 percent increase over five years, including 3 percent retroactively for each year teachers have worked without a contract since it expired in September 2007. Under the terms being discussed, teachers with good records would be eligible to earn extra money under a pay-for-performance program that would begin in 2010.

Tenure protections are likely to remain in place despite Rhee's outspoken criticism of the provisions as a major obstacle to reform. As recently as July 5, she told an audience at the Aspen Ideas Festival: "Right now, the culture within education and within the teaching ranks is once you have tenure, you have a job for life. I believe that mind-set has to be completely flipped on its head and that we have to move out of the idea that a teaching job is a right. . . . And unless you can show you are doing positive things for kids, you cannot have the privilege of teaching."

But Rhee is close to securing other new powers that would allow her to eventually remove ineffective teachers from classrooms. The proposal, first reported by teacher and WTU trustee Candi Peterson in her "Washington Teacher" blog, would allow the District to remove teachers from schools -- because of closure, consolidation, declining enrollment, budget cuts or takeover by an outside organization -- with minimal regard for seniority. Under current rules, teachers with the least amount of service are "excessed" first.

Under the proposal, teachers would be cut according to a formula that gives greatest weight to the previous year's performance evaluation, "unique skills and qualifications" and other contributions to the school community. Length of service would be weighted the least.

The proposal would also give principals more latitude to select staff from the pool of cut teachers. Currently, teachers in that group who don't find spots are assigned to schools by the school district's human resources department. If there are more excessed teachers than open slots, teachers at other schools can be bumped from their jobs on the basis of seniority.

Under a proposed "mutual consent" provision, principals would have more power to pick and choose teachers. Teachers who failed to find new assignments would have three options. They could remain on the payroll for a year, accepting at least two spot assignments as substitutes or tutors or in some other support role. If they can't find a permanent job after a year, they would be fired. Teachers could also choose to take a $25,000 buyout or, if they have at least 20 years' service to the city school system, retire with full benefits.

The proposals have triggered new tensions within the union's leadership. Executive Vice President Nathan Saunders, a longtime critic of Parker's, said the proposals all but eliminate job security for teachers.

"This contract looks to be another approach to diminishing teachers' employment rights," Saunders said.

Peterson's decision to publish draft documents from the contract negotiations drew an unusual public rebuke from Parker, who sent a letter and a voice mail message to members denouncing her for having "maliciously undermined" the confidentiality of the talks.

Peterson, who said she is not bound by any confidentiality agreement, said teachers have grown frustrated with the lack of information available about the protracted negotiations.

"He's promised to tell members about the contract, but he never follows through," she said.