Last week the teachers of New York City came thisclose to losing our seniority rights. Thanks to alleged Bloomberg ally New York State Senator John Flanagan (R), Suffolk County, who just happens to be chairman of the senate education committee, the bill squeaked through the State Senate, 33-27. However, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver is not letting the bill see the light of day in the assembly and with Governor Cuomo saying that he wants to see a more objective method of evaluating teachers in place before the bill becomes law all that is left is a game of chicken between the state, Mayor Bloomberg, and the teachers.
The entire bill, officially known as "S3501-2011: Relates to retaining quality teachers when teaching positions are eliminated in city school districts in cities with a population of one million or more; repealer," annoys me but there are several provisions that are particularly annoying, in fact, not just illogical, but mean spirited, and shows the true intention of the bill.
So let's all pull up a chair and let's examine the most draconian measures of this bill.
A School-based personnel with at least one rating of "unsatisfactory" in the five academic years preceding the year in which layoffs would take effect;
So if I am to read this right, any teacher receiving a rating of unsatisfactory within five years of announced layoffs will go to the top of the que. But we are told that the U/S system of rating teachers is too vague then why then is a teacher rated a U, that their rating is not then vague?
What about a teacher who in year 1 receives a U and the next four years becomes teacher of the year? Is this teacher then to be laid off, or subject to being laid off? Will this be fair? What about a principal that does not like a teacher for whatever reason, be it religion, lifestyle choice, race, or personality conflict and decides to give the teacher a U? In fact what I foresee happening is that U's will be given out like candy when the threat of layoffs emerge to the most senior, expensive independent thinking teachers.
A finding of guilt on 3020-a charges without termination in the last five years;
For those that do not know, teachers brought up on charges in New York State go through what is known as a 3020-a process. It can be quite time consuming. There is one arbitrator and both the NYC DOE and the UFT pay this arbitrator. Most decisions are come down to Solomon, split the baby decisions. In fact I know of several teachers that were found technically not guilty of charges, but nevertheless fined because the arbitrator wants to appease the DOE.
In fact in one of the leading blogs on education in New York City, Chaz's School Daze, the blogger Chaz explains how even if a teacher is just fined $1,000 and cleared of all charges the DOE takes that as a guilty verdict. Even pleading out will be seen as a guilty verdict. Can you see anyone in the future taking a plea with this as law?
Status as school-based personnel without a permanent position for six months or more as of the start of the school year in which layoffs will occur;
The DOE created the ATR (Absent Teacher Reserve) problem. So a school that is basically arbitrarily closed and good, senior, higher paid teachers lose their positions; they are the ones that are to be punished. Why isn't anyone hiring ATR's? Would you if you were a new, young principal want a senior, independently thinking teacher on your staff? Would you as a principal rather pay for one senior teacher or two fresh-faced newbie teacher? 'Nough said.
Any convicted of criminal charges without termination in the last five years;
Misdemeanors? Or just felonies? If you get arrested for drunk driving do you head to the top of the cue? Of course I am against drunk driving as much as the next person, but alcoholism is a disease. Wouldn't this be a great opportunity for the DOE to do as the NYPD and the FDNY does for its members? Treat the disease. You are not a bad person, or a bad teacher if this happens to you.
Investigations by the Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI), the Office of Equal opportunity (OEO), or the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) that led to substantiated allegations of misconduct in the last five years;
What is misconduct? Define it. An assistant brought me up for professional misconduct principal several years ago. The allegation? I was carrying a coffee cup in my hand. And, if we check back at Chaz's blog, we will be able to see just how easy it is for SCI, OSI, or OEO to substantiate allegations.
Lastly the bill has a provision for everyone's favorite, value added assesement.
Teachers in grades 4-8 who for two years or more ranked in the bottom thirty percent of all teachers in student test scores progress as measured by the City school district's value added assessment except for teachers who are licensed to teach special education or special needs children;
Prediction. We will see many physical education and art teachers in the upcoming years. Just to know what a sham VAA is, just check out The New York Times from Monday, March 7, 2011. I don't really need to delve into this. it's self-explanatory.
This bill is a poison pill, a pill to knock off the most senior, the most experienced, and the most expensive teachers.
Mayor Bloomberg is playing chicken with people's lives. It just is not right.