THE TWO FACES OF OUR LEADERSHIP
Just out…
The UTP membership department has forwarded a membership application to the office of President Randi Weingarten. We strongly suspect that she may want to join the reform caucus because her cry of “let voters decide” is so similar to the basic convictions of UTP ideology.
As our President and union attempt to raise awareness of class size as a major educational issue in our city, our UFT leadership finds itself in the same boat as the rank and file: hollering for democracy and representation, but having leadership--political leadership in this case-- turn a deaf ear. With not the slightest hint of irony, Randi asks for a democratic process and asks to let the voters of the city decide. Yet the dues paying rank and file can not choose their District Representatives. Director Joe Mudgett attempted to ask for this process at the most recent DA. But just as the city has twice bumped class size issues of the ballot, Randi asked for any other motions, looked directly at Joe, who had his hand raised ten rows from the podium, ignored him, and closed the motion period. Apparently our President thinks that there is a time and a place for democracy, and the DA clearly isn’t the place. As is common, the motion period was eaten up with Unity-time; that is, in this case, a chance to rudely interrupt and mock Presidential candidate Kit Wainer. Of course all this is commonplace in the would-be democracy of the DA, where totalitarianism and a dictatorship merely wear the cloak of democracy.
How ironic that Randi gets to see just how that feels.
How disgusting that the two faced nature of our Unity leadership is out there for all to see.
The UTP membership department has forwarded a membership application to the office of President Randi Weingarten. We strongly suspect that she may want to join the reform caucus because her cry of “let voters decide” is so similar to the basic convictions of UTP ideology.
As our President and union attempt to raise awareness of class size as a major educational issue in our city, our UFT leadership finds itself in the same boat as the rank and file: hollering for democracy and representation, but having leadership--political leadership in this case-- turn a deaf ear. With not the slightest hint of irony, Randi asks for a democratic process and asks to let the voters of the city decide. Yet the dues paying rank and file can not choose their District Representatives. Director Joe Mudgett attempted to ask for this process at the most recent DA. But just as the city has twice bumped class size issues of the ballot, Randi asked for any other motions, looked directly at Joe, who had his hand raised ten rows from the podium, ignored him, and closed the motion period. Apparently our President thinks that there is a time and a place for democracy, and the DA clearly isn’t the place. As is common, the motion period was eaten up with Unity-time; that is, in this case, a chance to rudely interrupt and mock Presidential candidate Kit Wainer. Of course all this is commonplace in the would-be democracy of the DA, where totalitarianism and a dictatorship merely wear the cloak of democracy.
How ironic that Randi gets to see just how that feels.
How disgusting that the two faced nature of our Unity leadership is out there for all to see.
posted by A Strong, Proud UTP Member at 5/20/2006 08:16:00 PM
27 Comments:
As a delegate, I was completely pissed-off at Randi's actions. I am also pissed-off that she allowed a couple of Klein's Nazis to address the DA. I hate to say it, but maybe it's time to let the press in on some of her games.
I couldn't agree more. Unity's actions border on racketeering. Other unions have come under investigation for less.
I find the UFT's lack of democracy and strongarm tactics very similar to those of the Bushies. But you're right--they resemble the mayor's as well.
The DA is a complete farce. It is constantly refered to as the "highest decision making body in our union" yet very little time is alotted for actual voting on motions and resolutions. The majority of the time is used for Unity propaganda. In addition motions cannot be introduced until the Pres. calls on someone to speak... at her arbitrary whim. The DA severely needs to be reformed. As it stands now it is merely a rubber stamp for Randi, and a Unity tool to prevent any real reforms from taking place. I don't think it resembles the Bush administration as much as it resembles Stalinist Russia. We are gaining a clearer understanding of the beast we intend to slay.
I was at the DA. but I thought thw what Kit Wainer was proposing was already voted on at the April DA?
A "No More Time Resolution" crafted by the Contract Negotiating Committee was voted on and approved at the April DA.
That resolution contained none of the concerns raised by Kit Wainer in his "No Givebacks Resolution." Kit's resolution stated the union should also reject givebacks that increase our pension contributions, increase healthcare costs, increase control by school administrators over our working conditions, and any erosion of our job protections or our professional rights.
Considering what we've lost in the last two contracts, I think that Kit's proposal makes much more strategic sense for the future welfare our our members and our profession.
Your mouth to God's ear, Joe.
Or unity's, at least. They don't seem to know the difference anyway.
I thought there was a similar resolution brought up and defeated at the April DA that Kit proposed in May?
How can there be a NEGOITIATION if you tel them to begin with there is nothing to negotiate?
As a speaker at the DA said, wouldn't we call that unfair if that is what they said as their policy before negotiations even began? Isn't that an unfair labor practice or bargaining in bad faith on either's part?
All of a sudden, we have to start negotiating cost of living adjustments? I don't recall my cable company telling me they were going to give me better service or more channels when they raise my rates. I don't recall receiving a letter from Keyspan stating I will be getting better gas when they raised my rates. We should not be negotiating COLA's! And to boot, the city should pay us interest on the COLA's when they fail to negotiate in good faith.
I heard that all negotiations had their basis in the previous contract: that it was the starting point.
Is that correct?
Unity's mantra is "everything is negotiable". With a negotiating stance like that is it any wonder that the city draws blood with every contract. The city's negotiators make demands then walk away, while our side tries to be really nice. Sounds like we are in a good position for the next round of negotiations. When you negotiate from a position of weakness you will lose.
When you go to PERB, knowing they endorse lockstep bargaining, and knowing that it will be based on 5% over three years, with one earmarked for givebacks, you've lost before you've begun.
Was it sheer laziness that caused them to go to PERB? It's tough to imagine a worse contract, and comparing ours with the sanitaiton, police, or corrections officers it's tough even to locate one.
No one does givebacks like the UFT. Their current get tough stance, based on their previous actions, is preposterous. It's straight from the Karl Rove playbook.
Aren't the recent reolutions of the DA, "changes in the Taylor law, "No contract, no work", and coalition bargaining good steps?
Why can't you guys back this? I thought this was at least some of what you supported before.
Talk is cheap, and Unity has a demonstrated record.
Why on earth should we trust the people who blatantly sold us out, trading a mountain of givebacks for less than cost of living?
And what motivation would you have to defend these grotesque incompetents besides being part of their sleazy patronage mill?
Nice name-calling NYC Educator but let's stick to the subsatnce.
When my DR came to my school to talk about the resolutions, the staff was really motivated and we had good discussion about the possibilities. We all look forward to continuing the conversation and plan our next actions.
When the DR came to my school he ignored almost every question and was just plain nasty. The staff was truly in shocked.
The DRs belong to Randi. If you collected two salaries for teaching one class and got a nice double pension to boot wouldn't you follow party orders? With all those DRs in Randi's pockets I'm surprised she is able to put on her pants.
Now let's stop name calling. Please, remember the children!!!!!!!
This is the UTP. Can't take the heat, then stay outta the union kitchen, dickweed.
Mr. Jarhead:
whose;
than.
In spite of your mega jar-like head, your point is correct.
I remember when this site was normal with people called Snakehead.
Jarhead is not a dickweed. He is a jar head.
Mr. Jarhead is right. DR's protect Unity's interests at all costs...their job depends on it. They should be called Randi Reps(RR's) because thats who they really represent. Also - don't make fun of Mr. Jarhead's name, I don't appreciate that sort of behavior.
NYC Educator: who is telling anyone to shut up? I think there are ligit questions being asked.
Instead of having Jar head asking/answering him/herself questions why don't you deal with the questions at hand?
You can see what they are after:
New York's Pension Peril
http://theutp.blogspot.com/
I think you meant this:
New York Post's
NEW YORK'S PENSION PERIL
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/67144
I think you meant this:
New York Post's
NEW YORK'S PENSION PERIL
www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/67144
It's not surprising they'd go after our pensions.
We've pretty much given them everything else anyway. I suppose we can throw sabaaticals in, if we re-elect Unity.
NYC Educator only wants to complain and talk about internal union politics- focus on the real enemy!
New York Daily News
Time to trim pensions of city workers?: Yes
BY CHARLES BRECHER
Sunday, June 11th, 2006
www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/
story/425460p-358925c.html
Mayor Bloomberg has taken a bold and important step to address the spiraling cost to taxpayers of the pension benefits of the city's municipal workers. It's prudent, and also fair, because it would affect only newly hired workers. Nobody now on the payroll would have their benefits reduced.
In the current fiscal year, taxpayers will contribute about $4 billion to the pension funds of municipal workers and pay another $900 million for retiree health insurance. If nothing changes, pension contributions in 2010 will be more than $5.7 billion - exceeding the projected budgets of the Police and Fire departments combined.
These expensive benefits are far more generous than those of workers in the private and public sectors. They were once justified because municipal employees were paid less, but state and local government employees in the New York region now earn more than private-sector workers in most categories. In a 2004 survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that average hourly wages for public employees were 15% above those of private firms; among blue collar workers the advantage was 30%.
The city's pensions are also out of line with those of other large private and public employers. In the private sector, most employers have converted to so-called defined contribution plans, like 401(k) plans; only one-fourth of private workers have pensions that are defined benefits, usually a guaranteed share of their salary for the rest of their lives.
Defined benefit plans are still common in state and local governments, but New York's are among the most generous. New York's benefit formula includes overtime earnings, a practice rare in other systems, and city workers contribute a smaller share to the pension fund than do most others. Also, most New York City employees are eligible to retire at 55, well below the age for full Social Security benefits (rising from 65 to 67 in coming years).
New York should always provide the salaries and benefits needed to attract qualified workers for its crucial services. The mayor's proposal does not jeopardize that. The city still will be able to recruit a capable workforce, workers will be fairly paid and taxes will be kept from skyrocketing.
Brecher is research director of the Citizens Budget Commission and a professor at NYU's Wagner School.
Post a Comment
<< Home