May 11, 2008

print icon

Watch What They Do, Not What They Say…

Filed under: Education by Leo Casey @ 2:03 pm

Posting published by the Principal of PS 71 in the Bronx:

Anticipated Vacancy Circular - School Year 2008-2009. Position: Lower Grade ATR - Absent Teacher Reserve Positions

Duties and Responsibilities: Cover class of absent teacher. Classes to be covered will be kindergarten through fifth grade, with no special education classes. The position is a regular teaching position for a regularly assigned teacher. If no teachers are absent, the teacher assigned will be doing small group AIS. Salary: Salary and Seniority do not change…

Amazing, isn’t it, that while the DoE and The New Teacher Project are telling anyone who will listen that the numbers of ATRs are a burden to the system, principals are issuing — in clear violation of the contract — postings looking for more of them?

18 Comments »

Comments are open for registered users and do not reflect the views of the UFT. Please read our general rules for commenters.

  • Someone told me the elementary schools used to do this all the time, have a floating position to cover absent teachers.

    It makes sense to me, for anyone who wants the job. You’re someone who knows the kids, the staff, the administration, and the building. You even know some of the parents and the parent coordinator. And you can tell the ATR you’ll be absent and give them instructions or helpful hints in person before you take your day off. Isn’t all this better than always having to hire someone from the outside?

    I remember spearheading a campaign in the middle school I worked in during the 90s (in Dist. 2) to ensure that the city wouldn’t replaced outside contractors for custodians. We wanted the people we already had. We trusted them and had established working relationships with all of them. (PS: We won that fight, and they had to try that plan out in someone else’s school.)

    Comment by JW — May 11, 2008 @ 3:55 pm

  • I don’t understand why this blog has such a “gotcha” attitude. In my opinion, it only makes the union look better if they can show that ATR positions are of benefit to schools. Furthermore, it is possible that individual ATR teachers are very helpful while ATRs are still, in aggregate, a burden to the system.

    Comment by nycityteacher — May 11, 2008 @ 8:38 pm

  • You say “principals are issuing”. How many principals have been willing to hire ATRs? Most ATRs are assigned to places where they are not wanted and respected.

    This seems to be a more positive approach, yet it violates the contract that forced the end of excessing seniority.

    Comment by Schoolgal — May 12, 2008 @ 5:32 pm

  • You’re kidding, aren’t you?

    When schools close and it’s cheaper to hire newer teachers with lower salaries, all of a sudden these same more experienced teachers become a “burden to the system”?

    When the less common programs or those that are not strictly mandated by the state are closed so the principal can save money by killing these salaries whether high or low, all of a sudden the teachers of these subjects become a “burden to the system”?

    When teachers are pushed out of positions because they’re active unionists who take strong stands defending members and kids, or when they are whistleblowers, all of a sudden these same teachers become a “burden to the system”?

    You’re either very young and have no intention of staying in this profession or you’re being paid to put this contemptible position out there.

    An ATR is no more a “burden” to the system than any other kind of teacher who’s not up to scratch.

    The union blog doesn’t have to show ANY tenured teacher’s “benefit to schools.” If they are of no “benefit” to schools, they wouldn’t have been granted tenure.

    ATRs are showing up to work, and it’s up to Klein to employ them. He’s taken a political position, and he’s bought PR companies to sell that position to the city. You either fell for it or, more likely, are part of his machine.

    What you’ve written is plain offensive and has no moral substance.

    Comment by JW — May 12, 2008 @ 6:17 pm

  • I have to fix one of the paragraphs above, in case someone misreads it. I meant to say:

    An ATR is no more of a “burden” to the system than a whole range of other teachers who do hold positions but who may not be the best at their job. It’s the not the ATR category that makes a teacher a “burden,” as you call it, it’s the kind of educator they are.

    Comment by JW — May 12, 2008 @ 8:14 pm

  • JW, I am a bit taken aback by your comment “You’re either very young and have no intention of staying in this profession or you’re being paid to put this contemptible position out there,” which felt like a personal attack. Your inferences are incorrect. Sadly, I am not “very young,” nor am I getting paid to comment on a blog. Happily, I do intend on staying in this profession for at least another decade. Perhaps I should have been clearer about my use of the word “burden” — I was referring simply to the money being spent on ATRs, not the people themselves. Nonetheless, I hope we can all stay open to the range of views that NYC teachers (and UFT members) hold, rather than cause rifts amongst ourselves.

    Comment by nycityteacher — May 13, 2008 @ 10:30 am

  • Nycityteacher-

    I”m not convinced.

    To say what you said means you have a mindset that comes from somewhere else, I suspect in non-union classrooms. As a unionist, I could never set certain members apart into their own group. All of us are Teachers, whether we have full programs or not. Becoming an ATR may have happened to me last year, but could (and will) happen to others in the the future.

    And for the record, I am not causing any rifts, you are — by calling them a burdensome group that needs, “in aggregate,” some kind of explanation or justification.

    (Schoolgal, I hope you realized I was talking to nycityteacher at 6:19 - we were posting at about the same time, but yours got in before mine so it looks as if I was speaking to you.)

    Comment by JW — May 13, 2008 @ 7:54 pm

  • Leo,

    “The UFT filed an age discrimination lawsuit in State Supreme Court on April 7 alleging that the more than 700 teachers in the Absent Teachers Reserve (ATR) are victims of the Department of Education’s year-old school funding system that, even with an April 2007 agreement with the union to mitigate it, created a financial disincentive for principals to hire senior teachers. “from UFT sues Tweed for age discrimination”

    This was indeed an excellent idea. However, history has showed us that direct discrimination involves treating someone less favorably because of their possession of an attribute not only as age… but race, religion,and national origin, compared with someone without that attribute in the same circumstances.

    Therefore, even though a lawsuit has been filed by the UFT because of the large percentage of ATRs who were 40 years or older,I would like to see all of the demographics re. ATRs , in an effort to examine the possibility of discrimination becoming a factor in the failure of a principal to hire from the current pool of ATRS ( for long term positions within their school) due to a teacher’s race, religion, or national origin.

    Please advise.

    Phyllis C. Murray
    Chapter Leader

    Comment by phyllis c. murray — May 15, 2008 @ 6:40 am

  • “The UFT filed an age discrimination lawsuit in State Supreme Court on April 7 alleging that the more than 700 teachers in the Absent Teachers Reserve (ATR) are victims of the Department of Education’s year-old school funding system that, even with an April 2007 agreement with the union to mitigate it, created a financial disincentive for principals to hire senior teachers.” From: ” UFT sues Tweed for age discrimination” by Dorothy Callaci

    Direct discrimination involves treating someone less favorably because of their possession of an attribute not only as age but race, religion,and national origin, compared with someone without that attribute in the same circumstances.

    Therefore, even though a lawsuit has been filed by the UFT because of the large percentage of ATRs who were 40 years or older, I would like to see all of the demographics regarding the ATRs. In that way, one might examine the possibility of discrimination becoming a factor in the failure of a principal to hire from the current pool of ATRS ( for long term positions within their school) due to a teacher’s race, religion, or national origin.

    Phyllis C. Murray
    UFT Chapter Leader 75X

    Comment by phyllis c. murray — May 16, 2008 @ 8:31 pm

  • Please look closely at Phyllis’ comment. Anecdotally, I am hearing that the ATRs are much Blacker and more Hispanic than the pedagogical workforce as a whole.

    Ironic, their discriminatory hiring practices makes everything they do look discriminatory.

    Can we follow up?

    Jonathan

    Comment by jd2718 — May 18, 2008 @ 12:55 am

  • How can anyone say if there are more people of color as ATRS? It’s not as if they are all sitting in one place or showing up on one list. They’re all over the system by now: those who found new jobs, others in full positions but still ATRs, others doing daily subbing, others waiting for an assignment.

    The data was apparently not readily available last Sept., or at least that was what the union was telling us when we were asking them to make the numbers of ATRs known. We all thought that it would have been readily available at the union, given that they do have computers. But, they claim they had to manually compile the info, with DRs asking chapter leaders to submit the names of the ATRs in their schools.

    With regard to data, I still am confused as to what the UFT is capable of compiling/viewing or not. Either the DoE was keeping the information back, or the UFT doesn’t have the computer capability to protect the members as much as it should, or the UFT was not telling us the truth. Each of these alternative explanations is as bad as the next from our point of view.

    I mean, once a person is hired by a school, that should show up on any computer. If a name is not attached to school by September 10, let’s say, shouldn’t there be a blank space? You can then count blank spaces. What’s so difficult? I’m serious: will somebody explain to me why data compilations couldn’t have been made last fall, and have changes been made to correct this problem?

    Comment by JW — May 18, 2008 @ 1:12 pm

  • ” Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and state and local fair employment practices agencies have documented a significant increase in the number of charges alleging workplace discrimination based on religion and/or national origin. Many of the charges have been filed by individuals who are or are perceived to be Muslim, Arab, South Asian, or Sikh. These charges most commonly allege harassment and discharge.”The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

    “According to the EEOC, race discrimination complaints continue to be the number one complaint made to the EEOC. In 2006, a total of 27,238 such complaints were filed. The EEOC also has seen a substantial increase over the past 15 years in discrimination claims based on color, which have soared from 374 in 1992 to 1,241 in 2006.”Tresa Baldas The National Law Journal March 30, 2007

    Therefore, perhaps it is more likely for one to have ATRs in our schools to fill the daily vacancies who represent Africans,Hispanics , Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians than any other group. Age discrimination may also be evident within this population of minorities. Therefore an age discrimination suit is needed. And in the process of further examination, other information might surface regarding the myriad ways minorities are excluded from equal opportunities for full employment in our public schools.

    .

    Comment by phyllis c. murray — May 18, 2008 @ 6:06 pm

  • I think you can be a unionist as well as a concerned NYC tax paying citizen. I do not think that a concern with how money is spent in schools and the effect on increased costs is incompatible with being pro union.
    After all there is a limit to what the City and State can afford.
    If ATR’s are more expensive than substitutes that is a legitimate concern, for all who pay taxes to fund schools and school contracts.
    The recent development with Mr. Schwartz, actuary, regarding the DC 37 reduction in age pension reopener should make us all wise to our fragile relationship with the political structure in Albany.
    Regardless of our good relationships in Albany, I would bet that our recently won 55/25 plan, would not pass today, due to the revelations of the cost analysis of Mr. Schwartz, and the response by the Albany politicians.
    I see no incompatibility between being aunionist and a concerned tax payer.
    We should never kill the Golden Goose.

    Comment by Love to Teach — May 19, 2008 @ 5:58 am

  • You are arguing for firing teachers without cause.

    I don’t think you are in a position to tell us what being a unionist entails.

    Jonathan

    Comment by jd2718 — May 19, 2008 @ 8:55 pm

  • I am not advocating firing anyone.
    I am just proposing and putting up for discussion a reasonable opportunity to evaluate the problem that was created with the last contract and see if there are solutions to this problem.
    I would never encourage a firing of a teacher !!!

    Comment by Love to Teach — May 20, 2008 @ 7:52 am

  • Love to Teach,
    You think discussing the ATR fiasco at this time is a “reasonable opportunity” to evaluate the problem that was created with the last contract” ? Now?

    First: the most reasonable opportunity to evaluate the ATR situation was actually BEFORE the union signed the last contract. That’s what we pay them to do to. They either didn’t take the potential threat of throwing staff out of positions seriously enough or they thought this was reasonable collateral damage in exchange for ability to transfer. Since they sold the contract to us with such gusto, and they keep talking about all those transfers that have been made possible, my bet is that they understood the consequences in full and didn’t care about the loss of careers for some people. RW also doesn’t mind the closing of schools.

    Secondly: The “problem,” as you say, was further compounded AFTER the contract was signed, when Klein changed the way teachers get paid. Whether the union knew that he was going to do this is not clear. It’s either that the they knew he was going to change the payment procedures before they signed the contract or that they were outwitted.

    Comment by JW — May 23, 2008 @ 6:12 am

  • “Teachers Unite: How have the demographics of New York City’s public school population, among teachers and students, changed since you’ve been involved in education?

    Sam Anderson: Over the past 40 years New York City’s public schools have gone from being comprised of predominantly white students to one that is now predominantly Black, Latino and Asian students.

    However, when we look at the racial breakdown of the teaching and administrative staff, they are still overwhelmingly white to the point that nearly 80% of the teachers are white. All we have to do is look at the Department of Education’s own data. More specifically, when we look at the sixteen year record of the racial breakdown of new hires, we see the re-enforcement of white teacher dominance clearly built into the DOE’s personnel structure. Below are the data from the DOE about new hires (this was not easy to come by. But thanks to the persistent work of an Amsterdam News journalist, it is now in the public light).”Black Educator: NYC’s Disappearing Black/Latino Public School Teachers

    http://blackeducator.blogspot.com/2006/12/nycs-disappearing-blacklatino-public.html

    Comment by phyllis c. murray — May 25, 2008 @ 8:42 am

  • JW,
    The negotiators to the last contract probably saw this ATR problem developing.
    Perhaps they assumed it would involve a small number of teachers. and maybe they opted to benefit the larger sum, with bigger raises, etc., and see what developed with the ATR’s.
    The problem now exists in a way where the membership should be able to decide what is in their best interests, protectionism or salary and pension growth.
    Any talk about age discrimination lawsuits skirt the issue, and will be meaningless in the short and long run.
    All parties to this contract are and were intelligent and astute. Their are no surprises here, just consequences and benefits, and it for the membership to decide what philosopht we want to advocate.
    Obviously it seems we can’t have everything.

    Comment by Love to Teach — May 27, 2008 @ 2:31 pm

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.