Cathie Black's Answer To Oversize Classes: "Could we just have some birth control?"

So now we know how to solve the problem of classes with 30+ kids: take birth control, stop having children.

Brilliant. Thank you, Mike Bloomberg!!!!

I hope your stay in Bermuda on December 26 was fun, lots of fun.

Betsy Combier

Big classes, budget cuts should be top concerns for Cathie Black, survey says
BY Meredith Kolodner
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Monday, January 10th 2011

Parents want the new schools chancellor to tackle bloated class size and overcrowding, while principals worry most about teacher layoffs and budget cuts, according to a new survey.


Almost half of the more than 1,000 New Yorkers who responded to an anonymous online questionnaire picked class size as one of their top three priorities for Chancellor Cathie Black.

"You can have a perfect curriculum and a perfect teacher, but if there are 30 kids in the class, then you don't stand a chance of your child actually getting a good education," one parent wrote in the unscientific survey set up by Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. "The kids in my daughter's class can barely all fit on the rug and still see the board."

Curriculum quality and rigor, together with budget cuts and teacher layoffs, were also top priorities for the roughly 640 public school parents who responded.

"After nearly a decade of focus on testing," one parent wrote, "the curriculum is watered down, without content, and doesn't serve high-achieving OR struggling students."

The three dozen principals who weighed in rated the item marked "budget cuts and teacher layoffs" as their most pressing concern.

"The budget issue is so bad it makes it almost impossible to put the books in the classrooms," one principal wrote.

The anonymous online poll allowed respondents to pick three concerns among a list of 26, or to name their own.

Stringer said he was struck by the number of parents who felt like their input was ignored.

"This report shows very clearly that there are a lot of parents, teachers and principals who are hungry to discuss their ideas," Stringer said. "This is one storm City Hall can get ahead of by having such a discussion."

More than half of the 164 teachers who answered the survey picked class size as a chief concern, and 46% named budget cuts and layoffs.

"As a high school teacher, having 34 per class is just overwhelming," wrote one teacher. "I am a strong classroom manager, but spend a lot of time doing crowd control. When I have a class of 25, it is so much better and I can TEACH."

A copy of Stringer's report with a list of recommendations will be sent to Black on Monday. The Education Department declined to comment.
mkolodner@nydailynews.com

Chancellor Black Regrets Birth Control Joke
"Could we just have some birth control?" Black quipped after a parent complained about overcrowded classrooms
By CHRIS GLORIOSO,  Fri, Jan 14, 2011
LINK

Two weeks into her appointment, New York City Education Chancellor Cathy Black is under fire for making a sarcastic joke about birth control and over-crowding at elementary schools.


The off-color comment came during a meeting with parents and lawmakers on a taskforce assembled to solve the city's pending enrollment crisis.

After one parent pointed out Lower Manhattan will need an additional 1,000 classroom seats by 2015, the rookie schools chief quipped, "Could we just have some birth control? It would really help us a lot."

The joke drew some laughs but also some uncomfortable cringes from attendees who gathered in the room Thursday.

Julie Menin, who attended the meeting in her role as Community Board 1 Chairwoman, thought the comment was inappropriate.

"It was surely a joke, but that doesn't change the tenor of it," Menin said. "The real issue is what is the Chancellor and the Department of Education going to do about overcrowding."

Department of Education brass quickly issued a statement defending the rookie schools chief.

"Chancellor Black takes the issue of overcrowding very seriously, which is why she was engaged in a discussion with lower Manhattan parents on the subject," said spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz. "She regrets if she left a different impression by making and off-handed joke in the course of that conversation."

In just her first two weeks on the job, Black has been no stranger to criticism. The former magazine mogul took over for outgoing Chancellor Joel Klein in the face of parents and teachers who tried to block the appointment with a lawsuit. They argued Black had no education management experience, but a judge allowed the former publishing executive to take her post.

Menin said she is less concerned about political correctness of the birth control joke, than she is about the tone of Black's policy debate.

"I think it was a flippant comment"

Mayor Bloomberg Plans To Scrap Civil-Service Rights

Unions: Mayor's Reform Plan Threat to Civil Service

Mayor’s Bid to Uproot Civil-Service Rights Triggers Union Fury
Say ‘Reforms’ Are Threat To Merit System; Will Oppose in Albany

MAYOR BLOOMBERG: Must scrap ‘antiquated’ system.
HARRY NESPOLI: An act of disrespect.
STEVE CASSIDY: Mayor creating hostilities.
DENIS HUGHES: ‘Outrageous’ attack on merit.

Posted: Monday, January 10, 2011 5:00 pm
Updated: 1:38 pm, Mon Jan 10, 2011.

By DAVID SIMS, The Chief

Labor leaders Jan. 7 reacted angrily to a wide-ranging report on workforce practices from the Bloomberg administration that proposes to reduce the number of civil-service exams given each year, free the city from having to honor seniority rights in making layoffs, and re-classify many union members as managers, a broad rewriting of civil-service rules that would need approval by the Governor and State Legislature.

The unions’ ire stemmed from both the plan’s components and the lack of consultation or information provided by city officials until the report was verbally presented to the Municipal Labor Committee that morning. Union officials were offered no opportunity to examine it beforehand and were not given copies of the report at the meeting, even though its key details had already been published in the New York Times.

‘Not How to Deal With Us’

“It’s really not how you deal with unions,” MLC Chairman Harry Nespoli said in a phone interview. “I told them, ‘What do you expect to accomplish today?’ All they did was read out a bunch of stuff that affects some unions and doesn’t affect others...It was poorly put together, it was something I’ve never seen done between union and management, and it’s just a guerrilla tactic.”

Uniformed Firefighters Association President Steve Cassidy said he was “disgusted” the city had not given union heads the report prior to the briefing. “It seems clear that the Bloomberg administration has decided that their new tack is to not discuss anything with us. This does not bode well for collaborative efforts in anything—and I mean anything.”

Asked about the lack of advance notice, Labor Commissioner James F. Hanley, who conducted the briefing, said only, “It’s a good time to be looking at our hiring and firing procedures. Hopefully we’ll be able to find some common ground.”

New York State AFL-CIO President Denis Hughes said he was disturbed that Mr. Bloomberg and Deputy Mayor Stephen Goldsmith were seeking to do away with much of a system that has stood statewide since the 1880s and was designed to prevent favoritism in personnel practices. “I think in the scheme of things it’s a colossal mistake to change the fairness and the openness of the whole concept of public employment,” he said in a phone interview.

‘Reopens Door to Patronage’

“This system has helped establish the middle class of the City of New York, and it’s just outrageous that they want to open the door to the days of patronage,” he continued. “There may be parts in the civil-service law that should be looked at, but the idea of eliminating tests in general is outrageous.”

The report was the result of a Workforce Reform Task Force chaired by Martha Hirst, the former Commissioner of the Department of Citywide Administrative Services. Several Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners from other city agencies along with some mayoral advisers served on the panel, which had no union representation.

“He convenes a puppet committee to do an inside job and get the results he wanted from the beginning,” United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew said of the Mayor. “Emperor Mike wants complete control of everyone, in their jobs and their life. That’s how I read the report.”

Most of the panel’s 23 suggested reforms require state approval, as they would alter the Taylor Law and other civil-service statues. Some smaller changes can be enacted at a city level, which Mr. Bloomberg pledged to do immediately.

‘Civil Service Holding Us Back’

“We have the best workforce in the world, but the civil service is so antiquated that it prevents them from performing up to their abilities,” the Mayor said in a statement. “We have identified 23 concrete, achievable reforms that will help modernize the system and strengthen the whole purpose of civil-service reform: conducting hiring and promotion based on merit.”

The changes fall under three broad categories: governance, hiring flexibility and organizational excellence.

The governance reforms largely focus on the burden of the State Civil Service Commission, which the report says provides unnecessary and slow oversight. The city has sent five proposals to the SCSC for examination in the past 18 months but no action has been taken; the report thus recommends eliminating SCSC oversight entirely through amendment of the state civil-service law.

It would also empower New York City Transit and the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority to administer their own civil-service systems without the city having to devise tests for them.

Wants Many Tests Scrapped

The hiring-flexibility proposals look to move many titles out of the Competitive Class, including all senior management titles, making them non-competitive or exempt, outside of the civil-service exam system. Other titles should be broadbanded or consolidated to “reduce the unmanageable number of competitive examinations the city must administer.”

The amount of time temporary workers can stay on the job should be doubled from 18 months to three years, giving agencies more flexibility to hire staff for specific projects, the report also recommends.

The last set of changes focuses on management and highlights the number of Office of Collective Bargaining proceedings that have classified managerial employees as eligible for collective bargaining. Principals, Precinct Commanders, Assistant Commissioners and Deputy Fire Chiefs are among the titles cited that the report said should be classified as managerial.

It decried the conflicts of interest that it said arose from putting these employees in unions, and the high overtime costs that come with such employees working the long hours often necessary in their jobs. “The task force believes it is critical that the Taylor Law be amended to refine the legal presumption that public employees are eligible for collective bargaining, and to re-define the universe of employees who are deemed to be managerial,” the report stated.

Teachers Main Seniority Focus

These organizational changes also include reforms of the disciplinary process, which the task force says is too inflexible and slow-moving; and a repeal of the reverse-seniority layoff provision for Teachers. “Last-in, first out is a quality-blind approach that can force Principals to lay off excellent Teachers while retaining others who are less effective,” the report states.

All other agencies should be able to organize employees into specific “groups,” allowing them to downsize, based on seniority, in specific business areas rather than across the whole agency, preventing epidemics of “bumping,” the report also advises.

“In the late 19th century, it was recognized that for people to have access to these jobs, they shouldn’t have to have political connections, shouldn’t have to know someone; they had to be competent and they had to pass the test,” Mr. Hughes said of the current system of exams.

“That system has held from 1883 to the present, because it dealt with the basic issue of fairness, of openness, way ahead of its time,” he continued. “The result of these kinds of things is to put working men and women further down on the chain and increase the gap between those who have the most and those who have the least.”

Union leaders said they were discouraged by the entire process. “If the changes are for the better, we’re willing to sit down and talk. If it’s something that destroys what civil service is in place for, then we’re going to battle them,” Mr. Nespoli said, having still not seen the report. “All the union members were very angry over this; they felt slighted, and so did I.”

“If you really want to work with people in tough times, then you have to sit down and work with them,” Mr. Mulgrew said. “They convened a secret puppet committee with no input from anyone except management, and then they asked us for cooperation. You can guess their mood from there.”

Asked about the chances of the changes gaining legislative approval, Mr. Cassidy said, “If they had worked with us, they could have found common ground with us on some things.” Instead, he continued, the administration will be dealing with “a roomful of labor leaders who will do everything in their power to stop this."

Labor Leaders Angry Over Proposed Civil Service Changes
CBS News, January 7, 2011 9:50 PM
LINK

NEW YORK (1010 WINS) — City union leaders are up in arms over Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s campaign to change the state’s century-old civil service system.

A task force appointed by Bloomberg concluded that civil service examinations should not be required in the hiring of senior managers and IT specialists, saying the tests precluded the flexibility to hire the best people for the job.

In addition, the task force recommended changes to seniority rules, which some labor leaders charged would make it easier to hire and fire.

Harry Nespoli, chairman of the Municipal Labor Committee, called the proposed changes “very dangerous.”

“The system was set up to protect the worker and get a fair shake. And that’s what the civil service system does right now. The latest version of civil service reforms that they’re showing in the report destroys it,” he told 1010 WINS’ Stan Brooks.

1010 WINS’ Stan Brooks reports

The current system has been in place for more than 120 years. Bloomberg would need the state legislature’s approval to change the law.

Nespoli said he believed that the changes would lead to favoritism in hiring and would encourage the city to lay off higher paid senior workers and keep lower paid newer workers.

"It’ll give them the ability to pick who they want to get the job or not,” Nespoli said. “That’s not why civil service was set up. It was based on merit.”

In NYC, Probationary Teachers Have No Right To Work, And Are Not represented fairly by the UFT

Dr. Priya Parmar is so accurate in her assessment of the UFT in her statement below that I think all teachers should read what she wrote. By the way, the UFT treats most tenured teachers the same way.

Betsy Combier
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter

CASE OF NEW YORK CITY TEACHER ABUSE
OF PROBATIONARY TEACHER
Written by Professor Priya Parmar, Brooklyn College – City University of New York School of Education

Teacher abuse is alive and well in this corrupt system run by the NYC Department of Education AND I would even venture to say the United Federation of Teachers (UFT). The motives of administration in placing hard-working, innocent veteran or tenured teachers in these “rubber rooms” range from personal (personality conflicts) vendettas to political feuds (violation of a teacher’s Academic Freedom). Most of the publicized stories are about tenured teachers placed unfairly and unjustly in these “detention centers.”

Now imagine the treatment UNTENURED or probationary teachers must endure by power-wielding administrators who are disciplined for simply expressing opinions, questioning policies or procedures that simply do not work, or even more egregious, for personality conflicts with members of the administration. The press MUST publicize these untold stories and hold the NYC Department of Education AND the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) accountable for their actions, or lack thereof. Many administrators, not all, have a ‘superiority-complex’ due to their positionality and experience (number of years) in the system. New teachers by virtue of their position as “inexperienced,” “young,” or “new” to the system are devalued and seen as easily dispensable if they go against the grain in ANY way. I am reminded by the poignant statement Senator Barack Obama made in one of his speeches when he asserted, “Longevity does not necessarily guarantee good judgment."

Inexperienced or probationary teachers who graduate from accredited teacher education programs bring passion, creativity, and innovative ideas that have the potential to transform oppressive working and teaching conditions to empowering educational experiences for students, parents, and teachers alike. Probationary or untenured teachers’ naivety comes from trusting an educational system that claims to want success for all of its students and trusting that they will receive adequate support from a union that requires ALL teachers, regardless of rank, to pay dues. They soon learn the hard way that regardless of degrees earned or union dues paid, they have very little power and voice under the tyranny of the NYC DOE. There is a culture of fear that permeates in NYC that new teachers learn quickly: if one conforms and has a “go-along-to-get-along” attitude, s/he will persevere and “earn” tenure. The following is a story from the 2007-08 school year that I am confident many probationary teachers can relate to in some way or another:

I am an assistant professor teaching in a School of Education in the City University of New York. I work with NYC teachers who are often subjected to deplorable working conditions and demeaning treatment by the iron-fisted tactics of their principals. Sadly, many report receiving very little support from their union (the United Federation of Teachers - UFT). I am currently witness to a yearlong battle between a first year, "probationary" high school social studies teacher and his principal in Brooklyn, NY.

We have STRONG evidence that suggests that due to dislikes against his personal character, among other minuscule reasons, beginning close after the day of his hire members of the administration have confabulated and colluded to "discontinue" his services, (or in other words, terminate his employment as a high school social studies teacher, which as I write this letter, they have succeeded – his case is currently under appeal). This piece of evidence I refer to is a scathing email I received from a formerly employed administrator from that school. This former employee (AP of English) received an email from a current English teacher who still works there but is at the principal’s beck and call. She shared her thoughts and CONVERSATIONS she had with the principal who blatantly discussed plans to “excess” (transfer) and “get rid” of this social studies teacher from her school. The writer of this email refers to this teacher as a “piece of shit” and explains how when she informed the principal that the English department has “boycotted” him, the principal simply “laughed” and stated, “He won’t be long here.” Shortly thereafter, this teacher has been subjected to harassing behavior from various members of his administration and unexpected observations that were written up as formal and rated as “U” ratings (Unsatisfactory).

Allow me to briefly explain the gross abuse and disregard of the union contract. According to the Collective Bargaining Agreement (contract), probationary teachers are: (1) Required to have pre- and post- observation conferences for formal, rated observations. Due to this teacher’s status as a probationer, he is required to have a minimum four to six observations throughout the school year: two full periods by the AP, one full period by the principal, and one full period by the AP or principal. He was only observed three times - two of those he was not afforded a pre-observation conference; rather, both were unexpected visits written up as formal observations and rated as “U’s”. ONE observation in which they actually adhered to the contract provided him a pre-observation conference and surprise, surprise, he was rated “S’ – Satisfactory - thus reaffirming the importance of providing pre-observation conferences to probationers, a right the UFT fought long and hard to include in the contract. In addition, the principal’s unexpected observation was written up as an “INFORMAL” yet it was rated as “U” and placed in this teacher’s end of year annual rating, which, of course, was a “U”.

(2) The annual rating of “U” and recommendation for “DISCONTINUANCE” did not provide information from his principal explaining how opportunities of professional development plans/workshops were provided to assist him in his growth in terms of pedagogy (i.e. - pre - and post observations, buddy teacher system, inter-visitation with colleagues, model lesson demonstrations). On his rating sheet, the category of classroom management or "control of class" was rated as "Unsatisfactory." However, this teacher attended three workshops for the "Classroom Organization and Management Program" and was given a certificate of successful completion stating he was a "COMPetent classroom manager" in March 2008. Additionally, the two COMP trainers observed his classroom on two different occasions and wrote positive evaluations.

(3) Moreover, this teacher was never made aware or even given a written warning from his principal that failure to improve may result in an "Unsatisfactory" rating or discontinuation of probationary service. Instead, he received verbal threats that she could easily get rid of him, statements easily corroborated by his union chapter leader in written letters.

(4) According to the Chancellor's Regulation on the mandate and timing of the annual rating (must be given within the last ten (10) days of the school year and not fewer than four (4) school days prior to the close thereof..) this teacher’s annual rating covered the period from 8/30/07 to 5/1/08 and delivered to him on May 12, 2008 – well in advance of the closing of the school year. He was actually served with a standard letter from the superintendent stating his services as a probationer may be discontinued as of June 10, 2008 BUT IF the teacher wished to submit evidence to refute the rating, he was welcomed to do so ten days prior to the June 10, 2008 decision. The teacher prepared a well-organized packet and hand-delivered it to the superintendent exactly ten days prior to June 10th with strong evidence countering allegations of insubordination and violations of the contractual policies (Article 8J for those New Yorkers who know the contract – no pre-observation conference provided). The DAY before the teacher hand delivered his packet to the superintendent, he received an email from his UFT borough representative stating that he spoke to the superintendent on the phone and the superintendent was steadfast on supporting the principal’s decision to discontinue his services! I was shocked that the decision was already informally made PRIOR to the teacher even submitting his rebuttal. Why bother even submit materials if the decision has already been determined?! So much for due process!

Other evidence of honoring “due process”: This teacher received a letter from his assistant principal instructing him to clear his classroom of all student work and submit student grades by June 10th – the letter was served at the end of MAY, prior to the June 10th decision! Even more astonishing, I made a few phone calls to the Division of Human Resources Office to inquire about the process of appeal and the secretary, in a straightforward yet polite tone, informed me that if a teacher received a letter of consideration to discontinue, services WILL be discontinued as this is standard procedure. Even staff is aware that this notion of “due process” is superficial and administration and UFT representatives simply go through the motions of serving letters, filing grievances, thus giving false hope to grievants, while all the time knowing that the likelihood of winning or overturning these recommendations are rare.

This teacher’s case has gone to the Chancellor’s level in which a representative from the Chancellor’s office hears the case. The UFT representative representing the teacher had a defeatist attitude before even presenting his case! She advised him to stay quiet throughout the hearing because the decision to discontinue him will not be overturned because the hidden message was that administrators tend to stick together regardless if the case has merit. During the course of these hearings, on two different occasions, the Chancellor’s representative asked the principal to consider a resolution that would not discontinue the teacher and the principal, both times, adamantly refused to grant a resolution, citing that since he made her work all year in preparing defenses for the grievances he filed, she was not going to back down. I even spoke to her for a half hour on the phone in the middle of the school year and she clearly had an axe to grind with this teacher telling me he was the first teacher to file a grievance against her and since she was planning to retire in the next year, she had virtually nothing to lose in teaching him a lesson.

Most of the UFT representatives this teacher has reached out to, with the exception of ONE, have defeatist attitudes when dealing with members of the DOE. His chapter leader is "overwhelmed" and gives the "I'm so sorry you're going through this" advice/guidance. This first year teacher and I are so well versed on the Collective Bargaining Agreement that we have resorted to writing our own grievances while he passes it along to his chapter leader to officially file! The district representative is useless as well. He is selective and laconic in how he responds to any inquiries this teacher makes in emails (he consistently misspells his last name – so much for personal care and interest), fails to return most phone calls, and worst of all, is spineless when dealing with administrators. I believe he could be assertive in his dealings with administrators but it is selective depending on whom he is fighting for – biased and preferential treatment seems to be more accurate.

Although the union has granted his appeals in moving his grievances forward to the Chancellor’s level, I strongly believe they are simply going through the motions in fear of possible complaints filed against them to the National Labor Relations Board or the ACLU. It is in the hearings that union representatives are not asserting contractual rights aggressively, thus the defeatist attitudes I allege above. It appears the union has adopted a passive attitude when dealing with teachers whom they have very little investment in. The NYC Dept of Education has created an anti-teaching culture of fear and the UFT fosters that culture. It is a shame because as I stated earlier, first year teachers are dues paying members yet they are not represented aggressively or fairly. I am reminded by another infamous historical quote: “NO Taxation Without Representation!!”

Bloomberg Is Understanding! by Lynne Winderbaum

No one should say that our mayor is not understanding of how unique challenges can affect the statistical measurement of one’s job performance. And so it was that I listened to Mayor Bloomberg explain with a bit of impatience and annoyance that the city’s performance in the wake of the snowstorm was not up to par because of a series of unique challenges. He begged for understanding because, you see, it was the biggest effort to clear snow that the city has ever seen, there were a large number of city agencies and personnel involved, there were near white-out conditions, and hundreds of city buses and dozens of ambulances were stuck in the snow.


But the mayor should be aware that all that matters is the outcome, not the difficulties inherent to the job. The data shows that the average response time to structural fires in 2008 was four minutes 33 seconds. The average response time for medical emergencies in 2008 was four minutes 30 seconds. However, in this case, data released today show that the FDNY had a 3-hour delay in response to critical cases, like heart attacks, and 12-hour delays for non-critical calls. A five alarm fire in Elmhurst raged for 3 hours when firefighters were delayed by the blizzard conditions.

Surely, firemen and EMT’s are to be judged “ineffective” when it comes to a response time so far below the city standard.

It is incumbent on the news organizations, for the sake of our citizens, to FOIL a list of all firemen and EMT’s that were on duty during this time period and to identify them by name in the newspapers. The mere fact that response time data was influenced by so many factors beyond their control, as detailed by the mayor above, is no excuse to fail to reach or exceed the standard of response time expected by the city.

The Fire Department of the New York is expected to comply with the request of the news agencies for the release of names and response times recorded in this snapshot of time. Extraordinary challenges notwithstanding, emergency responses to all calls should be within five minutes.

UFA objections that FDNY personnel who were not on duty during this time period would not produce data, and therefore would not be publicly judged as are their colleagues, are unfounded. UFA objections that response time data does not reflect the totality of the job and are unreliable are unfounded as well.

Perhaps there should be merit bonuses for the fastest responders to ensure that firefighters show more dedication to their work and our citizens’ welfare. Those who take on the most challenging conditions are no exception. Data is king and the statistics are the only objective way to measure the value of the workers.

It is also unfounded to excuse the longer response times from any engine companies who were impacted by the increased demands created by the closure of firehouses in their neighborhoods.

It is commendable that the FDNY receives the gratitude of the citizenry and the satisfaction of knowing they have saved lives and property. But these things are not measurable as are response times.

It is incomprehensible that in the face of this disappointing data the mayor would excuse FDNY performance by saying, ““And I want them to know that we do appreciate the severity of these conditions they face, and that the bottom line is we are doing everything we possibly can, and pulling every resource from every possible place to meet the unique challenges…”

Oh wait. Nobody wants to privatize the fire department or find reason for it to be run by corporate interests who have scant experience improving performance in fire and medical emergencies. Nevermind.

Lynne Winderbaum, retired teacher

Three of Winderbaum’s former students at JHS 109 — (from left) State Supreme Court Justice Kenneth Holder; Florence Gilpin, now a DOE principal; and former New York Jets player Chy Davidson — showed up to praise her

The NYC BOE 'Internet Acceptable Use' Policy

Teachers, staff, professionals everywhere:

In this world of make believe, where Principals can make up anything about you that they want, and something sticks, do your internet shopping/business/game-playing at home, not at your assignment. Even if you have nothing to do, DONT go to the internet to do anything but write/research/input something that relates directly to your work.

I have obtained the NYC BOE internet rules, below, and I suggest that you read them carefully. The Gotcha Squad may already have your personnel file.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com

New York City Department of Education


A.‘Internet Acceptable Use Policy.’

B. System Responsibilities:

3. “Each district’s plan must designate, for each school building in the district, a building-level coordinator for the Department’s Internet and e-mail system and must include a customer service telephone number for users to call with questions or comments about the Internet Acceptable Use Policy. The building-level coordinator may be the principal or his\her designee. The building-level coordinator will approve building-level activities, ensure teachers receive proper training in the use of the system and of this policy, establish a system to ensure adequate supervision of students using the system…and be responsible for interpreting the Internet Acceptable Use Policy at the building level.

D. Filtering:

The Department has installed Internet filtering software in an attempt to block users access to inappropriate and\or harmful text on the internet. The software works by scanning web sites, addresses, web site content, e-mail and other document for objectionable words or concepts. Objectionable words and concepts are pre-determined by the Department….it denies the user access to to them based on the level of access assigned to the word or concept by the Department.

F. Respecting Resource Limits:

i. Users will use the system only for educational and professional activites. Staff may not use the Internetfor personal use during working hours, except that they may engage in incidental use during their duty-free time…..

9. E-mail Policy: E-mail Acceptable Use Guidelines

i. “Acceptable” e-mail use activites are those that conform to the purpose, goals, and mission of the DOE and to each user’s job duties and responsibilities.

NY State Governor David Paterson Regrets Not Firing Aides Who Led Smear Campaign Against Caroline Kennedy

Governor Paterson believes that the unfounded rumors about Caroline Kennedy were wrongly spread by members of his staff, and he should have fired the people who created the smear campaign.

What about the Gotcha Squad who work every day on creating unfounded rumors about tenured teachers pushed out of their classrooms, and ultimately their jobs?

Let's look at the story below very carefully, and apply the essence to the rubber rooms. Paterson doesn't like his staff making up false stuff about Caroline Kennedy. So, why does he allow Principals to make up things about tenured teachers and permit these teachers to be vilified and thrown away like garbage?

What we need is a system that penalizes principals and superintendents who knowingly, recklessly and arbitrarily make false claims about a person, and pursue fake "just cause for termination". FINE THE PRINCIPALS if they charge a teacher unfairly.

NY Gov. Paterson: Staff should have been fired after Caroline Kennedy Senate post rumors

MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press, December 13, 2010
LINK

N.Y. (AP) — Gov. David Paterson said Monday that he should have fired all staffers "potentially involved" in spreading unfounded rumors about Caroline Kennedy after she dropped out of contention to be appointed U.S. senator.

Paterson's stand on Monday in a WWRL-AM radio interview was much harder than after the episode played out in January 2009, when just one campaign staffer left as a result. Then, Paterson was still widely thought to have directed or been involved in the attack on Kennedy, although an ethics probe later reported no wrongdoing.

But the long and unsavory process to select a senator to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton after she left to become U.S. secretary of state led to Paterson's political free fall before he chose Kirsten Gillibrand, then a little-known congresswoman. Ugly repercussions alienated the Kennedys.

It left Paterson looking indecisive and his administration looking mean-spirited in a process so wild he said New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg even urged Paterson to appoint himself.

Paterson, who took office after a prostitution scandal ousted his predecessor and didn't seek election to a full term, said Monday his political downfall was helped along considerably by what he called a dysfunctional "political club" in the media that seeks to run government in Albany and has "no standards at all."

"Caroline Kennedy was insulted and castigated by people who worked for me," Paterson said in the latest of his interviews in the final days of his administration. "It was outrageous ... all the people who were potentially involved should have been immediately dismissed. Like, immediately."

The New York Public Interest Research Group filed the complaint over the Kennedy leaks with the state ethics commission. The good-government group questioned how confidential, personal information submitted by those who sought Paterson's appointment to the Senate apparently got to the campaign staffer who lost her job.

"When someone is seeking a high position they shouldn't be treated like trash, and the governor didn't do anything about it," NYPIRG legislative director Blair Horner said. "Almost two years later the governor is describing his participation as an innocent bystander, which he may have been, but that would be disturbing in itself."

The Senate appointment process included often contradictory hints by Paterson that made national headlines and public criticism of people who sought the political plum.

Paterson said in a recent interview with The Associated Press that he was urged to appoint himself to the U.S. Senate seat. Before Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned amid a prostitution investigation in 2008, forcing Lt. Gov. Paterson into the seat, many Democrats had expected Paterson, a former Democratic state senator, would succeed Clinton if she were elected president.

"Everybody said to me, particularly Mayor Bloomberg, 'Appoint yourself to the United States Senate. Get out of Albany because with the budget (problems), you can't win there,'" Paterson told the AP.

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser said the mayor doesn't divulge any private discussions he may have had on the matter with Paterson.

Soon after, Paterson's headaches were compounded when the state Senate was embroiled in a power struggle. Paterson's departure for Washington could have meant the next governor would be Sen. Pedro Espada, a Bronx Democrat who is now under investigation for use of state grants at his health clinics and who lost his seat in the fall elections.

"I thought that would be irresponsible," Paterson said.

Gov: I Should Have Fired Aides Who Trashed Caroline Kennedy

State of Politics
LINK

Caroline Kennedy

Gov. David Paterson this morning expressed chagrin over his handling of the Caroline Kennedy mess last winter, saying it was a mistake not to have immediately fired aides who launched a smear campaign after she withdrew her name from consideration for Hillary Clinton’s US Senate seat.

“Caroline Kennedy was was insulted and castigated by people who worked for me,” Paterson said on AM 1600 WWRL. “And it was outrageous. It was wrong. And as the person in charge. I had to take responsibility for it.”

“… I think that when there’s been that kind of degradation of a person who had only signed up to be a candidate – in other words, they had put themselves out as a candidate – the one thing I think should have happened was that all people who were potentially involved should have immediately been dismissed, like immediately.”

In other words, the people who participated in leaking information to the media about her, which, by the way, was false information and gossip, that everybody who was potentially involved should have immeidatly been dismissed.”

Paterson did take responsibility for the leaks about Kennedy’s alleged tax, nanny and marital problems back in February 2009.

But he did not immediately fire the campaign consultant who masterminded the release of the information, (although she was eventually let go), nor did he ever axe the staffers who did the dirty work.

Paterson’s discussion of the Kennedy debacle came in response to a caller who asked if he wished he had done things differently and selected her to fill Clinton’s seat instead of former Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand and if that choice had tanked him with the media.

The governor replied that while he does believe that moment marked the beginning of the end of his relationship with the press, but also noted that he couldn’t have chosen Kennedy even if he wanted to because she withdrew her name citing “personal reasons that she declined to explain.”

Attorneys Joy Hochstadt and Nick Penkovsky Get A Reprimand In Federal Court

Attorneys Nick Penkovsky and Joy Hochstadt, a terminated teacher who worked with Ed Fagan, are sanctioned in Federal District Court for frivolous claims in a suit brought by former rubber roomers, but this will not stop the filing of federal claims by those who were denied their rights to a fair and speedy trial. 

Here are the cases: Southern District Federal Court Magistrate Judge decided to recommend sanctions for both of them in the matter Twana Adams v New York City Board of Education. Now the fines will be up to Federal Judge Victor Marrero to decide.

'Rubber' cluck fines
By BRUCE GOLDING, NY POST, Decemmber 11, 2010
LINK

Two lawyers who challenged the Board of Ed's policy of banishing suspended teachers to "rubber rooms" face $28,000 in fines over their "frivolous" charges.

Lawyer Joy Hochstadt violated court rules by claiming race discrimination under the 13th Amendment -- which abolished slavery -- after being warned she had no legal right to do so, Manhattan federal Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck ruled.

Co-counsel Nicholas Penkovsky, meanwhile, was slapped for pressing "previously dismissed hostile work environment claims without setting forth new facts."

Peck recommended that Judge Victor Marrero -- who dismissed the suit last month -- sanction Penkovsky $7,000.

Peck also recommended a whopping $21,000 in fines for Hochstadt's misconduct, noting that her race charge was only one of "numerous causes of action without any basis in law [or] fact."

Penkovsky said yesterday that he didn't have time to discuss the ruling.

Hochstadt didn't return a request for comment.