How You Should Cast Your Ballot and Why You Should Vote for the MORE and New Action slate

Here are images of how you should cast your ballot. First, here's the one page view, presenting how you should cast your ballot.

Here's how the process in a few practical steps. Find the envelope indicating that it contains the official UFT ballot. Check off the ballot box that is marked for the MORE/New Action slate. Put the ballot in the envelope, and then put that envelope into the final envelope.
Still needing guidance? Here are some FAQs from the MORE Caucus UFT website.

WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR THE MORE/New Action SLATE
When you vote for Michael Mulgrew and the Unity slate you are voting for the evaluations based on high stakes and Value Added Modeling, or VAM (rebuked by a judge last week in the Shari Lederman case). Furthermore, remember that Mulgrew has consistently supported Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his ill-minded policies. (Mulgrew took his support so far that in 2014 he threatened to defund the Working Families Party if it endorsed Zephyr Teachout for governor over Cuomo).
A major negative development under Mulgrew's tenure has been the change to the new evaluation system used at the city level. The evaluations have increased in number and have followed the absurd Danielson model. Mulgrew endorsed every worsening step of the evaluation Advance Evaluation system. He even asked for the DOE to evaluate teachers along more areas than even the DOE first sought in the negotiations.

And remember that Cuomo has supported the regressive education reform forces that led New York State education: John King and Merryl Tisch. And remember that Cuomo failed to listen to parents and educators that Common Core was an inherently flawed set of standards. (See this analysis of how Mulgrew endorsed Cuomo's New York State-level evaluation dictates.) Yet, Mulgrew has aggressively supported the standards, at one union function, threatening violence to anyone who dared to take them away. Mulgrew perpetuated the fiction that teachers had a role in writing the standards, when the truth is that no K through 12 educator wrote them.

Locally, Mulgrew has continued the Unity tradition of liking for a friendly mayoral candidate, and then failing to criticize the mistakes of that politician's policies once they are in office. Witness his continued support for mayor Bill DeBlasio whose chancellor Carmen Farina has proven to be no better than Bloomberg's chancellors. He has not challenged the DOE administration to part from the Bloomberg ways, and he has ignored the continuing problem of charter school encroachment on community schools and other district schools. By contrast, Jia Lee and the MORE caucus have challenged the administration on this enduring problem.

UPDATE: Co-locations and the Two School Systems on the Eve of the Funeral at the PEP

*"My ... revolutionary warriors," James lauds fervently anti-PEP crowd in her speech closing
[Video from the excellent work at Ed Notes]
*What is at stake with the school co-locations *Why protest is important

UPDATE:
Incoming public advocate Letitia James lauded teacher, student and community protesters as "my children, my advocates, my revolutionary warriors," telling a powerful anti-PEP crowd last night that there are just a few days until a new administration is voted in.
Councilwoman James' crescendo:
"But the good news, my scholars, my children, my advocates, my revolutionary warriors in just a few days, a new administration is coming to city hall . . . . In just a few days we will turn back the clock, and this [pointing to the Panel for Educational Policy] will be no more."
The crowd, especially the attending students of co-location impacted schools, went ecstatic. It picked up on her closing chant, "We want our schools back!"

We hope so. We hope that our long municipal nightmare will be no more.



 Once again the fete accompli rubber stamp of out-going mayor Michael Bloomberg, the Panel for Educational Policy, a fraud of a representative institution, is meeting tonight to officially carry out his decision to co-locate schools in over 20 pre-existing school buildings in five boroughs.

In a number of instances large comprehensive high schools will see the beginning of their slow death, with new schools squeezing them for resources.

Compare the new small schools' resources and offerings to those at the large schools under attack tonight, Clara Barton, Brooklyn, John Dewey, Brooklyn, August Martin, Queens, Long Island City, Queens, Martin Van Buren. (Links provided to schools that have not had their breadth of courses already gutted.) It is quickly apparent that the large schools have special resources that individual small schools cannot and do not match. Economies of scale afford the special offerings and special services.

Conversely, the small schools do not offer these. In opposite fashion from most high schools, conventionally in most student programs in new schools students move in joint cohorts, class to class, as in junior high schools.
Large comprehensive high schools offer:

*multiple foreign language choices

*Advanced Placement courses (though this writer has reservations with the whittling of "elite" students from "regular" students)

*better ratios of guidance counselors, social workers and psychologists to students

*wider ranges of art and music classes

*multitude of clubs that draw students to school, students that might be at risk for dropping out; hence, students see the schools as homes away from home

Other features are dropped from small schools or shared between schools, often in a gutted fashion or with access that create competition between schools include libraries and gymnasia.

If anticipated new mayor Bill de Blasio wishes to do the right thing and to distinguish himself from Bloomberg's failed record, he will sign a declaration to reverse all co-location decisions once he enters office.

The Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE, UFT caucus) and Change the Stakes are holding funerals for all the shuttered schools under Bloomberg's watch (and we might add under the media's acquiescence)

Here is the link for MORE's leaflet on the event. MORE's Facebook event page for the PEP.

[Contents of press release that has been circulated:]

Parents, Teachers, Clergy and Students to Rally for End To School Closures and Co-Locations

Will hold Funeral of Schools before NYCDOE Panel for Education Policy meeting to remember 168 schools closed under Bloomberg and look forward to a new era of equitable public education policy

New York, NY - On Wed., Oct. 30th at 5:15 community supporters of public education will gather outside of the Prospect Heights Campus at 883 Classon Ave in Brooklyn to hold a funeral for all the schools shuttered under the Bloomberg administration. Fathers Michael Sniffen and Chris Ballard of the Church of St. Luke & St. Matthew will officiate the festive Dia de Los Muertos-style ceremony.

Participants include the Movement of Rank-and-File Educators (MORE) Caucus of the UFT, Change the Stakes, Class Size Matters, the Paul Robeson Freedom School, and allied groups.

[Postscript: Pre-PEP schools funeral memorialized here.]

Tests and transparency issues

*Education Commercialization Complex parallel to permanent war economy
*UFT failure to broadly attack, on principle, the test-regime
We see that this permanent war against teachers economy, just as the military has had "black budget items," items that were kept secret, "for the good of the people," we have Common Core questions that are kept secret-- NY's State Education Department is only selectively disclosing some questions. Since the government cannot use the national security excuse, what excuse could they use? -Corporate private security or copyright. Baloney.

The real reason is that publicization of the tricky questions, hello, will expose what illogical, inappropriate questions the Common Cores brings into English and math, as At the Chalk Face reports in "New York ELA day 2 disaster #FAIL #Pearson #NYSED." The blog site reports several substantive issues with the Common Core questions. This is the negative consequence of privatization of test publishing functions by the international corporate giant, Pearson PLC, away from what historically had been a public function under the aegis of the New York State Education Department.

However, from the organization that we would expect to hear much criticism, the United Federation of Teachers, whose members were in touch with the tests, we have heard limited anecdotes of trouble, mixed with praise for the Common Core, as indicated in this April op-ed column in the Daily News by the UFT president, Michael Mulgrew. The leader mentioned the lack of a curriculum, the fact that test prep is not teaching and that teachers are over-burdened with paperwork. The union should issue a broad, comprehensive critique of the way that tests are hijacking the purpose of education, are vulgarizing the learning experience and are degrading teachers. Contrast this limited critique with the multiple details from the Chalk Face blog a week earlier.

This is reflection, once again, of the detachment of the union leadership from rank and file (regular non-officials) teachers on the ground. Contrast the union's alternating complicity or silence with this regime with the on-going critique launched by the union's MORE caucus, on their website and in person, for example at the union's delegate assembly. (The union's pretenses at critiquing the evaluation system are ephemeral window dressings.) Otherwise, we would have heard fire and this depth of detail from Mulgrew, and probably less enthusiasm for the Common Core.

Diane Ravitch mentions in "What is the Goal of Common Core testing?" that Rick Hess predicts that Common Core anxiety, prompting some parents "to demand “reforms” and an escape from their neighborhood schools." As she says, reformers will gloat over failing scores (no doubt to continue the failing schools line).

The progressive fightback on education has fused statewide across New York State! Coordination among the people's side is a great idea, for a recent report indicates that this has been coordination among the Rhee-type education Astroturf groups through the PIE Network.

From the Movement of Rank and File Educators (UFT) website:

Education Advocacy Groups from across New York Unite to form NYS Allies for Public Education by morecaucusnyc

Show Up In Person to Stand Up for Public Education!

Education Advocacy Groups from across New York Unite to form NYS Allies for Public Education and Plan Protest  at Commissioner King’s Visit to Rochester

New York Education Commissioner John King will be visiting Rochester’s School of the Arts on August 28th. Although his visit is not open to the public, members of a newly formed coalition of parents, educators and students called New York State Allies for Public Education [NYSAPE] plan to make their opposition to excessive tests and data sharing known by protesting outside of the school at 1pm.

NYSAPE includes groups from the following regions:

NYC: Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE), Save Our Schools, Stop Common Core in NYS, Change the Stakes, Class Size Matters, ParentVoicesNY, Time Out From Testing

Long Island: Long Island Opt Out Info, Long Island Parents for Education

Western New York: Western New Yorkers for Public Education, Concerned Teachers of Chautauqua County, East Aurora Supporters of Public Education, Hamburg Parents for QUALITY Public Education, Ken-Ton Parents Against Excessive Testing, Lancaster Central School District Info on Standardized Testing, NYS Stop Testing, O.P. Parents Against Excessive Testing, Partnership for Smarter Schools , Rush Henrietta Parents Against Excessive Standardized Testing, Williamsville Parents for Meaningful Assessment

Central New York: New York State Foundations of Education Association Opt Out of State Standardized Tests - New York (Opt Out NY) 

Oneonta Area for Public Education 

Adirondack Region: Opt Out Staab, Saranac Lake Parent Faculty Education Alliance 

Hudson Valley: Heads Down-Thumbs Up, Ossining Citizens For Schools, 

Parents For Change - Warwick, NY, Re-Thinking Testing Mid-Hudson Region

Student test scores on the state standardized exams plummeted this year: only 31% of students passed these tests.  Parents throughout the state are outraged and convinced that Commissioner King set the passing scores on these exams to convince them that their children and schools are failing to help him impose his damaging agenda.   Last weekend, nearly 2,000 parents and teachers, including members of NYSAPE, attended a protest rally in Long Island, expressing their opposition to these unfair and invalid exams.

Organizations from every region of the state have now joined forces to oppose these exams, the time and money spent preparing, giving and scoring them, and the invalid results, which one Long Island superintendent recently said were so unreliable he would ignore them.

According to Long Island Principal Carol Burris, author of the New York Principal’s Letter and recent recipient of New York’s 2013 High School Principal of the Year award, “Excessive testing is the wrong strategy to improve schools and bring all students to college and career readiness.  This year's tests, which caused the achievement gap to widen, and the percentage of students labeled "below basic" to balloon, will only discourage our students and push them into remedial services that they do not need, at taxpayer expense. It's time to end these wrong-headed strategies before we lose a generation of students.”

“High-stakes tests are resulting in substantial negative educational and fiscal impacts: School districts are diverting money to pay for systems of testing and scoring, a cost burden that is pushed to local taxpayers as the portion of school budgets funded by the state continues to be well below historical levels.” Says KT Tobin, a former vice president of the New Paltz School board and a founding  member of NYSAPE ally ReThinking Testing, Mid Hudson Region.

Chris Cerrone an educator, parent and member of NYSAPE ally Western New Yorkers for Public Education says, "Parents have the power to prevent damage to our children's education from high-stakes assessments. By uniting grassroots groups from around New York we can fight the impact of over-testing."  According to Tim Farley, an Albany parent and school principal, “Now is the time to take our schools back from corporate interests!” and as Dr. Joseph Rella, Superintendent of Comsewogue School District says, "Stop it, fix it, or scrap it!"

According to Nancy Cauthen of the NYC based parent and educator group Change the Stakes, “The efforts of Change the Stakes (CTS) have been greatly strengthened by learning from and with like-minded groups across the state. Last spring, the opt-out movements in Western New York and Long Island exploded with activity, and groups across the state benefited from the research they did as well as the excitement and energy they generated. CTS is thrilled to formalize this kind of collaboration by being part of NYS Allies for Public Education."

Lisa Rudley, President of Ossining Citizens For Schools said, “The state is overreaching and our rights are being trampled on and now there is a divisive campaign to “contain” parents, educators and community members.  We are joining forces across the state to protect authentic public education and our children’s privacy. Together NYSAPE Allies are a strong block of very concerned stakeholders committed to informing parents of excessive testing and inappropriate sharing of student data to third party vendors without parental consent.

Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters in NYC said, “Parents throughout the state were outraged when they learned last year that their children’s most sensitive, personal information would be shared with a corporation called inBloom Inc. and for-profit vendors, without their consent.  Thousands of them contacted Commissioner King to protest and asking to opt out, but he refused to acknowledge their wishes.  Two bills that would have prevented the state’s plan were passed by the Assembly in June.  Five states have now pulled out of inBloom because of the risk to student privacy.  Working together with NYSAPE and other parents throughout the state, we are intent on fighting to make sure that the State Education Department respects our rights and protects our children’s privacy and safety, by pulling out of inBloom as well.”

Bianca Tanis, a Hudson Valley parent said, “As a parent of a child with special needs, I am distressed by the state’s plan to share sensitive educational data, data that may include information pertaining to a student’s disability. This is a violation of a child’s dignity and right to privacy and may cause harm to our children. As parents, we insist on the right to say no.”

“Our teachers and schools are misrepresented as failing. We demand that the Commissioner, Chancellor and Regents support educators and communities in the hard work of creating and implementing meaningful curricula and assessments.” said David Hursh, a member of NYSAPE and a Professor at the University of Rochester. Eric Mihelbergel, a parent from Rochester NY says, "Public education is about teaching our children, not about teaching a test to our children. We must spend our time and money on our children, not on corporate and political interests."

NYSAPE urges parents and concerned community members to become an ally, join them on Facebook, and sign the NYSAPE petition against excessive testing and data collection. Parents and educator members of NYSAPE will raise their voices in support of public education at 1pm at the School of the Arts, 45 Prince Street, Rochester, NY 14607. Please visit www.nysape.org for complete details.

BREAKING: Watch WABC 7 @ 6:00 PM for MORE member speaking out against the evaluation imposition

Watch channel 7 (ABC) at 4:30 or 6 and there should be a clip from a MORE member speaking out against the evaluation imposition.

The 6:00 pm show did not show the clip; but you may view it here:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/html5/video?id=9125478&pid=9123903§ion=news/education.

UFT Does Have New Contract: It's Danielson and VAM-Based Evaluations

2007 CONTRACT 2.0, THE POST-2009 EVALUATIVE CHANGES AS THE DE FACTO NEW DOE-UFT CONTRACT

There has been much discussion of how New York City teachers, under representation by the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), have not had a new contract in the nearly four years since 2009, that is, not since outgoing president Randi Weingarten installed Micheal Mulgrew as her replacement, ratified by the UFT executive board. (How interesting it would be to see what a roll call vote would have looked like. Did the New Action members dissent from Weingarten's hand-picked choice?) The no contract angle even made a front page notice in the Chief, in the context of Mulgrew's getting re-elected in spite of producing no contract during his tenure.

Yet, teachers need to keep in mind that we do have a new contract. It exists in the extra-contractual give-backs that the UFT under Unity/Mulgrew's leadership.
Along with these points, we must note: it is a mistake to slip into the dichotomy of saying that Mulgrew is strong whereas Weingarten was weaker for us. When we look at the severity of the give-backs, we must ask, on what grounds are people asserting that Mulgrew better?

Weingarten set the cast for the current era UFT. She perennially said that new times called for teachers to concede and for unions to collaborate. She has always couched this position in language saying that teachers have to find ways to work together and so on. So, Mulgrew has followed in this position. He has only avoided clearly enunciating the collaborationist position. Whereas Weingarten would wrap her surrenders in statements calling for professionalism and cooperation, Mulgrew just concedes, without the rationale. The buzz-cut hairdo and portly physique has conned us to ignore that he has made giant concessions out-side of proper contractual procedure.

Let's look at the record, at the points by which Mulgrew has created a new contract. It must be noted that none of these items was ever presented to the membership for a ratification vote. These are priority matters to overturn, to protect our working conditions.

OBSERVATIONS
Teaching in New York has experienced a sea change in recent years. Unannounced observations are routine. Informal observations are treated with the weight of formal observations. Practices that would have been rejected out of hand in the past are routinely tolerated, with no systematic UFT fact-finding and push-back. Teams of network observers enter and disrupt classrooms with intrusive poking in and interrupting teacher-student interaction with questions.

DANIELSON FRAMEWORKS
As I've argued elsewhere at greater length, the union promoted this back in 2011, promoting this as helpful to teachers. Yet, as practiced in New York City, this is a nit-picking tool that can assail any but the super-human, hyper-organized teacher. In use, expect it to be used in a subjective manner, with sympathetic supervisors being fairer and biased principals to separate their friends from the pariahs. It will be rolled out officially in fall, 2013, a contract-quality change in our evaluative process, but it never faced a membership-wide discussion or vote.

VAM EVALUATIONS
It has been roundly documented: value added modeling is junk science. (For example, see here and here; test results correlate with school district poverty indices.) Again, supervisor bias can creep in. The low-totem pole teacher could get the challenging assignment; the favored teacher could get the easier classes. Last fall, the MORE caucus campaigned for a membership vote on the evaluation process. The UFT leadership (Unity) resolutely squashed the motions for a membership vote.
[UPDATE: This May 27 post at NYC Educator shows that already principals are using VAM against teachers, in one known instance, to deny tenure.]


Arguably tangential to a contract-quality job concession, but extremely influential upon teachers' working conditions, in a detrimental way, has been the Race to the Top. It has triggered many of the evaluative changes:
* Mulgrew conceded to Race to the Top. He joined in with New York City and State to endorse the state's application for Race to the Top. The stipulations of RTTT have brought forth increased numbers of school closures, an expanded number of charter schools, and test-based teacher-evaluation systems. Yet, the California Teachers Association has denounced it as hurting students; and at least 80 Ohio districts have rejected it, recognizing that the administrative costs out-weigh the benefits.

DIFFICULT TO REVERSE PRECEDENT
There is so much that Mulgrew has given away between 2009 and now. Strategically, in coming contract negotiations, this year or next, it will be very difficult for the union to reverse the practices. The city will be unlikely to give back on colossal encroachments it has made in the recent past.

Let's not kid ourselves. This is a terrible we find ourselves in: a de facto new contract, reached outside of proper protocols of what should happen in a union workplace. This is backroom deal-making with no membership vote. This must be challenged.

Revised (Corrected) Update: UFT's MORE Caucus Wins the Moral Victory

REVISED UPDATE: UFT ELECTION ANALYSIS --INCLUDING INCLUDING TABLE ON TURNOUT ISSUES-- FOLLOWS THE ELECTION DETAILS; NEW ACTION EXECUTIVE BOARD ASSUMPTIONS
MORE (Movement of Rank and File Educators) Bests New Action 2 to 1, Taking New Position as #2 Caucus, across a few divisional levels.
Considering the brazen negligence of the union to emphasize the United Federation of Teachers election, what with the buttons and posters for the municipal elections while keeping the union election on the hush-hush, this is a relative victory for the new MORE caucus.
Also, the union, cynically knowing that it has a lock on the retiree vote, rigged the rules to allow the retirees to have greater power.
An interesting question is how many unions allow their retirees to vote?

* * *
REVISED ICE-UFT REPORT
It is very telling how the Unity capitalizes on voter alienation, demobilization and simple apathy; yet in spite of all this, MORE bested New Action. The most striking voting result feature is that Unity won a minority plurality (45 percent) at the high school level. Translation: at the high school level, a majority oppose the Unity leadership.
The stark facts as reported at the ICE-UFT blog:

Here are the slate numbers for the 2013 and 2010 elections.

2013 High Schools Ballots Returned: 3808 Votes Counted: 3595
MORE: 1430 (40%) NEW ACTION: 452 (13%) UNITY: 1592 (45%)
The remainder are people who split their ballot.
2010 High Schools Votes Counted: 5203
ICE-TJC: 1369 NEW ACTION: 774 UNITY: 2595

2013 Middle Schools Ballots Returned: 1879 Votes Counted: 1875
MORE: 398 (21%) NEW ACTION: 161 (9%) UNITY: 1185 (63%)
The remainder are people who split their ballot.
2010 Middle Schools: Slate Votes Counted: 2881
ICE-TJC: 248 NEW ACTION: 421 UNITY: 1981

2013 Functionals (non teachers) Ballots Returned: 7704 Ballots Counted: 7113
MORE: 951 (13%) NEW ACTION: 754 (11%) UNITY: 5167 (73%)
The remainder are people who split their ballot.

2013 Elementary Schools Ballots Mailed: 34,163 Ballots Returned: 7331 Ballots Counted: 6870
MORE: 1140 (17%) NEW ACTION: 534 (8%) UNITY: 5111 (74%)
The remaining votes are those who split their ballot.
2010 Elementary Ballots Returned: 10,292
ICE-TJC: 703 NEW ACTION: 978 UNITY: 7337

2013 Retirees Ballots Mailed: 58,357 Ballots Returned: 22,462
MORE: 1490 (7%) NEW ACTION: 1880 (8%) UNITY: 18,155 (81%)

TOTAL SLATE VOTES, 2013: 40,400
MORE: 5409 (13.4%) NEW ACTION: 3781 (9.4%) UNITY: 31,210 (77.2%)

Something is wrong with the UFT electoral system when New Action gets only 13% of the high school votes but wins half of the UFT Executive Board seats for the high schools while MORE's 40% will get MORE no representation on the Executive Board.
It is obvious that a clear majority of the high school teachers who vote do not want a Unity monopoly on power. Had this been a traditional two party UFT election, there would be truly independent opposition representation (no Unity cross endorsement needed).
Two other stories emerge at first glance. First, the turnout was pitiful as only 43,138 ballots are being counted. More significantly, 22,462 of those votes are from retirees. That constitutes 52% of the voters. I would question if having retirees as the majority of the electorate is healthy for the union.
In addition, Mulgrew's vote will more than likely drop in a major way compared to 2010 among active UFT members. It appears many members did not vote for the opposition but they certainly didn't vote for the incumbent. For the next election, those members need to be persuaded to vote.

* * *

POST-ELECTION ELECTORAL ANALYSIS:
Before any Unity operative or any media journalist bandies about president Michael Mulgrew's apparent 84 percent victory, certain hard facts need to be acknowledged. A close examination of these facts will blow away any pretense that this election victory is any kind of victory that Unity or New Action can be proud of, let alone claim a mandate.
A crucial part of the story is that 52% of the voters in the 2013 vote were retirees, as the ICE-UFT blog, the source of the above details, attests.
(This is an essential fact that Unity caucus' press release, hosted on the UFT website, conveniently skips over.) This shows that Unity is very cynical in terms of how deeply it attempts to cultivate support among the rank and file.
--That it relies on people that are finished with the New York City educational system.
Unity cultivates the retiree bloc, touting member benefits. Yet, as an observer of the UFT scene noted three years ago, this allows Unity to ignore actual conditions of working in the classroom.

NEW ACTION GETS 9% - ANTICIPATES GETTING 18 PERCENT OF EXECUTIVE BOARD SEATS New Action, the caucus that fuses with the dominant Unity caucus, is such a bemusing entity. Sells its soul for seats at the table. It is a total cognitive disconnect, it ignores that its partner Unity brings on the train of conditions that are destroying our working conditions. Their latest blogpost acknowledges that its nine percent of the vote was a set-back. It ignores that it lost its number 2 position to MORE. Yet, due to its power sharing agreement (in exchange for not challenging president Mulgrew [Unity]) it gets executive board seats. By my math, if they are getting 10 seats out of 55 they are getting 18% of the executive board seats.

WHY THE JANUARY, 2013 EXPANSION OF THE RETIREE VOTE ALLOTMENT?
Furthermore, Unity, recognizing the huge pro-Unity skew among retired voters, and their greater proportional turnout, reconfigured the voting rules in January, 2013, to expand the pull of retired members. See this piece from Gotham Schools, this March:

Certain to make an impact are retirees, whose votes go overwhelmingly to Unity. It’s worth watching how big that impact turns out to be, since those votes have gained influence through a rule change made by the UFT this January. The total number of retirees’ votes counted had been capped at 18,000 since 1989, which meant that an individual retiree’s vote counted for less than an active member’s vote — about seven-tenths of a vote in 2010. The union raised that cap to 23,500 retiree votes in January, and because a high percentage of retirees vote, Mulgrew could potentially receive an even higher share of the votes than in 2010.

But, why the January, 2013 expansion of the retiree vote allotment? Could it be that Unity was facing a strong challenge from the MORE caucus? Note how no division other than retirees went over 74 percent for the Unity slate, yet the winning percent that Unity is able to cite is 84 percent. The retiree vote was instrumental in allowing that to reach that level.

Serving, retired	2007	2010	2013
In-service	24989	29005	20722
Retirees	22427	24978	22462
Total	47416	53983	43184

Yet, the counted retiree votes were capped at 18,000 in the 2007, 2010 elections. As Anna Phillips said, writing during in the 2010 election, the concern was that retirees could “outnumber active UFT members and effectively govern the union.” The cap was raised in January, 2013, to 23,500. (Funny how that figure was reached. 22,427 was the number of retirees voting in 2007.) Given that retirees voted at 52 percent of the total voters in 2013, for the first time in the majority of votes cast (see above table), they do now govern the union.
In March, Mulgrew went to Florida to speak at a retirees' luncheon. We imagine that if he were an in-service teacher, like Julie Cavanagh, the MORE presidential candidate, he might be inconvenienced to make a long-distance trip during a non-vacation time.

HOW PROGRESSIVE TEACHERS SHOULD APPROACH THE RETIREE QUESTION
Nevertheless, this should not be a point of antagonism by progressive teachers. What we should be pointing out is that the Unity faction is collaborating with conditions that will make it far harder for teachers to have the opportunity to reach and enjoy retirement as the retirees are enjoying. Unity has ceded the narrative of education failure to the deformers. Related to this is Unity's agreeing to the quota of seven percent of teachers per year targeted for termination via unsatisfactory ratings. With all the ramped up stress that teachers are going through --that Unity is not fighting, but just counseling teachers on how to comply with the mandates that it has never questioned-- the Danielson Frameworks, the Common Core, the data binders, the increased administrator/network leaders (or consultants) harassment, it is likely that there are thousands that will quit the profession, for their physical and mental health, and thus not be able to enjoy a full UFT retirement. Progressive teachers need to find a way to reach retirees to let them know how their union has acceded to working conditions that are thoroughly nightmarish compared to what they experienced.
LOW TURNOUT ACROSS DIVISIONS, BUT MUCH HIGHER TURNOUT FOR RETIREES

Division	Ballots mailed	Ballots returned	Percentage participating in vote
High schools	19040	3808	20.0 %
Middle schools	10807	1879	17.4 %
Elementary schools	34163	7331	21.5 %
Functional,	51040	7704	15.1 %
Retirees	58357	22462	38.5 %

PRONOUNCED ACROSS THE BOARD DECLINE IN TURNOUT IN EVERY DIVISION
It is striking that that there has been a fall-off in turn-out, across the school level types.
The anemic turnout can really be cast as the doing of the Unity caucus, for the union did little to authentically get the message out that there was an election. Beyond that, before and during the election, it has kept the members in a passive alienated state, it has the president and district reps speak in a loud barking style, as though that serves the members. It does not foster mass participation; it fosters a jolted state on the part of the listener. This is how Unity likes things.
Never will you hear Unity sincerely reach out and listen to the members, as UFT ELECTIONS: A VICTORY FOR MORE," as MORE pledges to do in the next three years.
TURNOUT IN SOME OTHER RACES The turnout among the practicing teachers was pronouncedly low –even lower than the turnout of registered New York State voters in the last presidential election.

Entity	Election	Turnout measure	Turnout rate
New York State,	2012 presidential election, general election	Voting-eligible population, ballots counted turnout rate	53.6 %

Source: “2012 General Election Turnout Rates,” United States Election Project, Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University, March 25, 2013
NO ADDRESSING OF THE RETIREE SKEW, CITED ON THE OCCASION OF THE LAST ELECTION THREE YEARS AGO
Excerpt from April 12, 2010 piece by Rick Hess, "Voice of Classroom Teachers Stifled... By UFT Election Rules," at Education Week, April 12, 2010

What you might find surprising about the UFT election, though, was the degree to which it was dominated by people who aren't teachers. Might this help explain the UFT's focus on gold-plated health care, pensions, and employee prerogatives, even at the expense of measures to attract talent or address instructional quality?
In last week's UFT election, 28% of the 36,907 elementary teachers voted, 20% of the 11,697 middle school teachers voted, and 30% of the 19,931 high school teachers voted. The result: a total of 18,713 ballots were cast by elementary, middle, and high school teachers. (These data are all available at New York City's Education Notes Online).
Those teacher ballots were swamped by votes from retirees and "functional" teachers. What exactly is a "functional teacher," you ask? Good question. The UFT New Teacher Handbook reports that examples include "attendance teachers; guidance counselors; hearing educational services; laboratory specialists and technicians; nurses and therapists; paraprofessionals; school secretaries; social workers and psychologists; [and] speech teachers." There are 45,889 functional teachers. Twenty percent voted, yielding 10,629 ballots.
And the union's 53,560 retirees voted at a 50% rate, yielding 24,978 ballots. Now, a recent rule change diluted the impact of retiree votes so that they count "only" for about 0.7 of a standard vote. This adjustment meant that the retirees cast the equivalent of about 18,000 votes. As Anna Phillips at GothamSchools reports, active union members voted at about a 24% rate, while the 53,000 retired members voted at a rate of about twice that.
So, do the math. From classroom teachers: 18,713 votes. From nurses, lab specialists, school secretaries, and such: 10,629 votes. From retirees (after their votes were diluted): 18,000 votes. So, 60% of the votes counted were not cast by active classroom teachers. That doesn't make it easy for reformers focused on improving work conditions and pay for today or tomorrow's teachers to marshal the votes for change.

Another observer of the election scene, Mike Antonucci, addressed this skew and Mulgrew's special advantage:

The largest teacher’s union local in the nation sent out 173,407 ballots, of which 43,138 were returned (about 25%). The most interesting detail is that Mulgrew received 34,919 votes, even though only 20,722 ballots were returned by working public education employees. How is that possible? Because 22,462 ballots came back from retirees – including many from Florida, where [the] UFT has offices, and Mulgrew can visit on the union’s dime, but his challenger cannot.

Is it any wonder, then, that the NYC Educator blog penned its latest post, "The United Federation of Retired Teachers"?

UNITY NEVER DEBATED IN ANY FORUM, live or Internet-discursive
MORE has won the moral debate. MORE and its lead members have consistently expressed deep concern for the issues surrounding education today. For example, here is Julie Cavanagh's November, 2012 statement on Race to the Top. And here is a critique, April, 2013, of Unity/New Action's Mulgrew's endorsement of Race to the Top, and a lengthy piece, also this April, with a deep analysis into the profound threats to New York City teachers, and Unity's role in abetting by these threats.
Unity and New Action's leader, Michael Mulgrew, shied away from ever debating MORE's presidential candidate.
Aside from a few weakly argued posts at a pro-Unity blog, Unity never defended its atrocious record. All of that receding from engaging the issues or defending its strategic posture or record, all the while, MORE's blog and about half a dozen blogs in New York City (in fact, all teacher blogs except for one) consistently plugged for MORE.
MORE on the other hand, has had its members appear in print, radio and television media, opposing the Unity perspective of education in the couple of years prior to the election. Never did Unity's Mulgrew appear in like media and directly articulate why he takes the strategy of mass professional suicide that Unity is pursuing.

REVISED UPDATE: UFT's MORE Caucus Wins the Moral Victory

UFT ELECTION ANALYSIS --INCLUDING TURNOUT FALLOFF-- FOLLOWS THE ELECTION DETAILS
Please see revised, updated post of Saturday, April 27, 2013.

Questions Mulgrew Still Has Not Answered About Evaluation Deals

Here is a Movement of Rank and File Educators (UFT) handbill of "Ten Questions for President Mulgrew About the Evaluation Deal," from spring, 2012.
Covering issues ranging from evaluations, evaluation deals, whether such deals will go to a membership vote, TDRs, observation appeals, "validators," PIP+, the new burden of proof on teachers (rather than the New York City Department of Education) to prove that they are not ineffective, mandated unannounced observations, test-based evaluations, most of these issues are still not properly resolved, and these issues point to the central failure of New Action / Unity's Michael Mulgrew's tendency to make easy deals with mayor Michael Bloomberg for the sake of making deals. Essentially, these topics point to many of the ways that Mulgrew has failed to properly lead the membership. X the slate box to Vote Julie Cavanagh for UFT president, and the rest of the MORE slate.

X the Slate Box for MORE in the UFT Election (See article for MORE's 2nd leaflet)

The stakes in the United Federation of Teachers election are high. The choice is clear: continue the path of the destruction of the teaching profession (that the New Action and Unity caucuses' Mulgrew has helped to carry out) as a viable long-term career, saddled by the endless contract-breaking give-backs plus the curricular travesty of the Common Core, or vote for a positive alternative leadership caucus with a vision of fairness for teachers and students.
In the United Federation of Teachers elections this month, say good-bye to Unity and X the slate box for MORE caucus. Beat the April 24 deadline; mail in your ballot now. Download the full leaflet at this address.

MOVEMENT OF RANK and FILE EDUCATORS
www.morecaucusnyc.org
The UFT elections are upon us.
UFT members have a choice for new officers, and MORE believes that this choice can make a difference. The Movement of Rank and File Educators believes the teachers union can and should be the fighting force to defend public education for all students. In the classroom we will fight for small class sizes, rich curriculum, push back on the testing regime and an end of harassment and incessant paperwork. Outside the classroom we will demand a fair contract and democratic governance of our schools instead of simply waiting for a new mayor.
We will partner with parents, communities and other unions because we understand that our teaching conditions are our students learning conditions, and together we can make a difference.

Ballots are out April 3 and are
due back April 24 by mail.
We urge you and any UFT members you know to vote for a positive leadership for our UFT. In past elections less than a quarter of the active UFT membership voted for their leadership. Please spread the word to Get Out the Vote and vote in a positive alternative leadership.

Vote MORE!
Demand MORE from the UFT.
No more waiting, no more concessions to billionaire mayors
and the corporate reform agenda that ignores the needs of students, teachers and communities. Together let's build a movement to fight for the quality public education that every students deserves!

HELP US CHANGE OUR UNION
Vote MORE in the election and encourage all the UFT members you know to do the same.

Forward this message to friends, relatives, activists circles and ask them to do the same.

Watch and share our video at: http://morecaucusnyc.org/2013/03/

For more ideas on how to help GET OUT THE VOTE for MORE, please visit http://morecaucusnyc.org/2013/02/19/get-out-the-vote/

WWW.MORECAUCUSNYC.ORG

“In the last ten years, in a departure from the roots of our union’s founding, the leadership has failed to organize and mobilize the membership at the time we have needed their leadership the most. The tidal wave of unprecedented attacks on our profession, our schools and our children will not stop with a new mayor. It is time for change. It is time we demand MORE from our union.”
--Julie Cavanagh, MORE’s candidate for UFT president

UPDATED: Mulgrew addresses chicken to debate controversy

(Updates at end.)
I'm Michael Mulgrew. I'm a big Chickenhawk.
I don't have to debate anybody. I'll have one of my minions debate MORE's UFT presidential candidate, Julie Cavanagh.
I don't care if it looks like Barack Obama sending out Gary Locke to debate Mitt Romney. Maybe let her speak for 90 seconds at my delegate assembly, where roughly a solid two-thirds are Unity die-hards, well-prepped to explain my sell-out moves that would fill an old S.I. telephone directory.
I don't care if I'm ignoring Cavanagh's diplomatic request in a letter, motion at the Delegate Assembly or statement at her caucus' blog.
I don't care because I'm a big, bad Chickenhawk, lord of the Unity Caucus.

Now, some reality-based commentary on the United Federation of Teachers presidential debate controversy, Norm Scott, commenting at Perdido Street blog:

With Julie being so inexperienced and unqualified to be president according to Unity flacks, a debate should be a slam dunk for Mulgrew. I've been challenging ANY Unity person to debate ANY MORE person and so far they all duck. When they were going to send Janella Hinds to debate Julie at FDR MORE said she would only debate Mulgrew and offered another MORE person and Leroy Barr pulled her out saying she would be on UFT time and couldn't debate until after 6PM.

Statement by Red Hook, Brooklyn special-education teacher, Julie Cavanagh and original letter requesting to debate, from MORE's website:

Cavanagh Defends Her Record and Asks Mulgrew to Debate His

25 MAR, By Julie Cavanagh

Wow. While having breakfast with my husband and almost nine month old son (who is finally on the mend after more than a week of a fever ranging 102-104 every day, during the same time my best friend’s 18 month old daughter was in the hospital, who by the way, is also a teacher and a single mother of two young children), I picked up my phone to see a mention on Twitter from Arthur Goldstein (teacher and chapter leader in Queens). I frankly couldn’t believe what I was reading. Usually a mention from Arthur has me in stitches. Not this time.

Now instead of relaxing while my baby takes a nap, I am writing this in response to comments on the ICE and MORE blogs attacking my commitment as a unionist and chapter leader and questioning my worthiness as a candidate for UFT President. All of this because I, and the caucus I represent, had the nerve to insist that Michael Mulgrew engage in a forum or debate with me so that our members can be fully informed and engaged when it comes to their voting choices in the upcoming election.

First let me say that I do not feel I need to defend my role as a chapter leader. Nearly every UFT member in our school, signed my petition for UFT President, and many of my colleagues are actually running in this election with MORE.

Second, I certainly do not need to defend my attendance at Delegate Assemblies. While I do attend, often, DAs are not a democratic forum. As I am sure the commenters on the ICE and MORE blogs know, and as all Unity folks know, the room is not even large enough for all of the CLs and delegates to be seated and when you do go and sit, you listen to Mulgrew practice his stand up routine for an hour or so, after which you *might* have the chance to ask a question or bring a resolution to the floor if Mulgrew recognizes you. Regardless, it is an effort in futility because it really doesn’t matter what you say, ask or bring to the floor; the ruling Unity caucus will disagree with it or vote it down, since they control the DA. If the UFT leadership actually held Delegate Assemblies each month that were informative and provided fair and ample time for discourse and discussion, I would be there in a New York Minute. As this is not the case, I attend as many Delegate Assemblies as I can, but sometimes other events such as a childcare issue, my son being ill or an important meeting in my community to bring a new partner into Red Hook to service children and families with disabilities will take precedence. I do not need to go to the delegate assembly to prove who I am or that I am committed to my union; I act every day in a way that highlights why I should be president of the UFT.

I am a mother and a teacher. I have been a teacher for thirteen years, and have been working with children with special needs and their families for even longer. I have stayed in the same community and school since moving to NYC in 2001, because I am committed to the process of leading school change and improvement from the school level. I became chapter leader at the request of my colleagues a few years ago and have worked hard with them, our parents, and our principal to make sure our children and our teachers have the best learning and working conditions possible. I fought for my school during the dictatorship that my union handed to the mayor, during a co-location of a charter school in my building that my union didn’t adequately help fight (which is difficult since the UFT leadership chose to co-locate its own charter), while our class sizes rise steadily and our budgets are slashed, while teacher’s choice was eliminated and insultingly reinstated to cover no more than a few boxes of pencils, while ATR’s rotate in and out of my building- some of whom have approached me on the brink of tears desperate for someone to listen to their struggle, during a time of a tidal wave of assaults on our children, our schools, and our profession.

Throughout this time, I not only worked in my own school community, I worked with parents and union members across the city and the country to fight back. You can find links to some of my work here, but I will list a few highlights: I co-wrote/edited/produced/and narrated a film that stood up to corporate education reform, a film that has been seen by hundreds of thousands of people in every state and on every continent (except Antarctica); I have appeared on several TV and radio programs and written several articles where I have spoken out forcefully against corporate education reform and for the schools our children deserve – and I was invited or asked in every single case to participate, so while those in Unity caucus pretend to not know who I am or what I have done (but yet ”know”, falsely, that I am not at DAs) apparently the national media does; I have also worked with other union members in the city and nationally – I helped organize a conference, and attended and facilitated, in Chicago in the summer of 2011 with other teacher union members; I helped lead the solidarity efforts with Verizon workers at the end of that same summer. I have sued, with a parent and a student, Mayor Bloomberg for the right to protest school closings and co-locations on his block and successfully organized and co-led that protest. I was the only teacher petitioner in the effort to stop and overturn the appointment of Cathy Black and also recently the only teacher on record to join with parents in sounding the alarm of student and teacher data privacy issues regarding SLC/inBloom data systems (Randi Weingarten, by the way, sits on inBloom’s advisory board). I say all of this not because I think anything that I am or that I do is so special, I share this information to highlight the outlandishness of the attacks from people whose usual line is there should be no attacks on union folks because we are under attack from outside forces and therefore need ‘unity’. I also share this because these are the things the president of a union should do.

Beyond of all of this, if Unity caucus can attack me for the number of times I went to the DA (this year I believe I have been to four DAs), the number of grievances I have filed (none), the number of UFT trainings or committees I have attended (none), then I wonder why they nominated Randi Weingarten as their presidential candidate, since she never attended a DA as a chapter leader, was never a chapter leader, and therefore never filed a grievance, attended the trainings, etc.

I personally do not think any of those things are what makes someone qualified to run our union. What matters is leadership. What matters is vision. What matters is the philosophy by which one will govern and represent the membership. I believe in a union that is member led and member driven. When I, or a candidate from MORE caucus, become president of the union, you will not have to attend a DA and sit idly and listen. The DA will be yours. When we take over leadership of our union, we will organize, support and build fighting chapters at the school level with elected district representatives who are trained organizers. When we run the union, leadership and staffers will make salaries equivalent to the teachers we represent — there will be no extra perks, no double pensions. When we lead our union, you will not go more than three years without a contract, at least not without organized job actions and a fight.

When Unity’s stranglehold of the leadership of our union ends, the members will have representation that believes in solidarity with other unions and in the power of our collective action. You will have a union that educates, mobilizes, and organizes our members and the public and who organically partners with parents and young people. You will have a leadership that truly understands that our working conditions are our students’ learning conditions, that a harm to one is a harm to us all, and that we must stand side by side with deep roots in the communities we serve to fight for social, racial and economic justice in our schools, in our city and across the country.

I am more than ready to share who I am with the members of the UFT and I am happy to answer their questions. In fact, that is precisely the reason I sent the email below to Michael Mulgrew. I believe a union membership with a less than 30% voter turnout needs to be engaged and exposed to open discourse and conversation between the two people who seek to represent them.

Mr. Mulgrew, I am still waiting for a response.

***

Sent: Mar 14, 2013 8:01 PM

Michael,

I hope this email finds you well.

While we have differences and disagreements concerning education policy and union democracy, we both are committed to our union and the children we serve. In that spirit, we should be able to engage in an open conversation during election season so we can ensure our fellow members are informed and engaged.

To this point you have ignored outreach regarding your participation in a debate or question and answer town hall with me. I would like to directly and formally ask you to participate in such an event.

I believe that our members deserve the opportunity to ask questions of their presidential candidates and I strongly believe this kind of open and honest discourse strengthens our union: an educated and engaged membership that is listened to and participates makes us stronger.

There is precedent for an event such as this between presidential candidates during election season. As you know, Randi has participated in presidential debates in the past: one in 1999 and again in 2001.

I am open to a debate format with a third party moderator or a town hall question and answer event with the membership. My only specific asks are that the event be filmed and/or livestreamed so that we can maximize member participation, that the date, which I am open to any, be agreed to a few days in advance, so that I can secure child care and that the date be as close to April 3rd as possible, so that we provide a fair amount of time for members during the election timeframe.

I look forward to your response.

In solidarity,
Julie Cavanagh

Some added considerations:
Unity partisans attacked Cavanagh, as discussed above. Yet, in doing so, they opened Unity to criticism on the undemocratic and pre-orchestrated nature of the Delegate Assemblies (DAs). Note these issues in the comments Norm made at the MORE site, including the note on how comparatively little classroom experience the last three UFT presidents have had:

I notice you get called on at every single DA while people never get called. Please try and tell us this is just an accident and not that you are part of the Unity speaker bureau that plans out scenarios at the DA in advance. (And you played the same role at the AFT). So Julie could attend a hundred DAs and never get recognized. Julie has more years of teaching than the last 3 UFT presidents combined. And more years as a chapter leader than Shanker, Feldman and Randi combined. And we haven’t even explored the stories about how well Mulgrew defended people as chapter leader at Grady.

Help MORE's Video Ad to Go Viral

Please share this the new Movement of Rank and File Educators (United Federation of Teachers, UFT) caucus' new video ad with all your friends, family and work associates.

From the MORE-UFT caucus' website:

New Video Ad

Help us take our 2nd video viral. Share on your social media, blogs, and email to all your friends and family. Ask your UFT colleagues to check it out and share it too! The ballots will be sent out April 3rd by USPS. The time is now to expect MORE from our union. We have a choice for a new positive leadership of the UFT which will build a strong union movement along side parents, students, community groups, and other workers’ groups.

Here is the video link to watch and share http://youtu.be/mN5cSbD4TTw

MORE believes that Unity co-signed on to government policies which are leading to the deterioration of our student’s learning conditions; Mayoral control, privatization of schools, over reliance on high stakes exams, and evaluation schemes based on testing which does not take into account our children’s socio-economic conditions, are just some of the harmful polices that Unity caucus has agreed to.

MORE’s UFT Presidential candidate Julie Cavanagh states; “For more than fifty years, one caucus and one caucus only, has led the UFT. In the last ten years, in a departure from the roots of our union’s founding, the leadership has failed to organize and mobilize the membership at the time we have needed their leadership the most. The tidal wave of unprecedented attacks on our profession, our schools and our children will not stop with a new mayor. It is time for change. It is time we demand MORE from our union.” MORE believes that a democratic, member-driven union will better address the needs of students, parents, educators, and the communities we serve.

In addition to running in the UFT elections, MORE organizes events ranging from educational forums and protests to social gatherings. For information about MORE visit www.morecaucus.org. www.facebook.com/MOREcaucusNYC www.twitter./MOREcaucusNYC

MORE's Cavanagh on Gambling Show; Eterno on NY1 Online: The Call 3/12/13

Check out the Movement of Rank and File Educators' (MORE)
Julie Cavanagh, candidate for the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) on where the union should be going
John Gambling Show, WOR, 3/04/13
James Eterno on the school closings in New York City
NY1 Online: The Call 3/12/13

Legitimacy of UFT Election in Jeopardy as Unity Chapter Leaders and Principals Block Mailbox Access

Federal labor law permits campaigning by rival sections of unions at the workplace. For public schoolteachers the question comes, are you working or are you campaigning. Thus, of course, school employees may only do their politicking during non-work-hours. Careful reading of New York City Board of Education statements supports such a stance.

Indeed, as the Education Notes blog reminded us a little over a month ago,

During election periods, the Baizerman decision allows any UFT member to go into ANY school -- even not their own -- and place materials in the mail boxes. Now this is not always a slam dunk as most principals, secretaries, etc. are not made aware. So if there is a problem a phone call has to be made to someone at the UFT (I hear Amy Arundel is in charge of getting these calls) who then calls the DOE and the school gets a message. Since that can take time it is best to do leave and go on to another place and come back another time. Sometimes I call the school first to let them know I am coming.

However, in the present (2013) election season, allies of the new alternate caucus of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE), are repeatedly having difficulties practicing their legal right to insert campaign literature in staff mailboxes of UFT members at city schools. At a disturbingly high rate, variations are happening, for several weeks now:
-principals are barring box access
-chapter leaders are barring box access
-other school staff are barring box access.

And DOEnuts blog notes how Unity-allied officers have been sending pro-Unity messages on union time:

what I heard was that MORE has been receiving reports of how Districts Reps advocated for the Unity Caucus during meetings reserved for union business. Specifically, they distributed leaflets during Chapter Leader meetings (meetings that are, again, union time, not election time) and have been using email lists to advocate for the same. Just recently, an email was sent to a list identifying seven reasons why Mulgrew should be re-relected (on a mailing list that was collected for union business. Not union election business). My understanding is that MORE has brought these issues to the attention of the election committee and asked for equal access to the members. But they haven't gotten a reply.

Unity has access to UFT member emails, access which MORE does not have, as noted here and here. (Kind of reminds you of election challenges for public office.)

The Unity caucus, which has run the union for the last 50 years, has been able to project its interpretation of the issues, its interpretation of the current union leadership's performance through the "New York Teacher." Yet, the MORE caucus is newer and has fewer resources than the Unity political machine. How fair is the election if one side is having access to mailboxes barred?

Everyday that Unity's Amy Arundell and Leroy Barr, the persons fielding complaints of election misconduct, drag their feet, the greater the net benefit to Unity in preventing name and caucus recognition of the MORE caucus and its slate. Again, the complaints have been coming in for weeks now. Arundell and Barr have "made phone calls" and have recently informed chapter leaders of leafletting rights. However, this is ineffective. This writer and other MORE supporters have been barred access in the last 72 hours; obviously many people didn't get or read the memo. Or the chapter leaders are conveniently failing to inform principals or other office staff of the memo. It will be a shanda, as the saying goes, if this box access problem only gets addressed properly after the election.

A quick googling of phrases such as Baizerman decision or Baizerman Step III grievance will indicate that this kind of Unity chicanery of denying mailbox access to other caucuses goes back to past election seasons. See for example, these posts from March 2005 and November 2006. It is a little disingenuous for Arundell or Barr to feign shock when this game playing has quite a legacy with the Unity caucus. The games such as District Representatives campaigning for Unity on union time is merely history repeating itself.

If the current leadership gets re-elected by a similar percentage as in the past, it will crow about how strong it is and how the members are not interested in the alternative.
The union must reach out now, to secure the cooperation of the Council of Supervisors and Administrators (CSA) and the New York City Department of Education, to get the message to all principals, that rival caucuses have the right of mailbox access; the union must reach out now to all district representatives, to reach all chapter leaders --via personal visits-- the email messages aren't cutting it, to get out the message of the right to free access to faculty and other UFT member mailboxes. (The UFT's Chapter Leader Update sent out a notice indicating mailbox access; however, even after this notice, the very high rate of mailbox access denial is occurring.)
Ms. Arundell, Mr. Barr, take action now, or the legitimacy of the election and its result will be seriously tarnished.