It's been over a decade since our union negotiated the terrible and "giveback" laden 2005 contract. The union leadership has claimed that they're not responsible for the ATR crisis and blames it entirely on the DOE. However, a UFT sponsored report " Case Study In Partisanship" shows the union's complicity in the creation of the ATR pool.
On page five of the above referenced UFT sponsored report the union was well aware of the potential damage the contract will cause excessed teacher and the potential discrimination of all veteran teachers..
"The UFT negotiating team warned the DOE before the 2005 contract was signed that the new Open Market Transfer System would result in a growing number of unassigned teachers (ATRs) but the DOE said it was prepared to pay the price for the changes it wanted. The UFT raised concerns about the waste of money and talent but the DOE did not seem to be worried at the time".
Interestingly, the report states that the UFT leadership was getting more concerned about the potential effects on the ATRs and all veteran teachers with the DOE's school based "Fair Student Funding"budgeting process and on April 7, 2008 filed an age discrimination lawsuit, only to quietly drop it in negotiating the 2009 ATR Agreement a year later
The union leadership was well aware that the combination of the "givebacks" iin the 2005 contract and the Fair Student Funding budgeting process made the ATR pool top heavy with older veteran teachers. In fact, according to the report, 81% of the teachers in the ATR pool were 40 years of age or older while for the UFT educators as a whole. it was only 57%. Fast forward to 2017 and the age of the ATR pool is still about the same while the average age of teachers is decreasing.
In 2006, 44% of the newly excessed teachers had between 0-3 years experience while 22% had 13 years or more. The next year, only 25% of the teachers with 0-3 experience were still in the ATR pool while 42% of those with 13 years of experence were still in excess. A complete reversal from the year before and proves that principals were discriminating against veteran teachers.
So when the union leadership tells you that they never expected the DOE to demonize the ATR pool, don't believe them. They knew what the DOE was planning to do before the 2005 contract was signed and still they agreed to the DOE's demands that made the ATR pool what it is today.
