Tuesday, February 28, 2012


Our power comes from informing and organizing our members and the
community. To effectively struggle against SFUSD's "pro-cuts" in
bargaining, it is important to inform and involve all UESF members.
Over 2000 UESF members filled out the bargaining surveys. Shouldn't
UESF members be able see the survey results?--or at least an outline
of their reflected concerns and priorities??

To get a fair contract, UESF has to take the initiative to make sure
the Millionaires' tax gets on the ballot and start preparing our
members for workplace actions, including “work to rule” and possibly a
strike. This will take focused organizing at our sites - and at the
district and state level.

We will need to have an informed and empowered membership that can
convincingly take this fight to the street. We are part of and serve
the 99% and this is no time for business as usual. Our livelihoods and
the education of the young people of San Franciso are at stake.
Together with communities we serve, we can protect the right to a
quality public education.

Support EDU Executive Officers in the upcoming UESF election:
Lita Blanc for President

Andy Libson for Vice President

Lisa Gutierrez Guzman for Secretary

Darlene Anya for Vice President of Substitutes

Upcoming Events:

Fundraiser Jan 20th 6-9pm @ 88 Park St. SF CA

School Board Meeting Jan 24th 6-8pm @ 555 Franklin

Next Meeting February 9th 430pm @ Ingleside Library

March 1st Local Day of Action @ TBA

March 5th-8th Week of action in Sacramento

Friday, February 24, 2012

Notes for UESF February Assembly

Notes for UESF Assembly (Feb. 15)

Attendance: 55 – 65


Contract discussion on Health and Safety

*Division Reports:*

Elementary School

High School

Paraprofessional Issues

Retired Division

COPE and community outreach


Support Mar, Campos and Avalos for Supervisor

Support Re-election of Tom Ammiano

Legal Support for enforcing Special Education Provision

Resolution on March 1st and March 5th

*President’s Report – Report on Negotiations with District*

*Vice-President – CTA State Council*

* *

*The Red Flyer –*

The assembly was framed by a flier passed out in the parking lot by
members of PLC in the parking lot. One side was PLC's slate for the
CFT. The other side was a vicious attack on EDU for organizing people
with posters saying “No Layoffs!”, “No Furloughs!”, and “No cuts!” to
the Board of Ed. Meeting last month. This action was labeled
undemocratic and divisive .PLC went on the attack calling us
“Educators for Disunity and Defeat” and asking “Do EDU candidates plan
to continue to undermine winning a fair contract for 6000 UESF members
in their attempt to win office?”

Much of the assembly was colored by this bombshell. Much of the assembly
was colored by this opening and many of us were busy figuring out how
should we respond and if so where was appropriate in the meeting and what
should we say?

Michelle I. kicked off the election process and talked about the elections
committee. Cynthia L. asked about where can complaints about tone and
content of campaign literature can be addressed.

I will also say that many of the anger and frustration which came out in
March 1st discussion was largely in response to the PLC attack. Finally,
EDU waited to the Good of the Order to basically say that “we are running.”
That we will not be bringing the election into the gutter and that we urged
the PLC to carry itself in a more professional and principled for the sake
of having an election that invites member participation. There is no doubt
about it. The election has started!!!

*Elementary School Committee Report* – Piloting of addition of ELD
standards for report cards. A handful of schools will be piloting ELD
standards on the report cards next year. Participation by individual
teachers is supposed to be voluntary and will be compensated by some modest
extended hours pay.

*High School Report* – It seems High Schools are being hit with lots of
expectations around School Loop, CLA testing and assorted responsibilities.
But no real information on how UESF is planning on responding.

*COPE *– UESF will be working to do signature gathering for the
Millionaires Tax which is very positive. EDU had considered putting
forward a resolution to all for this but UESF is planning to be proactive
on this despite lack of CTA support. This is good and EDU should
participate in Millionaire Tax signature gathering. There was also talk
about fighting “Paycheck deception” which is an attempt by the right-wing
to make it harder for unions to collect dues from its members.

*Reso’s on Support of Mar, Campos, Avalos and Ammiono* - These candidates
have been supporters of progressive causes and education (compared to
others), but the only thing that struck me as odd was that there was no
Assembly vote for our endorsement. Jeremiah J. made a point to ask that
candidates who were presented to Assembly should have a scorecard that we
can all see based on their stance on the issues. Dennis said he would
refer this to the COPE committee which I think meant “not a chance”

*March 1 and 5th* – Lita B. was asked to present on a reso. Which called
for UESF to aggressively build for March 1st and get a bus for March
5thgoing to Sacramento.
Before she could get to the front Dennis called the reso “Moot” because
UESF already endorsed March 1st and was going to join AFT2121 on their
buses for Sacramento. Lita B. made sure to point out that UESF in fact was
not being as aggressive as we needed to be to vigorously build March 1st by
the small number of flyers at the meeting. Comparison were made to March 4
th and how UESF showed more vigor around it. Ken T. said they only knew
about for a few days, but Matt B. pointed out that was not true and they
had know for about a week and half.

Questions emerged about “why the tension?” and this is where Noah W. spoke
to how it was reprehensible that good union activists are being attacked
for building fight back. Maggie D. made a spirited defense of EDU and
others asked when would we get the flyers if not at the Assembly?

*Bargaining Report* – Dennis reported that the district has 55$ in
reserve for the unrestricted general fund and and additional 23$
million in reserve for restricted funds but would still be calling
for about 300 layoffs. SFUSD seemed to want to add another furlough
day for a total of 5 per year / step freezes / AP prep lost / getting
rid of sabbaticals and a host of other concessions were asked from
UESF by SFUSD. UESF is saying currently “we will not be participating
in cuts”. That seems good but there is as yet no information on how
we will be waging this fight to stop the district’s attack. In
addition, Dennis reported that UESF strategy was to raise issues that
had no ‘price tag’ to them.

These issues were:

1. elimination of a language around the consent decree which is no
longer enforced.

2. establishing educator priority in having their own children
assigned to schools

3. adequate supplies for teaching( note: this is actually a big monetary

4. elimination of standardized testing, not used for anything but
curriculum taught (????)

When asked what members could do to support the bargaining team,
Dennis replied " Wear your T shirts and attend the March 9 UESF

There are also rumors that SFUSD will be limiting layoffs in the SIG
zones which would be very divisive if true. EDUers pressed UESF to get
this information out to members in a clear manner which highlighted the
attack and our need to respond. To date, it is not clear if UESF
leadership is listening. They seem fixating on limiting what UESF puts out
for fear that SFUSD will know. How that could matter is beyond me but
seems to be the mantra for keeping our members uninformed and uninterested
in bargaining. It is still not clear what UESF’s plan and time-line for
waging a contract campaign is.

*Vice President Report - *

CTA State Council – Linda P. reported on the work UESF did in the LULA
Caucus to push CTA to back the Millionaires’ Tax (or dual endorse Brown’s
and Millionaires’) but they were unsuccessful even though allied with
Oakland and sections of UTLA. I think UESF has done good work in the LULA
caucus and is waging the good fight inside CTA took make it less lame and
exclusively electoral and so tied to the Democrats.

* *

*Analysis –*

Election has started. Woo Hoo!! But I will cite what Karen Z. wrote in
response to how we should respond to PLC attacks on EDU.

*ah, the mudslinging... let me just say this is a great sign. PLC
considers you all a political force (although i have old ties to EDU, i've
not been involved so long that it feels wrong to say "us"). their response
is political, and they've framed it that way.

as someone whose been involved in now 2 successful campaigns (John's
mayoral bid was a success as we hit almost all our political goals), the
mudslinging is a great sign. the absolute best response you can provide is
to not respond. if you fire off something, no matter how principled or
righteous, you will look like you've stooped to their low. when john was
attacked by his political "challenger" in the D11 sup campaign, it was the
nail in the coffin for his rival. His campaign responded with nothing but
highroad messages and sticking 100% to the message which was this is a
person with vision, with integrity and with knowledge. you don't want to
show that anything will ruffle your feather or take you off your course of
serving educators, providing a voice for change and challenging the status
quo so that our students and our communities and ourselves have a better

congrats! -kz*

Our message needs to be clear. We need to oppose any cuts, any shared
sacrifice and any more furloughs or loss of staff. We need to be prepared
to mobilize our membership for actions like March 1st and March 5th and
then putting pressure on the District by preparing our members for starting
the strike vote process and let SFUSD know we will not be just sitting back
while they call all the shots. To do this, UESF will need to really
educate our members about what is at stake and the resources that SFUSD
already has.