Saturday, May 9, 2015

Are They Above The Law?




The United Federation of Teachers (UFT)
Special Complaint Process of Harassment by Supervisors
Derails Resolve & Fuels Abuse of Power

By: Luis Angel Perez, Educator & Advocate
Tuesday, April 14, 2015



Steps:

Step 1: Make a special complaint.

                     * Defined by UFT Officials as –

                            * “A complaint by an employee that harassing conduct or 
                                 acts of intimidation are being directed against him or 
                                her in the workplace.”


Step 2: “Your district representative will help you prepare the special complaint…”

                     * There is no such help provided across the board.

                            * On the contrary, special complaints of harassment are
                              underhandedly redirected and persistently discouraged.  

  
At this juncture, the policy goes from -

        * designating the responsibility to an actual individual or employment title, 
           (UFT District Representative),

        * to designating the responsibility to a more ambiguous entity (The UFT).

                * The UFT is not a person that can be held accountable.

                        * From this point on, it is not clear who, (by employment title), 
                           will be responsible to move the harassment complaint forward.
                           


Step 3:“…which the UFT may file with the chancellor.”

                     * Key word here is “may”.   

                     * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining
                         what constitutes a harassment complaint that -  

                            * will be filed verses a harassment complaint that  
                               will not be filed with the chancellor.


Step 4: “A joint investigating committee consisting of one chancellor’s 
               representative and one union representative will investigate 
               the complaint at the school level.”  

              “The Committee will come to your school to confer with 
                the complainant, alleged harasser, witnesses or other 
                people involved in the matter.”

                     * Transparency is needed here. 
                        This is not happening across the board.
  
                            * If this were happening, evidence of abuse of power 
                               and harassment would be apparent and corrective action 
                               proficiently expedited.


Step 5: “If the complaint isn’t resolved by 
              the joint investigating committee…”

                     * Wait! Why would the complaint not be resolved 
                         after being investigated by both –

                            * a Representative of the Chancellor and

                            * a Representative of the UFT Union?

                                   * Surprising answer provided below.      

            “…the union will determine if the matter has sufficient merit 
               to request a hearing before the chancellor or 
               the chancellor’s representative.”

                     * Transparency is needed in clearly defining who, 
                         by name or employment title, will be designated to 
                         move the harassment complaint forward from this point.

                     * The “union” is not a person that can be held accountable.


Step 6: “If the complaint is not resolved by the chancellor,…”

                      * Wait, seriously!? Why, by this point, would 
                          the harassment complaint not be resolved?

                            * Surprising answer provided below.        

            “…the union will review the matter to determine if 
              it should be submitted for a fact-finding hearing 
              before an arbitrator.”

                     * Transparency is needed in clearly defining whether this means 
                        that the chancellor or the chancellor’s representative have the 
                        legal right to disregard fact-findings in a harassment investigation.

                            * Are they above the law? 

                      * If this is the case then the mere involvement of the chancellor, 
                         or any representative of the chancellor, in a harassment 
                         complaint investigation would pose a serious conflict 
                         of interest in the investigation which will directly confound 
                         the results and infringe upon an individual’s right to due process.

                            * How are specific UFT Officers defending members 
                               in this respect?

                            * If they are not above the law then –

                                   * How is/are the chancellor and/or chancellor’s 
                                      representative held legally accountable for 
                                      disregarding fact-findings in a harassment 
                                      investigation which directly obstructs justice, 
                                      contributes to a hostile environment and directly 
                                      abridge a people's Human & Constitutional Rights?  
                        
                      * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining who, 
                          by name or employment title, will be responsible to 
                          move the harassment complaint forward from this point.

                            * The “union” is not a person that can be held accountable.

                        
Step 7: “Once the hearing has been held, the arbitrator must issue 
              his or her recommendation within 72 hours.”

                      * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining –

                            * Who appoints the arbitrator? 

                            * What are the credentials of the arbitrator? 

                            * In whose payroll does the arbitrator appear? 
             


Purpose of The Special Complaint Process as defined by UFT Officials


             “…the purpose of the special complaint process is to 
               resolve harassment or intimidation issues.”

                      * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining –

                            * what is actually meant by resolve?  

                            * how is effectiveness of “the purpose” 
                               monitored and measured.

               

             “The joint Investigating Committee doesn’t have the 
              authority to discipline the alleged harasser.”

                      * So at the end of all this twisting and turning, 
                         according to the UFT policy the Chancellor’s 
                         Office does not have the authority to discipline 
                         the harasser.

                      * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining –

                            * who actually does have the authority to discipline 
                               the harasser and what are the actual steps taken to 
                              decide and execute the discipline.


             “The goal is to make sure the harassing behavior stops 
               and doesn’t happen again.”

                      * Transparency is needed here in clearly defining –

                            * Who is measuring the progress of such goal?

                            * How is progress measured overtime?

                            * Where is the evidence that the goal was actually met?


The Following Section of the Special Complaint Process
Helps Fuel the Revolving Door of Abuse of Power by Our Leaders


The only thing this Special Complaint Process is effective in doing is -

        a. allowing harassment complaints to get lost in an complicated and 
           exhausting sticky web of twists and turns where a victim of harassment 
           can never be sure whom to follow-up with and the title of the person 
           responsible at different periods of their case. This makes it difficult, and 
           in many cases impossible, to genuinely address harassment.

        b. empowering leaders to abuse their power and continue harassment

        c. enabling and empowering the abuse of power and harassment 
            of teachers & students by school leaders.


In conclusion, after a person becomes abused and harassed 
by Public School Officials they then have to endure the same 
by United Federation of Teachers (UFT) Officials.


Cases handled by the “Special joint investigating committee” should be 
public information. A union member should be able to access prior cases 
handled by the special  joint investigating committee.

        * The reason there is no resolve is because DOE/BOE administrators
           on all levels have no respect for facts, Union Officers, Union Members,
           and the Children and families that we serve.

        * The reason there is no resolve is because Union Officers,
           on all levels, are passive in the representation of Union Members.
        
        * The reason there is no resolve is because Union Officers
            are intimidated by DOE/BOE Administrators.


        * The purpose of the special complaint process seems more like to –

               * prolong investigations in order to exhaust and deplete 
                  the complainant’s resources and to coerce union members 
                  into giving-up and into toxic conformity.