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.
