In between its strained and sporadic contract talks with the Bloomberg administration, the union representing New York City teachers has quietly been gauging public support for a strike and considering whether and when the city's 80,000 teachers should walk off the job.þþLast week, the union, the United Federation of Teachers, conducted a telephone poll of 620 city households, asking questions like, ÿWhen you hear that the teachers' union is voting to authorize a possible strike if negotiations do not achieve an acceptable contract, would you say your reaction is mainly sympathetic and understanding or mainly angry and unsympathetic?ÿþþThe union, which confirmed that it had conducted the poll after a respondent informed The New York Times about it, was clearly an attempt to measure the political pros and cons of a teachers' strike, which is illegal in New York State and can involve steep penalties. Sixty-five percent of the poll respondents said their reaction to a possible strike was ÿsympathetic and understanding,ÿ while only 22 percent characterized their reaction as ÿangry and unsympathetic,ÿ the union said.þþÿThis fortifies my belief that the strategy of pulling out all the stops to try to get to a contract settlement is the right strategy,ÿ Randi Weingarten, the union president, said yesterday. ÿIt says that the public is with the teachers more than they've ever been before.ÿþþAsked about the poll results, Edward Skyler, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's press secretary, said, ÿThe mayor is more interested in improving education than responding to polls.ÿþþThe city's 80,000 teachers are working under a contract that expired in November 2000, and they have not received raises since December 1999. A deal seemed imminent last month, when a state fact-finding panel recommended that the teachers get a 15 percent raise over 27 months as part of a contract that would also lengthen the school day by 20 minutes. To help relieve the city's shortage of certified teachers, the panel also recommended a $56 million recruitment pool that would give new teachers a $3,100 bonus. Their starting salary is $31,910. Altogether, the recommendations would increase new teachers' salaries to $40,000.þþBut a number of factors have delayed a contract agreement, including the city's precarious finances, Mr. Bloomberg's focus on winning control of the school system and the two sides' inability to agree on how teachers should spend the extra 20 minutes recommended by the fact finders. Mr. Bloomberg wants most of it to be spent in the classroom with students, while the union says it should be used for training. The union put forth a new proposal for using the 20 minutes during a negotiating session on Friday, but it was unclear yesterday what the proposal was and whether Mr. Bloomberg approved. He and Ms. Weingarten discussed the contract in a meeting at City Hall last night, but afterward, neither would reveal what they had talked about.þþMr. Bloomberg may also be taking his time because he believes that he cannot improve the school system without drastically restructuring the current contract, which gives the teachers significant power over how schools are run. But mayoral aides have suggested that since the new contract will be retroactive and likely to expire early in 2003, the mayor may be willing to make concessions this time around. If he has control of the schools by the time the next contract negotiations start, the aides say, he will have a stronger idea of what he wants, advised by a chancellor he will have chosen.þþThe union's poll results come three weeks after its delegate assembly voted overwhelmingly to authorize the leadership to call a strike anytime between June and the end of September. The vote came after Ms. Weingarten accused Mr. Bloomberg of ignoring the teachers' plight while he fixated on gaining control of the school system.þþIn the next step toward a strike, all 100,000 of the union's active members — who include teachers, guidance counselors, paraprofessionals and school secretaries — are to vote this week on whether to authorize a strike. The vote will be tallied by June 7, Ms. Weingarten said.þþMeanwhile, Ms. Weingarten has met with union representatives from all 1,200 city schools over the past two weeks to ask whether they want to strike, and whether they think a strike should take place in June or in September. Most believe that September would be the better time, Ms. Weingarten said. This school year ends on June 27, and the new one begins on Sept. 4.þþUnder state law, the Board of Education must withhold two days' pay for every day that a teacher strikes. It can also strip striking teachers of benefits provided by the expired contract, like health insurance. Judges can also send striking teachers to jail, as happened in Middletown, N.J., last fall.þþThe public opinion poll, which was conducted on the union's behalf by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, a Washington firm, tried to gauge not only whether city residents would support a strike but also what they think of Mr. Bloomberg's handling of the contract talks and of his quest to win control of the schools. þþAccording to the union, 83 percent of the respondents said they had heard about the contract negotiations, and 74 percent said it was ÿvery importantÿ for Mr. Bloomberg ÿto act promptly in negotiating a new contract that gives city teachers a significant pay raise.ÿ þþAsked which should be ÿthe more important priority for the city right now,ÿ giving teachers a significant pay raise or giving the mayor control of the school system, 57 percent chose the raise while 20 percent chose giving the mayor control. Eleven percent said the two were equally important, and 12 percent said they were not sure.þþIn the union's poll, 66 percent of respondents said they were enrolled Democrats and 17 percent said they were Republicans. Dick Riley, a union spokesman, said that the households had been randomly chosen and that the union did not intentionally seek to survey a disproportionate number of Democrats, who tend to sympathize with labor unions more than Republicans do.þ
Source: NY Times
