<HTML><BODY><DIV style='font-family: "Verdana"; font-size: 10pt;'><DIV>  <DIV class=MsoNormal>Following many prominent Democrats in this city, <I>The</I> <I>New York Times</I> today endorsed Bloomberg for a second term, citing his unparalleled record of achievement. This past Friday, about two hundred NYC school teachers expressed a different opinion by throwing up a picket line around the United Federation of Teachers HQ in lower Manhattan. They were calling for the rejection of the proposed four-year contract that Bloomberg and schools chancellor Joel Klein are trying to sell to the teachers. They also called for the ouster of UFT president Randi Weingarten for her treachery in agreeing to this contract. The picket line followed stormy scenes at the UFT Assembly the previous Friday, which was also picketed by a couple hundred teachers, and in which Weingarten was repeatedly heckled. Although her approval recommendation won by a two-thirds margin, the opposition was significant in a body that was always seen as a rubber stamp for the leadership. The rank-and-file will have their say in a ballot beginning on Oct. 24. The "no" vote is likely to be substantial. As added favors to Bloomberg, Weingarten informally agreed not to announce the results until after election day, and not to endorse Freddy Ferrer, Bloomberg's Democratic opponent in the mayoral race.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">   </SPAN></DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal> <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal>The contract is being billed by City Hall, the media and the union leadership as a victory for the teachers. The only provision they like to talk about is a 15% pay hike and a 5.5% retroactive increase for the last two years, in which teachers were forced to work without a contract. The 15% figure so far constitutes the sum and substance of general public knowledge about the contract. Less known is the fact that the 15% will be doled out over 52 months, amounting to 3.5% a year, barely enough to cover the rise in the cost of living. But what has made so many teachers furious are the non-monetary concessions Weingarten made in exchange for this raise. They amount to the surrender of a big chunk of what the union has won over the past thirty years. They include: 1) 37.5 minutes of additional classroom time per day and two additional workdays in the school year; 2) the right of principals to assign teachers to lunchroom, hallway and bathroom patrol; 3) the loss of seniority transfer rights <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>(a laid-off teacher would be able to get a job at another school only at the principal's pleasure); 4) The loss of the right to grieve disciplinary letters in personnel files.</DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal>The proposed teachers contract follows concessionary deals by the sanitation workers (their routes have been extended and the number of workers reduced on some trucks), and by city workers represented by AFSCME D.C. 37 (which agreed to a paltry increase and a lower starting wage for new hires). These contracts represent an implementation of Bloomberg's stated policy of granting pay raises only in exchange for "productivity increases," read: givebacks. </DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></DIV> <DIV class=MsoNormal>I'm not surprised that the union bureaucrats have given in to Bloomberg's bullying (they've been selling out their members for a long time), nor that his policies have won him the unanimous plaudits of bankers and bondholders. What amazes me is how effective the powers that be have been in cleansing public discourse of any criticism of NY's most consistently anti-labor mayor in decades. The voices raised on the picket line outside the UFT building broke the silence, but have so far found no echo anywhere else.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">          </SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>