GRIEVANCE DEClSION

(OLR #'s 227. 3341, 258; UFT #'s 13323, 13607, 13362)

 

Grievant: David K. Roemer

Title: Teacher

School: Edward R. Murrow High School, Brooklyn

Date of Conference: December 12, 1995

Union: UFT

Persons In Attendance: David K. Roemer, Grievant; Bill Forster, Chapter Leader; Jeffrey A. Huart, UFT Representative; Ira Cohen, Assistant Principal; Saul Bruckner, Principal; and Donald Roth, Superintendent's Representative.

Article/Contract: Article 21A5 (Material In File) of the Agreement.

Nature of Grievance: The grievant contends that the letters of May 15, 1995, May 17. 1995 and May 19, 1995 are unfair and/or inaccurate and should be removed from the file.

Finding/Reason:

Letter Dated May 15. 1995 (Observation of May 9, 1995)

The grievant alleges that he is currently involved in a conciliation process regarding the approach to be used in the teaching of physics. The grievant contends that during this process, the principal has no authority to rate his lesson as unsatisfactory and that the report of May 15, 1995 should be removed from the teacher's file.

The principal alleges that the conciliation process, initiated in December of 1994 has ended; the parties have been unable to bridge the differences and reach an agreement. The supervisor has the responsibility of observing the instructional program of the grievant and of reaching a conclusion, based on his/her professional judgment of valid reasons presented in the report. The Grievant does not challenge any of the statements in the report.

There was no documentation presented on behalf of the grievant's contention that the principal is restricted in the supervisory program during the conciliation process. Further, the process, initiated a year ago, appears to be at an impasse. The supervisor has the ongoing obligation of improving the instructional program and rating the teacher's performance. The statements in the report present valid reasons for the conclusion that the lesson was unsatisfactory, in the professional judgment of the supervisor. For the reasons above, the grievance is denied and the report of May 15, 1995, is to remain in the teacher's file.

Letter Dated May 17. 1995 (Observation of May 16, 1995)

During the conference, the parties requested a meeting outside the hearing room and returned with a resolution agreed to by all parties. Regarding the observation report of May 17, 1995:

Item 1 -The first sentence is to be deleted.

Item 1 -The third word "thus" in the next sentence is to be deleted.

Item 2 -The ninth word in the first sentence "also" is to be deleted.

The entire letter is to be retyped as per the above changes for placement in the teacher's file.

In the presence of all parties present at the hearing the grievance was withdrawn. Both parties, and the hearing officer initialed the changes that were agreed, specific to the report of May 17, 1995.

Letter Dated May 19, 1995 (Observation of May 17, 1995)

The grievant alleges that it is unfair to be observed by the supervisor while a conciliation process and an exchange of ideas are ongoing; that the item: c: Saul Bruckner." at the bottom of page two of the observation report of May 19, 1995 should not have been included; and that the entire report should be removed from the teacher's file.

The principal alleges that the conciliation process, initiated in December of l994, has ended; the parties have been unable to reach an agreement. The supervisor has the responsibility of observing the instructional program and of reaching a conclusion based on his/her professional judgment for the valid reasons presented. Further, the inclusion of the item: "c: Saul Bruckner." ensures that a copy of the letter, prepared by the supervisor is forwarded to the principal, who must be informed of the supervisory visit.

There was no documentation presented on behalf of the grievant's contention that the principal is restricted in the supervisory programs during the conciliation process, or, that it is unfair to rate the teacher's performance when the process has reached an impasse after a year of unsuccessful efforts. In addition, the statements in the report present valid reasons for the conclusion that the lesson was unsatisfactory, in the professional judgment of the supervisor.

For the reasons above, the grievance is denied and the report of May 19, 1995 is to remain in the teacher's file.

Respectfully submitted,

 

FRED GREENBAUM
Chancellor's Representative

IT IS SO ORDERED:

 

RUDOLPH F. CREW, Ed. D.
CHANCELLOR

2/21/96

FG:mr