The United Federation of Teachers (UFT), New York City’s powerful teachers’ union, is maneuvering to secure a substantial pay raise for special education paraprofessionals, bypassing the traditional route of collective bargaining with the city administration. UFT President Michael Mulgrew has endorsed a proposed City Council bill that would grant these crucial support staff an additional $10,000 annually, a move that effectively circumvents the recently negotiated contract with Mayor Eric Adams. Mulgrew argues that the existing compensation system undervalues the critical role paraprofessionals play in supporting students with special needs, emphasizing their one-on-one work with children facing a range of challenges, including autism, visual impairments, and medical conditions. He contends that without these dedicated professionals, students with special needs are deprived of their right to a proper education.
The city administration, however, has rejected the UFT’s demand for immediate raises, asserting that such discussions are premature and should be addressed during the next round of collective bargaining, scheduled for 2027. City spokesperson Allison Maser acknowledges the vital contributions of paraprofessionals and emphasizes that the current contract, finalized in June 2023, already includes wage increases and other benefits for these employees. The administration maintains its commitment to fair compensation for all educational staff and expresses its willingness to engage in comprehensive discussions regarding economic demands in the future, but within the established framework of collective bargaining.
This attempt to secure raises through legislative action rather than negotiation has drawn criticism. Ken Girardin, research director of the Empire Center for Public Policy, a government watchdog group, labels the UFT’s strategy as an “abuse” of the collective bargaining process. He argues that circumventing established negotiation procedures undermines the very purpose of collective bargaining, which is designed to provide a structured platform for labor and management to discuss and agree upon terms of employment. Girardin points out that collective bargaining is already a costly process for taxpayers and that such maneuvers only exacerbate the financial burden. While critical of the tactic, Girardin concedes that utilizing the City Council to achieve this objective is likely within the union’s legal purview.
Mulgrew, who is facing re-election this year, is navigating a complex political landscape within the UFT. His recent clash with the UFT’s Retired Teachers Chapter over health coverage has significantly weakened his standing among a crucial voting bloc. The Retired Teachers Chapter commands substantial influence within the union, representing tens of thousands of retired educators and holding significant sway over union elections. This demographic’s ability to participate in UFT elections adds another layer of complexity to Mulgrew’s re-election campaign. His push for paraprofessional pay raises, therefore, can be interpreted as a strategic move to bolster his support within the active membership and potentially offset the damage caused by his conflict with retirees.
The timing and context of Mulgrew’s advocacy for paraprofessionals have also attracted attention. Some political observers, including Councilwoman Inna Vernikov, a Republican from Brooklyn, view this move with skepticism. Vernikov suggests that Mulgrew’s focus on current members’ interests, specifically paraprofessionals, follows his unsuccessful attempts to alter retiree health benefits. She characterizes this shift as a belated effort to address the needs of his active membership, akin to “showing up to class in the last five minutes,” implying it might be too little, too late to effectively garner support.
In essence, the UFT’s pursuit of a pay raise for paraprofessionals through the City Council represents a departure from established labor practices and raises fundamental questions about the integrity of collective bargaining. The move is seen by some as a politically motivated maneuver by Mulgrew to strengthen his position within the union amid a challenging re-election campaign. While the city administration recognizes the importance of paraprofessionals and their contributions to the education system, it insists on adhering to the agreed-upon collective bargaining process. The ultimate outcome of this dispute remains uncertain, with potential implications not only for paraprofessionals’ compensation but also for the future of labor relations within the city’s education system.
