Teacher Fired

RUSSIAN TEACHER FIRED FOR PHOTO

By Stephen Wilson

'Smile and the World smiles with you ' was the warm well intended advice

of a nursing instructor years ago. Well, the World does not always smile

back at you. At least not all the time. In fact smiling often irritates, annoys

and angers people. When I once worked in a Russian school in Khimiki

near Moscow my "Good morning" to the assistant headmistress was met

with a stony grim silence. Despite working at this school for a year I can't

recall a single teacher greeting me back once. Only the friendly janitors

had time for you. Misery likes company would be more appropriate advice

for entering some Russian schools. A Russian told me they never send a

photo for attaining passport with a smile on it lest it be sent back because

you should express a more serious look .You should send a photo with a

more serious, sullen or stern expression. It helps to frown.

This attitude helps to explain the plight of a luckless Russian language and

literature teacher, Tanya Kuvshinnikova, who was fired from her post after

some parent sent a complaint about a photo to the headmistress of her

school number 13, in Barnaul,Siberia. The letter complains that since the

teacher looks like 'a prostitute' because she is wearing a dress above her

knees, she is leaving a stain on the reputation of the school. "Who is she

trying to entice?" states the unpleasant letter.  This is just nonsense! If you

look at any of the photos the teacher has simply been swimming and is

conveying a warm, pleasant  and friendly smile. The teacher comes across

as vivacious, affable and friendly. It is an entirely  innocuous photo. The

teacher claimed she was attempting to promote a healthy style of living

by encouraging people to do winter swimming by bathing in cold water. But

instead of being commended, she finds herself fired. Even when the Local

Minister of Education intervened to fully support the teacher, by stating that

such talented and clever teachers should be encouraged to enter and

remain in schools, Tanya's situation has not improved. She stated that at

every lesson she gave after the incident there was an inspection by someone

from a commission. "I thought it would be definitely possible to work until

the holidays, but now I have written another letter of resignation. My colleagues

have been shooting me poisonous glances. They gather, and condemn me.

Because of such an atmosphere from morning to night my wish to go to school

has fallen.... I earn 12,000 rubles. It is possible to state that I work more for an

idea than money. I would like to be seen as a good teacher in the eyes of children,

especially those students who want to study. But the headmistress stated to me

that I was not a valued teacher! And I thought that there is no sense in working

in such a place. "Tanya hopes to set up her own school or educational project.

The local Minister of Education Maxim Kostenko to his credit, has promised that

Tanya won't be left without work. The Minister stated in reference to the dismissal

that: "Often emotions arise which are higher than a truly reasonable decision".

If only headmasters and mistresses at all Russian schools were so reasonable.

It is interesting to ask: "What does a prostitute actually look like ?" At this moment

of time in Moscow many woman are wearing attire such as dark tights, mini skirts

and long black boots. This attire has long been associated with the stereotyped

appearance of a prostitute. Yet those women who wear such clothes are not

prostitutes at all. It is simply the fashion! It can be very difficult to identify a

prostitute.

In recent years there have been widely publicized cases of Russian school teachers

being dismissed just for posting a photo of themselves in a swimming costume or

lying on the beach. The basis for firing teachers is article 48 of Russian Labor

codex in Education where a teacher can be fired for 'unethical behavior' . However,

the codex fails to spell out exactly what they define as unethical behavior resulting

in teachers being fired for a dress someone dislikes or for a face book photo of

themselves kissing a friend. What makes the case of 38-year-old Teacher Tanya

Kuvshinnikova more disturbing is the lack of support of her own colleagues.

Instead of supporting her they have shunned her. It is terrible that a good teacher's

efforts should be not only derided, but that she is made to feel so isolated. No

wonder she no longer yearns to return to school number 13.

Film Review

FILM REVIEW OF  SOLARIS BY TARKOVSKY 1972 MOSFILM

HUMAN-BEINGS NEED EACH OTHER

By Stephen Wilson

"On the surface , I was calm : In secret without really admitting it, I was

waiting, for something, Her return ? " ponders the main hero of Polish

writer Stanislaw's science fiction novel 'Solaris', Chris Kelvin, a psychologist

sent to investigate the strange events which have occurred at a space

station within the vicinity of an odd planet or star called Solaris. The character

who has arrived at a space-station, is wondering whether his dead wife will

come again to his room !  And he is anxiously awaiting something awesome !

The novel was then used by Russian film Director Andrei Tarkovsky to create his

masterpiece . Many people consider it one of the best Science Fiction

films of all time not only because of the stunningly beautiful shot

scenes but for the brilliant acting of the cast, dramatic dialogue  and the

deep penetration of the characters '  inner lives . This film provocatively

challenges all our cherished assumptions about our lives. It is also, in

a sense, a very disturbing film as it is not an easy film to watch or arrive

at a crystal clear interpretation of the film.

Not everyone was content with this film. The author Stanislaw thought

that Tarkovsky had radically changed the plot so much that the novel

was no longer recognizable. "More like Dostoyevsky's Crime and

Punishment than my novel ". Tarkovsky responded by claiming he had

the right to poetically reinterpret the novel and that Stanislaw did not

appreciate or understand the genre of film-making .

But many people who watch this film might regard it as either dull, slow

and unintelligible. A film of Tarkovsky demands a lot of attention from

the viewer as well as thinking. This is not a film for escapism or to

relax. It requires a lot of deep and penetrative thought ! It also might

be painful for some people to watch as it deals with traumatized events.

The basic plot of the film is that a psychologist, Chris Kelvin, {played

by Donatas Banionis,} a psychologist, is sent to investigate the bizarre

and inexplicable events which have happened on a space station which

does scientific research into a mysterious star or planet called Solaris.

The scientists who work on the station appear to have gone mad and

this may be due to the influence of Solaris. Before Chris leaves the earth

he says farewell to his parents by visiting their house for the last time

as well as interviewing a pilot who has already visited Solaris many years

ago and claimed to have seen a four meter high child on the planet. His

report was dismissed as being part of a hallucination and Chris tactlessly

agrees when he listens to the pilot. This deeply offends the pilot who

upset, storms off. But Chris Kelvin is a man haunted by a traumatic past.

His wife killed herself 10 years ago and Chris can't quite get over this. In

one poignant scene we see him burning all his photos, papers and things

connected to his past, including a photo of his dead wife. It is as he wants

to kill the old self and begin a new liberating journey.

When Chris arrives at the space station there is no friendly reception. He

finds himself in a very drab, dull and battered space station. The scientists

who meet him are so paranoiac that one of them almost physically assaults

him wrongly believing Chris is attacking him. While one scientist has

committed suicide , others are behaving in an erratic and abnormal way.They

also appear unhelpful as well as secretive as if wishing to conceal some

unmentionable crimes or deeds. Just to arrange a meeting with Doctor Snaut

{Juri Jarvet} entails a feat. It is as if nobody wants to meet him. Then Chris

wakens up in the night to find that his dead wife has come to his room. She

not only looks but feels like a real tangible person. Where did she come from?

Is Chris hallucinating or is she a ghost , replica or double ? The replica , played

brilliantly by Natalya Bondarchuk does not know anything about her past or how

she came to Chris. When Chris tries to leave her she starts to cry and Chris

scolds her : "Are you a child or what ? " But when he leaves her or fails to

watch her she kills herself over and over again. When she dies, she mysteriously

comes alive again. It is as if the suicide of his wife relentlessly haunts him.

He just can't escape from her. When he and his wife are invited to a birthday

party one insensitive scientist brutally tells her : " You are not real. You are just

a replica ". The other scientist scold him for his cruel words.  But is the replica

real or not ? Does it matter? When Hari asks : "What was your wife like ? Why

did she kill herself ? " Chris answers : "I'm not sure . Perhaps she thought I did

not love her enough ! " But Chris learns the importance of how to love a person.

It is now clear that the planet Solaris began to send replicas or influence the

psyche of the scientists on the play station after they performed dangerous

nuclear experiments on the planet. It is when the scientists decide to send a

message to the planet via Chris's brain waves that the strange events stop.

Hari leaves Chris a farewell message and destroys herself so that he can move

forward in his life.

Many of the themes of this film are that humanity is not spiritually mature enough

or ready for space travel. If humanity does not understand itself how can it

grasp other worlds ? "We don't need other worlds, we need mirrors".The film

poses questions such as :' What makes us human ? Do we really love someone

or our own false view of him or her ? What does it mean to love someone ? To

what extent are we responsible for the suicide of another person? How easy is

it to forgive ourselves never mind other people ?'  It is clear that Tarkovsky had

a  romantic and religious view of things which entailed a much more

sophisticated interpretation of the Orthodox faith you will encounter in many

churches. Like Chekhov, he believed that the Orthodox church was a friend of

the artist. If you watch the film attentively, you will notice there is an Icon of

the famous painter Andrei Rublev 's Holy Trinity in Chris's room. This is no accident.

Perhaps Tarkovsky was saying that there are clear spiritual limits on how much

we are allowed to know or pursue science in the world. And the scientists appear

to have transcended the limits of the planet , so God, is attempting to awaken

the conscience of every scientist . In this way, people will begin a much more

productive journey than  space travel leading them to become better spiritual beings.

Whether Stanislaw would accept such an interpretation remains open. In fact,

in his novel one of the characters asks : " Do you believe in an imperfect God?"

Both the novel and the film raise disturbing questions. Nevertheless it is worth

watching . It remains one of the best Russian classic films of the cinema. And

don't forget to read the original novel by Stanislaw.

Political Endorsements

CTU endorsed mayoral candidate?

By Jim Vail

CTU endorsed Toni Preckwinkle for mayor

Now let me get this straight.

The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) endorsed Toni Preckwinkle for mayor. She is the president of the Cook County Board.

She has promised the union to place a moratorium on school closings and charter schools, and favors an elected school board.

We hear from her advertisements that she was a teacher before she entered politics.

But then a strange thing happened, or didn't?

The CTU darling and heavily endorsed and encouraged to run against Rahm Emanuel in the last election in 2015 - Jesus 'Chuy' Garcia - has endorsed Lori Lightfoot, her opponent.

I was scratching my head on that one.

It made sense when explained - Preckwinkle did not endorse Garcia when he ran for mayor.

Why?

Preckwinkle is part of the city's Democratic Party machine. She was polling higher numbers and they say she could have beaten Rahm Emanuel in the last election, but chose to not run.

But not only not run, she chose to not back his challenger.

The CTU is now sending email blasts to its members to vote for Toni, but not Lori. They say Lightfoot is a corporate attorney and wants to turn the closed schools into police academies.

It appears a lot of big corporate money is now filling her coffers. And she appears to leading in the polls.

But Preckwinkle is a strong candidate who can win.

One teacher union insider speculated that the CTU political strategy, which is heavily invested in city elections, is to help make Preckwinkle the mayor, and Brandon Johnson, who then spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to be elected Cook County Commissioner, would then become the president.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens in this crazy world of politics.

Ogden Principal Battle

Does CPS Have a Process to Fire People?


Attached is the latest installment on the Beyer vs. CPS lawsuit. As you read through this, (never mind the award winning snark), you will see the pattern emerge that the Beyer attys are making the claim that there is no process at CPS for firing anyone. Parents have experienced that there is no process for much of anything at CPS.  CPS, on a whim, comes up with an idea or scheme: “I have an idea. Let’s fire —— because he is awful. Let’s write a letter, let’s disable an email address, and If he fights back, let’s get lawyers involved”. There is no process to ensure that Beyer was fired appropriately. 

Was there a process formulated with the Ogden Jenner merger? 

No, there was no process. I’m the first one out of the gate that thinks Beyer should rot in a cage somewhere for what he did to my family. Most families agree with me and we all know the Ogden Jenner merger was a train wreck waiting to happen. But in merging these two schools, there was no process. Basically, there were a handful of “merger moms” who called everyone racist if they didn’t agree with the merger. So CPS said, “Ok, let’s put these schools together and cross our fingers. If it doesn’t work, let’s get the lawyers involved”. There was no process to make sure this school merged successfully which is why it’s a whitewashed mess. Chip Johnson, who, along with Beyer, made the mess at Ogden. Now he was over there at Jenner last week having safety meetings that didn’t go well. I guess Chip can get paid for making a mess out of Ogden and then get paid to clean it up. 

Was there a process formulated to prevent drownings at CPS schools? 

No, there was no process. The child that drowned in the school did so because there was no process to keep children safe in the pool.  The child didn’t even have on a life jacket. The child was a diverse learner. The child wasn’t adequatley supervised. CPS has not read the memo that Diverse Learners matter. CPS had an idea:  “Hey, let’s put kids in a pool, and if anybody drowns, let’s get the lawyers involved”. There was no process to make sure no child gets in a pool without a life jacket and many other safety processes were not considered. Of course, since there wasn’t a process, the CPS lawyers did get involved, and the child’s family was awarded $4 million. Hardly enough to compensate for a child’s life. There was no process to ensure safety. https://www.bettergov.org/news/chicago-public-schools-to-pay-4m-in-special-ed-teens-drowning

What is the process when a child is abused at a school like my son was at Ogden? 

There is no process. As I may have mentioned, my diverse learner was abused at Ogden. Not just by Beyer and others in the administration, but the C Suite got involved. I went to Chip Johnson, Jadine Chou, Liz Kirby but there isn’t a process to go up the ladder to keep your child from being abused. 

In fact, in my case, I even reported to CPS that Jadine Chou and Chip Johnson exhibiting serious racial bias against my family. I asked for an investigation. Why are we paying for these two terrible people? CPS refused to have an investigation. Why? They know I’m right and they don’t want the liability, and that is why they don’t want a process. 

This week, myself, and three other Ogden parents went to meet with Board member Jaime Guzman to discuss the Ogden failures, among other things.  We discussed how there wasn’t any process to ensure safety, ethics, academics.  Guzman knows there isn’t a process, and they don’t intend to formulate a process for conflict resolution or anything else for that matter. I made Guzman aware that if there is a conflict, the parent is bullied. Parents can go up the food chain, but the word on the CPS Street is to bully the parent and don’t investigate. So in my case, Beyer, who cheated and lied was able to do so because there was excessive enabling, but no process, no investigation. Guzman’s assistant sent me the worlds most ridiculous email that I “misinterpreted” how we were abused at Ogden. Not only was it a ridiculous email but a reminder that if you want anything done at CPS, you must report to an outside agency. 

What I find concerning, as well as ironic, is the lack of process that allowed Beyer to operate like a madman at Ogden, this same lack of process may be the very thing that gets him back into Ogden. 

file:///C:/Users/jnvail/Downloads/image.pdf

Crisis

NO END TO THE CRISIS

A recent survey finds that while the rich cut back on

on education, the poor increase expenditure

By Stephen Wilson

A well-qualified accountant in Moscow can't find a job after one year, a

father suddenly loses his job so can only afford to let his children

have English lessons once a week as opposed to two and the head

of a German company with a branch in Moscow worries about how

his sales might be adversely affected by Russians purchasing less

cars and hence less lights. Practically everyone can express a story

of how either their salaries or future job prospects have been hit

by a stagnant and paralyzed economy which has hardly recovered

at all, but on the contrary, seems to have stalled. If you have any

doubts about this just drop into the high rise buildings around Moscow

and on the front door of the closes is written an ominous warning that

'Those tenants who refuse to pay their bills for household utilities will

face court action.' Those posters stuck on doors seem to have mushroomed

indicating a numerous rise in debt among Russians. It also confirms

a recent survey by the Atlantic center that over the past years most

Russians have spent almost half their income on food alone. The survey

found that over the last 5 years  the share of income spent on food has

risen by 5.6%. The number of Russians in debt have increased as easy

the light loans are made available.

One of the daunting challenges facing Russians is how to find a decent

paid job in not only towns outside Moscow, but in the very city itself which

is supposed to symbolize a beacon of tantalizing and alluring opportunities.

When you encounter highly qualified and experienced professionals

in Moscow complaining of how difficult it is to find a job then you quickly

grasp this economy is in grave trouble. A recent survey of the average

pay of personal who work in schools {Not just teachers but janitors, cooks,

cleaners and teachers}, found the average salary in Moscow was 59,500

rubles ($982) and in Saint Petersburg it came to 34,000. The average salary in Russia

was 37,000 rubles a month in 2018 according to the agency {РИА Рейтинг}.

I came across one student who informed me that her sister, a highly-qualified

ecologist was pondering over whether to take up a school teacher post in a

school just 100 km from Moscow for the salary of 11,000 rubles. Since it

might be one of the few jobs available in this village the student advised her

to take up the post which is in the Tula region.

However, one finding of the Atlantic survey found that despite the deepening

crisis, the poor  are spending more of their income on education

while the richer are cutting back. How can we explain this? It could be that the

survey fails to take into account that many of the rich are sending their children

to either English or German boarding schools abroad. But it could well be that

poorer people view education as a means of breaking out of poverty and they

want their children to do well. Every tutor in Russia can confirm that many of

the parents of their pupils don't always have good incomes . There is a growing

trend for some parents to pay for lessons once a week rather than twice a

week. A lot of the parents can't afford to pay for more than one lesson even if

tutors agree to a lower price. And parents make enormous sacrifices to ensure

their children attain good school exam results or master a key profession. Only

yesterday I met one vendor who works night and day in a kiosk. When I often

pass her she is struggling to keep her eyes open. One day, she asked me: 

"Are you from the Baltic republics?" I answered I was from Scotland. When we

got into a discussion it emerged she was a highly-educated migrant who had

come to Moscow to support her son who was training to be a cardiologist at

a medical school in Moscow. She was from Kirghizya. Like many poor migrants

and low paid workers in Moscow, they are sacrificing a lot of their income to

pay or support the education of their children. The overwhelming evidence does

not support ill-conceived notions that Russians are poor because of unwise spending

habits, or over-borrowing. On the contrary, the poorest are very careful with how

they spend their money and diligently use it. They are unlikely to go on some

rash spending spree which would lead to them being unable to pay the rent and

thus facing eviction. In fact, it is  the government who has more to learn from the poor

than vice versa.

Oakland Teacher Strike Analysis

OEA Strike: Balance Sheet, Lessons, and What Next?

By Jack Gerson, retired Oakland teacher and former executive board and bargaining team member

On Friday (March 1), the bargaining teams of the Oakland school district (OUSD) and the Oakland teacher union (OEA) reached a tentative agreement that received a mixed reception by OEA members. Yesterday (March 3), after several hours of heated debate, OEA members voted to ratify the agreement, 1141 to 832, or 58% for, 42% against. That’s an unusually big “no” vote on a contract recommended by a union leadership which had just organized a spirited strike that shut down Oakland schools for seven school days. At cluster meetings and at OEA’s Representative Council (delegate assembly) on Saturday (March 2), bitter accusations were made by teachers who thought the agreement was far less than the union could win by continuing to strike.

Why this division? Despite the union leadership hailing the agreement as "historic", it is far from that. There were several complaints:

OEA had demanded no school closures (earlier this year, OUSD announced plans to close 15 schools and consolidate nine others).  The OEA leadership said this was a critical demand. But in the tentative agreement, they settle for a 5 month "pause" in school closures. That's not worth much: the pause will end at the beginning of August, in time for OUSD to close schools before next school year starts. It will be much harder to fight those school closures in the summer, with teachers and students on vacation, than it is right now during the strike. And if the schools are closed, we can expect the available school properties to be disposed of: some to charter schools, some to real estate speculators who will drive housing costs still higher -- more teachers leaving Oakland, more homelessness. Many teachers spoke out against the “pause”.

School nurses said that their overwhelming need was for OUSD to lower their workload and hire more nurses. But the tentative agreement provided no change in nurses’ workload – just cash bonuses which the nurses had repeatedly told the union’s bargaining team they didn’t want to settle for. Several nurses told the Saturday meetings that “We were thrown under the bus.”

OEA had demanded a reduction of maximum counselor workload to 250 students (From the current 600). But they agreed to 550 next year and 500 the following year. Every little bit helps, but this will only help a little bit.

OEA had demanded a reduction of class size maximums by 4 per class in high needs schools (about half of Oakland schools) and by 2 elsewhere. But in the tentative agreement, they settle for 2 in high needs schools and 1 elsewhere phased in over three years -- better than nothing, but far less than what's needed, as many teachers said.

OEA had demanded a 12% pay increase over three years: 3% retroactive to the start of the 2017-8 school year, another 4% retroactive to the start of the 2018-9 school year, and another 5% for the 2019-20 school year. But they agreed to 11% over four plus years, starting January 1, 2019. And since the last 2.5% increase won’t take effect until the last day of year 4, it’s essentially an increase for the following year – so this is 11% over five years, or 2.2% per year, well below the cost of living increases. The original demands were meager enough: Oakland teachers are the lowest paid in Alameda County, an area where housing costs and overall cost of living are among the highest in the country. The proposed increases in the tentative agreement will be less than inflation, which will do nothing to help young teachers to make ends meet, and so the exodus of teachers out of Oakland will continue.

OEA had made solidarity with other school worker unions a main theme. Indeed, on Friday OEA called for a picket with community members and SEIU Local 1021 (representing OUSD classified workers) to block the school board from meeting and adopting a budget which would cut over 140 jobs, mainly of SEIU members. But at about 2pm, OEA President Keith Brown told the pickets “We have a TA! We Won!” and urged them to disperse. The optics of this are very bad and were not lost on SEIU members. One wrote on Facebook:

As a SEIU member who has been picketing in the rain or shine for the past seven strike days, I feel betrayed. I feel used…  I thought our collective goal Friday was to shut down the Board Meeting.”

Fortunately, several hundred OEA members ignored the leadership’s request and stayed to picket with SEIU and community until after 6pm, when the school board meeting was cancelled. It’s critical to not let the school board play divide and conquer, pretending that they have to cut SEIU workers and student support programs to pay for the OEA contract. The attempt to disperse the pickets on Friday played into the school board’s hands. That needs to be corrected. It’s important that OEA leadership makes clear that it unambiguously stands with all OUSD workers and stands fully in solidarity and support with them. Those cuts need not happen: much of the money is already there, and more can be found by cutting down on OUSD’s outrageous shoveling of revenue to private contracts and to redundant and overpaid top administrators.

[Breaking News: Today (Monday, March 4), hundreds of students and several teachers called in sick to protest at an emergency school board meeting called during school hours to try to minimize student and school worker presence. Despite impassioned speeches from scores of students and several teachers and other school workers, and over the protest of virtually all of those present, the school board voted to make $22 million in cuts: to school libraries; to restorative justice programs; to the Asian Pacific Islander support program; to the foster youth program; and to lay off well over 100 classified school workers.]

On balance: It’s important to acknowledge that Keith Brown and his team were able to lead a spirited strike supported and carried out by over 90% of OEA members. In contrast, OEA’s punishing 27-day strike in 1996 was beset by divisions within the union and within the community, as some charged that it deprived black students of essential schooling. None of that this time – the union was unified throughout the strike, and it had substantial support from students, parents, and community.

And it’s not helpful to characterize the contract as “a sellout”, nor to say that the bargaining team or the officers are “sellouts.” I believe them when they say that they’re convinced that this was the best deal that could be had at this time. I believe them, but I don’t agree with them.

Why not?

First, I think that the leadership was heavily influenced by their state parent, the California Teacher Association (CTA). CTA is overly legalistic and cautious, and it is closely tied to the state Democratic Party. Under CTA’s influence, the leadership team was far less transparent during the strike than it should have been. Decisions were made by a small group consisting largely of OEA’s officers and CTA staffers, with some union executive board members telling me that even the executive board was out of the loop. One lesson is: more transparency is needed, and especially needed is an elected strike committee to work directly with the officers, the executive board and, as often as possible, Rep Council and picket captains.

Second, and related, I think that there was a reluctance to aggressively confront corporate targets physically with militant actions. To overcome the intransigence of the corporate-funded and controlled school board, it’s necessary to convince corporate Oakland that the union is prepared to see that there’s no business as usual.  Hesitancy to do that was evident in the reluctance of the OEA leadership to vigorously pursue a proposal to rally and picket at the Port of Oakland, which could and should have occurred several days ago and would have had the support of dockworkers (ILWU Local 34 had already voted its support). Instead, CTA staff and OEA officers expressed fears that the union would be legally liable if it picketed at the port (it wouldn’t: the park and roads at the port are public property, picketing there is legal and that right has been exercised numerous times, including more than once by OEA). Finally, last Thursday (February 28), Rep Council voted overwhelmingly to picket at the port on March 5 (tomorrow). It’s no accident that OUSD improved its offer and rushed to settle when they did: one big reason was to preempt the port action. Had OEA not settled on Friday, and especially if it followed the Port action with militant rallies and sit-ins aimed at the big real estate and financial interests in downtown Oakland, I think that the corporate masters would have told state and city politicians to cough up some money, and told their school board puppets to settle up.

The union leadership repeatedly credited OEA's militant and spirited picket lines and mass rallies with what they proclaim as an historic win. But then they turn around and say that the meager tentative agreement is "the best that can be won at this time" because, they claim, support was beginning to ebb. I saw little evidence of that: thousands of teachers turned out to picket, march and rally on rainy days all week. I think that there's another reason: the union leadership is for the most part close to liberal Democrats like state superintendent of schools Tony Thurmond, who stepped in late this week to mediate the dispute and broker the deal. Thurmond and other Democrats represent corporate interests and the state, both of which wanted an end to this disruptive strike. I am sure that they pressed the OEA leadership directly as well as indirectly (through their influence with community activists and with CTA, OEA's statewide parent union). 

It’s important to move forward now: to do what wasn’t done during the strike – a complete end to the school closures; a full moratorium on charter school growth; restore all the cut programs and all the jobs that were cut; take the spirit that dominated the strike and rekindle it into a militant movement that confronts corporate Oakland – at the Port, in the City Center, at all the seats of corporate power. Confront them, and demand that the priorities be set straight: Adequate funding for quality public education and for essential social services, not for privatization and corporate profit.