June 17, 2012 Mr.

Michael Mulgrew President, United Federation of Teachers 52 Broadway New York, New York 10004 Dear Mr. Mulgrew: Your call on the City Council to review the Department of Education's hiring process is a disingenuous shell game to fool the public from the real problem: your protection of teachers who engage in inappropriate sexual behavior with students. And the fact that none of these teachers had a prior record that would have prevented their hire is only part of the problem. Following investigations involving sexual and other misconduct, DOE has moved to fire those who should not have the privilege of teaching in our schools. While your letter expressed concern over how these individuals were hired, you ultimately recommended that these teachers be returned to the classroom. Here are some examples: In 2003, an independent investigator found that a male teacher in Brooklyn failed to notify school administrators when he received nude photos of a student on his phone. The arbitrator decided with the UFT and concluded that although the teacher did not solicit the photos, he "agreed to be sent a nude photo of a student" and did not report it to the administration. And yet, the arbitrator ordered only a three-month suspension without pay. In 2006, a male teacher in Manhattan was found guilty of inappropriately touching, hugging and speaking to several female students between the ages of 13 and 14. He called them baby and sweetie and showed them pictures of himself in a short bathing suit. The arbitrator decided with the UFT and wrote that the teacher "victimized female adolescents entrusted to his care" but imposed only a six-month suspension without pay. In 2007, investigators found a male teacher engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a 17year-old student, including excessive phone calls and text messages, visits to her place of employment, and inappropriate comments. Despite this behavior, the arbitrator sided with the UFT and found that "it is not likely the teacher will ever repeat" the mistake. Instead of being fired, the teacher was only suspended for a year. In 2008, investigators found a female teacher in the Bronx had sent text messages to a male student, telling him he was special to her and that she missed him. The arbitrator ruled with the
Office of the Chancellor 52 Chambers Street Room 320 New York, NY 10007 Telephone: 212-374-0200

Page 2

UFT and concluded that while the teacher "crossed the line and drifted into inappropriate personal student communication," she should be given an opportunity "to correct and adjust" her behavior. Her penalty was simply a letter of reprimand and counseling. In all of these cases, the Citys independent Special Commissioner of Investigation found instances of sexual or inappropriate conduct. Each of these teachers deserved termination, but in each case the UFT vigorously argued against it and recommended that the teachers be returned to the classroom. Whats more: none of these teachers had a prior record that would have prevented their employment at the time of hire. During the 2011-2012 school year, DOE processed 21,000 applications from prospective employees. This process included a fingerprint check and a review of employment and personal histories. Anyone with a prior serious conviction involving inappropriate conduct with children cannot work in our schools or for DOE. You wrote that the hiring process is the beginningbut thats not where the responsibility ends. These disturbing cases undermine your assertion that students are sufficiently protected by both your supposed zero tolerance policy and the contract provisions. Rather than calling on others to take action, make the decision that is right for our schools and our students. A teachers union should never protect those in its ranks who would dare to harm our children. Sincerely,

Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor

Office of the Chancellor 52 Chambers Street Room 320 New York, NY 10007 Telephone: 212-374-0200