1- Electronic voting allowance arguably should be /become a “no-brainer” on at least a referendum vote on next union-wide voting elections.
2- Is that really true that a low percentage (25% or so) of eligible UFT Members “bother” to vote ?
That is really sad, if so.
Perhaps with more issues presented on existing balloting (to include electronic voting)—or via electronic voting with “special elections” —more cohesive & equitable actions/policies can take place within UFT.
Thanks for reading, we agree with you! Voter turnout in the UFT officer election, which occurs every three years, is abysmal—with less than 25% of UFT members participating. Here at ABC, we think it is possible to increase member turnout by making voting accessible across all modalities (mail-in, in-person, and electronic), as well as a robust campaign to advertise and inform members about the election process and current issues. We can get UFT members more involved by holding information sessions, candidate town halls, and moderated debates—open to all UFT members. Proportional representation, instead of the current winner-take-all system, would also be a strong incentive to boost member participation. We are all UFT. Let’s show trust in each other and get to it!
Every group I’ve ever been and every sub committe always have minutes taken by a secretary. The minutes are then read at the next meeting. Since email is so readily available, the minutes are also sent to the members.
"Carl Cambria stated the task force is advisory in nature and will not maintain official minutes; and that task force members are encouraged to take their own notes." ABC, you neglected to add that this was also incorporated in Carls' explanation of the difference between a "committee" and a "task force". We aren't a committee. We are a TASK FORCE. He explained the difference. You were there. You listened. Questions were raised and answered. Our findings will be disseminated in a FINAL report, when we are finished, that is what we were tasked to do. Period. Publishing your "notes" of this meeting may make you feel tranparent, but you are playing a political game, where politics should not be involved at all. Yes, this year is an election year for functional chapters, but if you can't adhere to directives (in good faith) to a task force that you sit on, why bother being on it in the first place? Was it because you did not like the fact that we weren't on a committee, therefore there wasn't a need for a sec'y? Or because you could take your own notes if you wanted, you chose to do this? A report at the end wasn't good enough, yet you were silent? I'm curious, because this is unacceptable, to me. I'm speaking for me. Forget about the fact that you put it all on Unity to begin with...that's where your political games came in. Misinformation has no place in our union. You may say the notes are accurate however they weren't supposed to be disseminated. You knew that. Everyone on the Task Force knows this. New Year, New Beginnings... how about that at our next meeting?
Hi Nina, thanks for reading and for sharing your opinion. The proud UFT members of A Better Contract (ABC-UFT) have no objection to a final report from the task force being publicly disseminated to all UFT members. In keeping with ABC's shared commitment to transparency, open dialogue and freedom of speech, we will continue to publish our notes for anyone who wishes to read.
I am a member of this UFT task force. We were expressly told by the task force chair that we were free to take our own notes. There was no directive presented at the meeting stating we could not share our personal notes.
I specifically asked if regular updates were going out to members. Carl said no. Nina, we’ve been part of plenty of meetings and contract negotiations where NDAs are handed out, or meetings are moved to executive session, or requests made by leadership that details not be shared … NONE OF THIS was part of the response from the chair.
I also really think too much energy here is being spent by repeating “this is a task force” when the very title says as much.
I’m aware that Unity culture values tightly held meetings with no or limited transparency.
Yes, Chad I am aware that we were "expressly told by the task force chair that we were free to take our own notes" as your notetaking "expresses" however, the second part wasn't addressed. If ABC planned on doing this, it could have been discussed openly in the meeting as with the comment above yours. They are opinions, correct? Honestly, I'd rather have a secretary taking notes, since ABC's become forthright now about dissemination because what's left OUT of ABC's notes are just as important as what's in them. What was omitted is needed to put things into perspective. Again, my opinion. C'est la vie. Happy New Year!
I'm glad we are in agreement that there should be a secretary at the meeting to take minutes. I wish you had brought that up at the meeting when we were advocating for greater transparency. What is missing from the notes we posted?
Chad THAT issue was brought up about having a secretary. We were told we could not have a sec'y. I understood and accepted what was explained to me. I thought at first I was on another "committee". Why couldn't we have a sec'y? We we told and the difference was explained between a committee and a task force. (This was omitted) We are a TASK FORCE. At what point did ABC bring up disseminated minutes as greater transarancy? There's no use talking in circles. We both know that question was not raised. ABC knows what you will continue to do moving forward. Bastante. Enough.
Nina, you have not identified anything that is not already reflected in the notes. The task force is correctly named as such throughout the notes, and is not referred to as a committee. The chair’s distinction that this is a task force and not a committee is reflected in the notes. The lack of a secretary taking minutes was noted in the section “Meeting Structure and Decision-Making.” ABC’s advocacy for transparency and accountability was noted in the section “Representation and Task Force Composition.” The task force chair stated we were free to take our own notes, and we were not told at any point that we were restricted from sharing our notes. As a result, there was no need to expend time during or after the meeting to discuss the sharing of our notes.
From the meeting notes (thanks)
1- Electronic voting allowance arguably should be /become a “no-brainer” on at least a referendum vote on next union-wide voting elections.
2- Is that really true that a low percentage (25% or so) of eligible UFT Members “bother” to vote ?
That is really sad, if so.
Perhaps with more issues presented on existing balloting (to include electronic voting)—or via electronic voting with “special elections” —more cohesive & equitable actions/policies can take place within UFT.
Thanks for reading, we agree with you! Voter turnout in the UFT officer election, which occurs every three years, is abysmal—with less than 25% of UFT members participating. Here at ABC, we think it is possible to increase member turnout by making voting accessible across all modalities (mail-in, in-person, and electronic), as well as a robust campaign to advertise and inform members about the election process and current issues. We can get UFT members more involved by holding information sessions, candidate town halls, and moderated debates—open to all UFT members. Proportional representation, instead of the current winner-take-all system, would also be a strong incentive to boost member participation. We are all UFT. Let’s show trust in each other and get to it!
Every group I’ve ever been and every sub committe always have minutes taken by a secretary. The minutes are then read at the next meeting. Since email is so readily available, the minutes are also sent to the members.
It should be common practice for our union to make minutes and meeting summaries available to all UFT members, for all meetings.
I took the time to write a reply below. Please read it. Thank you. We're a task force, not a committee.
"Carl Cambria stated the task force is advisory in nature and will not maintain official minutes; and that task force members are encouraged to take their own notes." ABC, you neglected to add that this was also incorporated in Carls' explanation of the difference between a "committee" and a "task force". We aren't a committee. We are a TASK FORCE. He explained the difference. You were there. You listened. Questions were raised and answered. Our findings will be disseminated in a FINAL report, when we are finished, that is what we were tasked to do. Period. Publishing your "notes" of this meeting may make you feel tranparent, but you are playing a political game, where politics should not be involved at all. Yes, this year is an election year for functional chapters, but if you can't adhere to directives (in good faith) to a task force that you sit on, why bother being on it in the first place? Was it because you did not like the fact that we weren't on a committee, therefore there wasn't a need for a sec'y? Or because you could take your own notes if you wanted, you chose to do this? A report at the end wasn't good enough, yet you were silent? I'm curious, because this is unacceptable, to me. I'm speaking for me. Forget about the fact that you put it all on Unity to begin with...that's where your political games came in. Misinformation has no place in our union. You may say the notes are accurate however they weren't supposed to be disseminated. You knew that. Everyone on the Task Force knows this. New Year, New Beginnings... how about that at our next meeting?
Hi Nina, thanks for reading and for sharing your opinion. The proud UFT members of A Better Contract (ABC-UFT) have no objection to a final report from the task force being publicly disseminated to all UFT members. In keeping with ABC's shared commitment to transparency, open dialogue and freedom of speech, we will continue to publish our notes for anyone who wishes to read.
I am a member of this UFT task force. We were expressly told by the task force chair that we were free to take our own notes. There was no directive presented at the meeting stating we could not share our personal notes.
I specifically asked if regular updates were going out to members. Carl said no. Nina, we’ve been part of plenty of meetings and contract negotiations where NDAs are handed out, or meetings are moved to executive session, or requests made by leadership that details not be shared … NONE OF THIS was part of the response from the chair.
I also really think too much energy here is being spent by repeating “this is a task force” when the very title says as much.
I’m aware that Unity culture values tightly held meetings with no or limited transparency.
Yes, Chad I am aware that we were "expressly told by the task force chair that we were free to take our own notes" as your notetaking "expresses" however, the second part wasn't addressed. If ABC planned on doing this, it could have been discussed openly in the meeting as with the comment above yours. They are opinions, correct? Honestly, I'd rather have a secretary taking notes, since ABC's become forthright now about dissemination because what's left OUT of ABC's notes are just as important as what's in them. What was omitted is needed to put things into perspective. Again, my opinion. C'est la vie. Happy New Year!
I'm glad we are in agreement that there should be a secretary at the meeting to take minutes. I wish you had brought that up at the meeting when we were advocating for greater transparency. What is missing from the notes we posted?
Chad THAT issue was brought up about having a secretary. We were told we could not have a sec'y. I understood and accepted what was explained to me. I thought at first I was on another "committee". Why couldn't we have a sec'y? We we told and the difference was explained between a committee and a task force. (This was omitted) We are a TASK FORCE. At what point did ABC bring up disseminated minutes as greater transarancy? There's no use talking in circles. We both know that question was not raised. ABC knows what you will continue to do moving forward. Bastante. Enough.
Nina, you have not identified anything that is not already reflected in the notes. The task force is correctly named as such throughout the notes, and is not referred to as a committee. The chair’s distinction that this is a task force and not a committee is reflected in the notes. The lack of a secretary taking minutes was noted in the section “Meeting Structure and Decision-Making.” ABC’s advocacy for transparency and accountability was noted in the section “Representation and Task Force Composition.” The task force chair stated we were free to take our own notes, and we were not told at any point that we were restricted from sharing our notes. As a result, there was no need to expend time during or after the meeting to discuss the sharing of our notes.