STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM OF RUTH WENIG

I am a certified Special Education teacher presently working at P.S. 23 in Queens. I have been a teacher at this school since 1997. I have been a Special Education teacher in the NYC school system for 14 years, having previously worked at P.S. 811 at St. Mary’s Hospital, which was renamed to P.S. 23 in September 1997. I have a B.A. from Brooklyn College, a M.S in Special Education from Adelphi University. NYS Certification as a Special Education teacher, and NYC City License #643762 from the Department of Education. I have certification as an Educational Evaluator. I am certified with ABA training. In June 2005, I completed my course work in Educational Administration and Supervision at Queens College and am awaiting receipt of my NYS license in Administration, which would allow me to accept a position as principal.

The actions of current Principal W of P.S. 23, are discriminatory and constitute an unlawful and pattern of harassment. Principal W has indicated personal dislike, and has used all her efforts to discredit me. She has taken action against me in retaliation for complaints that I have made about her and certain persons in her administration to the union. The UFT has done little, or nothing in my defense.

As early as the time that P23 took over St. Mary’s in 1997, then Assistant Principal W’s behavior toward me was inappropriate. I was instrumental in creating a computer lab along with then Principal Dr. Joseph Zacherman. At one of our meetings together, AP W sat in. This was the first time I had met her. As the principal and I were discussing software and logistics, Ms. W interrupted, “I think that Mrs. Wenig should be teaching the older students science”. This was directly opposite the outline that Dr. Zacherman and I had envisioned. I explained that due to the transient nature of the site, this option was not realistic, and she threatened to write me up for insubordination. Dr. Zacherman became enraged and told her to desist. A year later, while she was still an Assistant Principal at P.S 23 I was denied payment for a day that I was absent from my classroom due to my religious observance of a Jewish holiday. It became necessary for me to file a grievance to secure my right to be paid for that day. The Union immediately upheld my position and I was paid for that day. At all times was Dr. Joseph Zacherman completely supportive of my talents and abilities.

When she became Principal in 2002 after Dr. Zacherman retired, she immediately began to personally attack several teachers. That year (2003-04) was a nightmare. There was one paraprofessional (“Para”) who has a history of inappropriate behavior and cruelty to children. This Para was removed from a succession of several classrooms, and placed into others, when the teachers could no longer work with this woman. Eventually this Para was placed in my classroom. Immediately, she became hostile to certain children, calling several of the Black children “Chocolate Babies”, and crocheting during class time. As the other teachers did, I contacted Principal W about her pattern of insubordination, racial bias, inappropriate behavior and disregard of her responsibilities towards the children in her class. Principal W refused to transfer this paraprofessional out of my classroom. Needless to say, with a highly disabled population, this staff member was not an asset to the classroom, and I questioned why all other teachers were offered relief from working with this disturbed individual. I was told that I did not have the option, and would have to spend the entire school year with a Para who would not follow directions, nor work directly with the children.

In December 2003, when the issue of this Para was again raised to the school’s Administration, Assistant Principal BN, acting with Principal W’s full authority and at her insistence, was openly hostile and extremely verbally abusive often invading my personal space. After about a half hour of being loudly berated and screamed at, I felt ill from this assault, and was taken by ambulance to Flushing hospital. Principal W refused to view this as a line of duty injury. As a result, four days were deducted from my bank of sick days. Although this abusive conduct was reported in a letter from an attorney on my behalf to Dr. Susan Erber, the District Superintendent, in January 2004, no action whatsoever was taken. A letter from my treating physician supported my physical condition at that time.

Later that same calendar year, Principal W coerced one of the hospital psychologists, Dr. DC, at the St. Mary’s site to write a letter, which falsely insinuated that I was not allowing one of my student’s therapies to be initiated, when in fact, no therapy plan had been put into place. As no therapeutic plan could be found either in the student’s file or within her IEP, I filed a complaint with the hospital. (This letter was withdrawn by the psychologist without further action and was thereafter reprimanded for his action by the hospital director.)

In March 2004, Principal W wrote a letter for my file for an occurrence, which not only happened outside of school but outside of school hours. As I entered the Hospital building one morning very early (around 7:30 am), I caught someone stealing newspapers intended for use by my class. Rather than supporting me for stopping the theft of valuable educational tools for our children, Principal W wrote a letter complaining about my actions for my personnel file. I filed a grievance. The grievance eventually went to arbitration and my innocence was upheld.

Also in the spring 2004, as assignments were being made for the 2004-05 academic school year, Principal W specifically advised me not request the same class assignment that I had for the 2004-05 academic school year and made numerous and explicit threats about how miserable she was going to make my life in her school if I went against her wishes. She implied that she would assign the Para to my class for the next year, even though she had made repeated promises that I would not have to suffer through another year with that individual. As a result, regardless of my seniority, I capitulated to Principal W demand and accepted the assignment to the lowest functioning class at the site for the 2004-05 academic school year.

In July 2004, Principal W filed a false and baseless complaint to the District Superintendent asserting that I was unfit for work, causing a letter to be sent to me by the Center for Recruitment and Professional Development administrator. Principal W demanded that I submit to a medical examination, without any medical issues listed or suspected, only that I had lost weight. Moreover, to compound this insult, while she was sending me to the medical offices, Ms. W initially refused to authorize my time away from school for this medical examination as being for school business and she insisted that I take the day of attending the medical examination, on personal time. The examiner, Dr. Audrey Jacobson, found the complaint to be baseless and advised me that it was not unusual for principals to file unfounded claims against teachers as a means of punishing teachers. A day was removed from my CAR for the appointment at the medical offices.

Ms. W, when absent from the office, has often used the site coordinator (“SC”) at St. Mary’s Hospital, as her henchperson. A site coordinator is only a fellow teacher who is working on a 6 year term as an out of classroom position, which is non-supervisory in nature. SC is a disruptive and rude element within the school. She is moody, and unpredictable, and she is often inappropriate and unprofessional. Almost daily, she would run into my classroom in the midst of a lesson squealing and kissing one student, ignoring everyone else, and then bark at me “Go Back to Teaching”. She would also come into my classroom, ask why we were doing a particular activity, and scream at me, or one of my paraprofessionals that the students needed to be doing something else.

In October 2004, my paraprofessionals and I were dealing with an emergency situation, wherein a student was having a seizure and vomiting. SC was alerted and came into the room and stood there, watching, instead of providing any assistance in what could have been a critical situation. Afterwards, rather than being supportive for a job well done, SC used that situation to call Ms. W and caused a letter written in my file alleging that while we were having an emergency with one of the students, another one of the other student’s head was leaning to the side (which is something that happens frequently, but is not dangerous as this child has some head control and he most likely wanted to see what was going on. When he does that, we prompt this student to pick his head up). Several paraprofessionals substantiated that, although we were involved in an emergency situation, at no time were any of the other students in the classroom in any danger at all. This unsubstantiated, baseless and false letter remains in my file.

I have tried hard not to let Ms. W’s actions towards me interfere with my duties and commitment to the school. In the 2004 -2005 school year, I conducted several staff development technology workshops, I was appointed to the Leadership Committee, served on the Science Fair Committee, designed the 7 site wide participation in “Read Across America” certificate, and ran the Hospital/School model seder. In addition, I repaired many of the computers throughout the school, particularly at my site, often using my lunch time for that purpose (a task which likely saved the school and the Board of Education many dollars and kept the computers available for use, which certainly was a positive and well needed asset) I also offered to be the site liaison to for the Brigance Testing, helping those who had alternate assessment students. The teachers were told several times, if there was a problem to come to me with it.

On Tuesday, May 24th, 2005 a staff meeting was held with Dr. H. Among the things discussed were the Brigance testing. Dr. H had asked all the teachers if they had completed the Brigance for their respective children. Almost all of them indicated that they did not know they were due. Dr.H reminded everyone that they had received training and requested that they should complete the testing as soon as possible. The teachers were told, if they had a question, they should come to me. Dr. H asked me to sit down with everyone during this week and help them all complete the Brigance testing, which I agreed to do.

The next morning, Wednesday, May 25th, Dr. H telephoned me and advised me that Ms. W wanted to speak to me. Ms W came on the phone as a three way conversation with Dr. H listening, and proceeded to go into tirade, screaming at me because I had not already completed ALL the Brigance testing at the St Mary’s site. I informed Ms. W that, although I had agreed to assist my fellow teachers, it was never my responsibility to do the Brigance testing for ALL children in the site. Ms. W continued to scream at me incessantly and called me a liar. She claimed that she had a letter to this effect, which I had signed, and based on this letter, would put a letter in my file. I again informed her that such letter did not exist, and asked her to show it to me if I was mistaken. She then made a series of threats:

A. She was just made aware that I was graduating with a degree in administration and supervision. She advised me that she would call my graduate school and make sure that my internship would not go through, and she would speak to the dean to tell them that I should not be allowed to graduate. I did inform Ms. W that my internship courses had ended and she was not in any way involved with my course work. She could, of course, call my dean, but her efforts would be fruitless.

B. She stated that she would not allow me to attend my graduation on June 2nd and I would not be authorized to take the day off. I informed her that I am entitled to the day, which I did take. (I have submitted all appropriate and required documentation and expect to be paid for that day.)


C. She told me that she will never give me a recommendation and that she would make sure I never got an administrative job anywhere. She said that she would call every principal she knows and tell them not to hire me.

D. She advised me that she intends to write me up for not doing the Brigance testing on all the students in the entire school. She said that she would put as many adverse conduct letters in my file as she could. She complained that I was being insubordinate, and from that point on, I would only be getting unsatisfactory ratings.

Note: I have always done the tasks that an administrator has assigned to me. This is my 14th year of teaching, during which time I have always received satisfactory ratings for my work and performance, including for the 2004-05 academic year as well. Before P.S. 23 came under Ms. W’s reign of terror, I had never had a letter placed in my file complaining about any adverse conduct or action. I believe that I have always gone above and beyond my job to help anyone who has asked for my assistance.

Later that same day (May 25th), I spoke to Dr. H, who asked me to work with the other teachers to finish up the Brigance testing during the rest of the week. I also reminded her that we had never received the testing material for the higher functioning children, making completion impossible. She verified this to me.

The next day, Thursday, May 26th, as I walked into school, the SC summoned me into her office. She informed me that SHE had decided that she was going to tell all the other teachers in the school not to do the assessments for the students in their classes. She further informed me that is was her decision that I had to do them all on my own time, including my preparation period and my lunch hour. She further insisted that all of them were to be completed by the next day. I advised the SC that Dr. H had already spoken to me and indicated that the other teachers would have to work with me since I do not know their children, and was not able to do an assessment on a student that I did not work with. The SC started yelling and screaming at me, calling me a “liar” and an “idiot”. The SC that told me that it was “too bad” for me, that I had to do this assignment “or else”, and advised me that she was calling the Principal.

Approximately, an hour later, Dr.H asked to see me. I went with her into a back room where the SC was present. The SC immediately started raising her voice to me, claiming that I called her a liar. When I asked she remembers that it was she who called me a liar, she admitted that it was her, but asserted “Well, you are.” I reminded Dr. H that the SC is neither a supervisor, nor is she an administrator. Dr. H agreed that the SC is only a teacher working on a compensatory time line as a site coordinator. Dr. H agreed that the SC was patently improper. The SC was informed that she was not working within her duties of her position. Dr. H continued to explain that the SC has no right to scream and yell and do things behind the staff’s back. She is not entitled to call teacher’s inappropriate and hurtful names, interrupt lessons and attempt to discipline teachers. I then questioned Dr. H that since this upcoming year would be the SC’s sixth year as out of the classroom in a compensatory time position (the mandated limit), would her position as site coordinator be posted next year. The SC asked if I was threatening her. I replied clearly and unequivocally that I was not threatening her in the least. Rather, I simply asked about a posting for the position, Dr. H confirmed that I was again correct, as this would be the SC’s sixth year, and her position would be posted. The SC began to cry, left the meeting abruptly, grabbed her purse and left the school building.

After the SC left the room, Dr. H and I spoke cordially. She again asked me to help the other teachers finish their student assessments. Dr. H apologized to me repeatedly, as she said that she really dropped the ball on the Brigance testing at our school. Despite her attempts to advise Ms. W about the situation, Ms. W was insisting that all the blame should be placed on me. Dr. H advised me, as the site Assistant Principal, that the summer theme would be “Putting it all Together”, and considering the low functioning classroom that I was teaching, she would suggest the theme of the “Five Senses” We discussed it at length and I was gratified with her interest and suggestion.

On Friday morning, May 27th, Principal W came to the site at St. Mary’s Hospital. During my early morning preparation period, as I was working in the teacher’s room, Ms. W approached me. She did not approach me as a typical person would, but rather invading my personal space, with her mouth only 3 or 4 inches from face. In a loud voice she proceeded to tell me the following:

A. She strongly suggested that I find a new school for September “or else”.
B. She categorically stated that “I was not an asset to the school”.
C. She categorically stated that “no one likes me at the school”.
D. She categorically stated that “I have to leave” or else she would make my life miserable.
E. She categorically stated that “I am not doing a good job”.
F. I was to stay away from coordinator Ms. Ronik and Ms. Ronik was instructed not to speak to me, Rather, if some issue came up, Ms. Ronik would inform my Para’s, but no longer communicate with me.
G. She stated that from this point forward, I would only be receiving “U” ratings on all observations and yearly ratings. She stated that this would be my last summer working, and I would lose my retention rights because of the “U” rating I would receive, regardless of the quality of my work.
H. She also threatened me, telling me that I had better watch out, because if I defy her and stay at the school, she will make next year absolutely impossible for me.
I. After she finished this diatribe, pursed her lips and spit, mostly air and a small amount of saliva, right into my face.


I reported all of this to the union, starting with Ms. Carmen Alverez, Al Samuels, Lisa Mendel, Michael Mendel and Al Mancuso at the UFT headquarters. They assigned special investigator James Vasquez to my case.

On June 10th, Dr. H came to me and asked for all the Brigance testing from my room. All were done with the exception of two (2) brand new students. One student was respite, and the last student had a Brigance that the parent was going to bring in for updating. Before Dr. H left the St. Mary’s site, she gave me a handwritten note of approval. Within minutes of Dr. H’s departure from Saint Mary’s Hospital, I received a fax from Dr. H, insisting that the Brigance for two (2) new students must be done immediately and indicating that the letter was going in my file. It would have been physically impossible for her to get to the main site in this short period of time, and is completely against the note she had left me with. When I saw Dr. H the following week, she communicated to me that her letter was sent to me at Ms. W’s specific insistence. I have not (and will not) sign Dr. H’s letter, which directly contradicts and conflicts with the note that Dr. H had given to me just an hour earlier that day. (Moreover, it is my understanding that a letter from an assistant principal cannot be placed in my file.)


I did not want to leave this site. I believe that because of some form of bias, or basic dislike, I have been singled out by Ms. W, who has undertaken similar course of conduct against the other individuals who had worked in this school. In addition, because I have indicated that I was awaiting the posting of the site coordinator’s compensatory time position, Ms. W and the SC have carried on vendetta-like actions against me. If I were out of the picture, no one would dare request a posting of the site coordinator’s position, and the SC would be able to hold this position indefinitely.

The first day of the summer session was Thursday, June 30, 2005. The summer staff met in the Lifeline School auditorium. After going over the requirements typically spoken about during orientation, we were dismissed to return to our sites. Principal W pulled me aside and expressed her dissatisfaction that I did not heed her warning that I not return to the school for the summer program (she made that statement to me on May 27th, 2005, and has been documented in my earlier statement). Principal W advised me that, regardless of my performance this summer, I would receive a U rating to insure that this would be my last summer working, and I would lose the 17.5% of income for all future years to come.

The theme of the District 75 summer session was “It All Adds Up”. As written earlier, in discussing how this theme could best be adapted to my classroom with Assistant Principal H, I followed her suggestion and used the theme to illustrate the five senses. Since my classroom is a SIE I class, with comatose, quadriplegic, non-verbal and cognitively low students, this concept not only followed the global theme of “Putting it all together”, but also incorporated a sensory experience that would be meaningful to the highly disabled students in my classroom. Throughout the summer, we smelled a variety of different scents, touched and made clay from flour, water, oil and cream of tartar; heard a variety of sounds, etc. On the initial page of the “It All Adds Up” District Implementation Booklet, the District suggests that this theme might be incorporated in ways other than mathematics, to suit the population of the classroom.

As in most hospital settings, the school is at the mercy of the hospital staff. We might not get any students at the time school begins, but they trickle in, and often are quickly removed for a variety of therapies throughout the day. We, as teachers in St. Mary’s have learned to be very flexible about our schedule. One morning I can have 11 children in my classroom, and a half hour later, be down to 2. It is impossible to prophesize which students, or how many students will be present at any given time.

On Thursday, July 14th, all three classes at the St. Mary’s site were outside after lunch, since it one of the few temperate days. The period was supposed to be from 12:30 to 1:15pm. Most of my students were brought down by the hospital staff after 1pm. All three classes came inside at approximately 1:30. It was one of those rare days - sunny but was not too hot. All of the students in the school were enjoying the brief respite.

At approximately 1:35, only moments after the students and I had arrived in the classroom, Principal W entered my classroom. I was working to arrange the 9 large wheelchairs in which my students were confined into a circle in my small classroom. The first thing Principal W did was yell at me loudly, complaining that I was not keeping to my schedule since the APE period was over at 1:15. Although I attempted to explain to her that the ENTIRE school was outside, and since the students in my classroom are at the mercy of the hospital to be transported around the school, we had only just arrived back into the classroom.

Principal W is well aware that the schedule in my classroom is frequently modified to adjust to the number of students in the classroom. While the time schedule may call for the morning circle activity, if only one or two students are in the classroom at that time, I will use that time for one-on-one or small group activity, and save the circle activities or reading lessons for a time when most of the students are present. This has been the universally accepted practice in every classroom throughout the site, since I have been in this site for the past 9 years.

After Principal W stopped berating me for being late, I proceeded to put on my Velcro vest and began to do a circle activity, which we had not been unable to do in the morning because few students had been present in the morning. Principal Weinfeld yelled at me to stop because that activity was not on my schedule for that time. I explained that there were only two children in class that morning, and since I had more students now, I would teach the circle time activity that could not be done that morning. I pointed out that the class across the hallway, in which Ms. L was the teacher, was engaged in a circle activity for the second time that day. I further explained that Assistant Principal H has often suggested doing circle activities as the last lesson of the day, as a way to bring closure to the day. Principal W said that she did not care what the other classes were doing nor did she care what the Assistant Principal had suggested; she only cared that we adhere strictly to the set time schedule. She advised me that she did not believe that a circle activity was closure, since it was only 1:40 and there was almost 40 minutes until the end of school. I tried to advise Principal W that circle activities generally takes nearly an hour, which would bring us to the end of the school day. Principal W continued to berate me in front of the entire class and the 3 paraprofessionals. She commanded me to do the next thing on my schedule, “Music and movement”.

I followed her command and turned on my special tape. The paraprofessionals and I began to push the chairs in time to the music, hold the students hands, sing, and rub their arms. We used a variety of percussion instruments and played songs which initiated activity, such as “Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes” and other songs that have some sensory stimulation.

Principal W had been running in and out of the classroom, in order to cram in three informal observations at once, then interrupted our activity by yelling to me to give her the written out extended lesson plan for this lesson as would be appropriate for an observation. As this was not a formal scheduled observation, but rather an informal drop-in visit, I did not have the whole lesson written out in a detailed step-by-step manner, as I would for a scheduled observation. I informed told her that I did not have an observation-type lesson at hand, but I had my plan book. Principal W then yelled at me, again in front of the class and staff, to provide an IEP for a specific student. As it happened (and as she likely knew), that this IEP had just provided to me from the District the day before. The student in question is non-ambulatory and profoundly retarded, but is able to parrot certain words. I still had the IEP on my desk and gave it to her. Principal W then asked me for the student’s portfolio, which I also gave to her. Since this student had only arrived in my classroom recently, I had used most of his work to complete his alternate assessment portfolio. Therefore, there were limited pages in his classroom portfolio. This student is able to make scribbling marks on a paper with prompting, but cannot count, does not associate numbers to quantitative values and does not retain any information. Like most children in my room, this student does little actual paperwork, as this is generally not possible with the SIE I population.

After walking in and out of my room for the third time, at 2pm, Principal W, who had not remained in my classroom for more than 5 minutes in total, instructed me that I was doing the music and movement activity long enough. I took out the booklet that the class had been going over in compliance with the district theme, “It All Adds Up”, entitled “The Five Senses”. This is very time consuming, since it has to be done one-on-one with the students in my classroom, and requires that the staff remove splints or other orthopedic hand devices from the children. Meanwhile, across the hall, Ms. Lochansky’s class was engaged full speed ahead on her second circle activity of the day, with Principal Weinfeld’s complete acquiescence and approval.

After the students were dismissed for the day at 2:20pm and the rest of the staff subsequently left, Principal W called me to the teacher’s area in the back of the school building. She told me that I did not have a lesson plan book, which I did and which I immediately showed her. I told her that I did not have the detailed lesson written out in the manner that would be used for a formal observation. She accused me of writing out the lesson plan schedule for the day just then, which was clearly impossible given the time frame of Principal W’s informal observation of my classroom that afternoon. I reminded her that, unlike the other teachers at the site, my lesson plan book was checked as often as twice or three times a month for the past year. My plan book is complete since the beginning of the school year in September 2004. I have been the only teacher on site to have my plan book examined repeatedly. It was looked at least 15 times over the course of the prior year by Principal W, Assistant Principal BN, and Assistant Principal Dr Herman. (I was the only one always examined)

I invited her to peruse almost a complete year of lesson plans in that book. I was always the only one who had lesson plans done a week before.
Principal W proceeded to call me a liar and an “idiot”. Principal W has frequently referred to me as a “liar” in public, including at a step 3 grievance hearing. The hearing officer stopped her and advised her that it was unprofessional (but I believe that it is part of the minutes of the grievance record).

Principal W then proceeded to berate me on my theme, “The Five Senses”. I informed her that Dr. H had instructed me to use this theme and I was following her directives, as the administrator assigned to the St. Mary’s Hospital site for the year. Principal W stated that, since Dr. H was not working at our school for the summer, I had no business following Dr. H’s directives. Principal W advised me that she wanted formal math lessons to be used with the students in my classroom. She wanted to see evidence of written math up on the boards, done by my students.

Principal W continued to yell at me, stating that she saw no evidence of my students’ written math work on display in my classroom. I asked Principal W if she would be willing to come into my classroom and demonstrate a written math lesson with my students, so that I could emulate what she wanted. This is what the UFT contract asks for. If such a lesson were successful, I would be thrilled to continue her work. Without such a demonstration, I did not know how a math lesson could be carried out with students in my classroom, who are unable to sustain eye contact or communicate in any way. Principal W falsely and erroneously reinterpreted my request in her observation letter, claiming that I did not know how to teach my students. I may not be able to do math with them, but I don’t believe that many teachers could provide the warm, secure, comfortable and stimulating environment that my classroom had.

(As a side comment, Phyllis W has never taught a SEI I classroom and since it was the only such classroom in all of her 6 sites, she was unqualified to assess the methodology involved in working with this difficult population)

Lastly, that same day, July 14, Principal W informed me that, as promised, she was giving me a U rating for the lesson she observed. I told her that, since this was an informal, unannounced observation, I was entitled to a demonstration lesson from her so she could model what was expected. Then I was entitled for a date for a formal observation, which should include a pre and post observation conference. She told me that she would speak to me again the following morning (July 15th). Principal W did not come onto our site on July 15th, nor has she ever discussed her ideas for implementing formal math lessons, the given a formal observation of my classroom as I had requested. She has never responded to my request for a formal observation with a pre and post observation conference, which is my right as a teacher. She came into my classroom with the preconceived goal of giving me a U rating, regardless of the actual observed activity and she was totality and completely unconcerned with whether her objective was achieved in a procedurally proper manner.

Later on July 15th, I sent Principal W an email, reviewing the informal observation, asking her again to demonstrate how teach math to my classroom, reasserting that the timing of circle activities she observed was not inappropriate, and explaining to her again that small group activities were done when we had low attendance at any point in the day. I pointed out that the situation at St. Mary’s Hospital was unique and we were at the mercy of the hospital regarding transporting our students to the classroom, a situation of which she should be very well aware. Flexibility in the classroom schedule was vital to assure that our students are best accommodated to the best of our abilities.

On Monday, July 18th, Principal W and AP BN came into my class room unannounced during a group lesson, which was going well. I was able to obtain some reaction from a few of my students. Using a large button switch, I was able to get three of my children to press the switch, by using close proximity and repeated prompting. One of the students was able to carry out this activity by using his foot, which he can raise, with assistance and prompting. The two administrators sat quietly for approximately 5 minutes and then left the room. As soon as I returned to my classroom from bringing the students to the ward for lunch, Principal W was waiting for me. In her hand, she had an observation report for her informal July 14th observation in which she claimed it was an unsatisfactory lesson. I told her that since that was an informal observation, I would like to schedule a formal observation, as well as a pre-observation conference. Principal W refused, stating that i) her observation was final, ii) I was going to have the U rating, and iii) I would get a U rating for the summer. She gleefully reminded me that I would then lose my retention rights for future 683 summer sessions.

I understand both teachers Ms. L and Ms. G received a satisfactory rating from Principal W during the same 40 minute period that she claims she gave me her undivided attention, as well as rave reviews, even though they undertook circle activities at an unscheduled period (and twice in a day) or undertook an unscheduled activity. Thereafter, I contacted Randi Weingarten, who requested that Lisa Mendel handle this situation. A step 2 grievance was initiated.

On July 26th, I was observed for over an hour by a teacher from a different site, Ms. Caroline Ismael. She sat at my desk silently for about an hour and observed me as we worked on a project with the students. From my understanding, teachers do not observe other teachers. On July 27th, AP BN came into my classroom for about 10 minutes during which time she asked to see my plan book again and asked me to introduce her to some of my newer students. On July 28th, Principal W came into my classroom for about 10 minutes during a literacy lesson, checked my plan book, after which she left without saying anything to me.

On August 2nd, I received a counseling memo, stating that I would be receiving a U rating for the summer and I would lose my retention rights to any future 683 programs. That memo indicated, on the bottom of the page, that it was being placed into my file.

On August 11th, the SC (who had been instructed by Principal W not to speak or interact directly with me since May) handed out the summer ratings to the staff at our site. These documents were not in an envelope. Before delivering my rating document to me, she was gleefully showing my U rating to others in the site, which was a complete and unacceptable violation of my privacy. Several staff members came to me at lunch time and expressed their disbelief that I received a U rating. I did not sign the rating sheet and reported it to the union. I was upset due to the violation of my privacy, which continued for the entire morning as a series of loud and continuous vocally repetitive demands in the doorway of my classroom, by the coordinator, ”I’m waiting for you to sign your U rating”. I did not sign the rating, but in a decision that I now regret, I ripped up the paper and left it on her desk while she was out to lunch. The next afternoon, after being goaded on by Teacher G, I cried. I know it was wrong of me to cry, but I felt that I was being attacked on all directions. I am obviously not the first person to cry in a small site where people are constantly goaded upon.

Principal W continues her clear vendetta against me, following through on her promise prior to the first day of summer school, that I would get a U rating. This is an extension of the harassment and bullying behavior that Ms. W has practiced towards me for an extended period of time. I have taught this particular student population for several years, not only receiving accolades from the administration, but also with gratitude and appreciation from the parents of my students, who recognize the obvious love, care and respect my paraprofessionals and I provide to this very difficult and involved population.

Principal W intent on portraying me as an ineffective teacher is part of her calculated plan to torment me and get me out of her school. By giving me a U for the 683 program, she is deliberately depriving me (and my family) of much needed income. I have worked for 14 previous 683 summer programs with great success, prior to Principal W’s vendetta.

Principal W had warned me not to appear at the St. Mary’s site on September 6, 2005 for the first day of orientation for the school year. She has specifically told me

I) that I am not welcome at her school,

ii) That I am a bad and disliked teacher, and

iii) That she will have me physically removed from the premises if I appear for work.

Although I had tried to find another position, both independently and by an urgent appeal to District 75 then Superintendent, Dr. Susan Erber, I had not been successful in obtaining another position. I had been told by the UFT to show up to the St. Mary’s site, which is my assigned school, on September 6th 2005, regardless of the threats that Principal W has made to my well being.

I came to the orientation on September 6, only to be removed by Principal W, and told that I could not return to my site, and that I would be transferred to the Queens Psychiatric Center. I told her that I had rights to my site, and she did not have the right to remove me from my position. She said that she made the decision and it was final. I filed a complaint to the UFT, but nothing was done. The next day, while on the way to the QPC, I received a phone call on my cell phone from Principal W to come to her office at the Hillside/Zucker Pavilion. Once I arrived there, I was told that I would be awaiting an appointment at the medical bureau for crying at school, and taking dangerous narcotics at work (as per the speech teacher’s claim). While it is true that I did take some prescribed headache medication, this medicine is clearly not a narcotic, and I took it during my lunch hour. Not to mention that it was none of this teacher’s business. However, this teacher is well known to be an active player in Principal W’s team, and frequently is called upon for writing creative letters to aid in the teacher’s harassment.

I was told that I should arrive at the main site for normal school hours, but I had to sit in the office and either sit and do nothing, read or do clerical work. I was not allowed to move from that seat, except to go to the bathroom, or to talk to certain people. I did this for three weeks, and then was sent to the medical unit. Since this was the second time I was sent to medical, the doctor Dr. Garner said that she had to give me a leave for at least a month. I stayed home for a total of six weeks, losing 23days out of my CAR, and then I was told I could return to work. I returned to medical for a third time on December 12 for a follow up. I was not/and am not in any way unwell. I was sent to the medical office and made to stay home as a punishment. And to use up my sick days was a successful punitive attempt to further harass me.

On my return to school, I was given a third change in my schedule. I would not be returning to St. Mary’s where my classroom was, nor was I taking the position at QPC, but I would be working at 3 different schools each week, walking great distances between two of the schools on Tuesdays and Thursdays, regardless of weather. I would be teaching reading enrichment to the inpatient students at Schneider’s Children’s Hospital and Hillside Zucker Pavilion. On Monday, Wednesday and Friday I would be teaching social studies to the 6, 7, 8 graders at Lifeline Center. I was told that I was “not worthy” of having a place to hang my coat. I spent the entire rest of the year with no desk, chair or file cabinet. I dragged a suitcase with wheels with all my teaching materials.

On Tuesday 11/15/2005, in the morning at The Hillside Zucker Pavilion, I was briefly approached by PrincipalW, who told me that she was taking me off the School Leadership Team to which I was appointed at the start of the 2004 school year, for a two year term, by UFT Representative Marcia Koster. Ms. Koster retired in February, 2005, and was replaced by Ms. Sheila Kaplan. Sheila Kaplan was informed by the UFT that this was a Union assignment and it was non-negotiable. However Ms. Kaplan did nothing.

Principal W explained that she did not want me on the Leadership Team because I no longer worked at St. Mary’s Hospital, and she needed it represented, so she appointed another teacher. I said that I thought that the appointment was for two years, but W said that it was more important for the site to be represented. I did not question her further, as it would have been useless.

Later that day, when I arrived home, I called UFT Special Investigator, James Vasquez, who has been handling all my grievances, and asked him if I was allowed to be dismissed from the Leadership Team by the principal. His immediate reply was no, it is a Union appointment, and Principal Weinfeld had violated Union rules by denying me my full term, regardless of which site I was assigned to within the school. Mr. Vasquez instructed me to tell my UFT representative Sheila Kaplan that this incident occurred and to correct this issue with the principal.

On Wednesday, November 16, 2005, at Lifeline School, I saw Ms. Kaplan in the teacher’s room, and told her of my removal from the Leadership Team, and my instruction to inform her by the Queens UFT office. Rather than doing what was asked by Al Mancuso, District 75 UFT representative, Ms. Kaplan responded instead by asking me to repair two of the Lifeline School’s computers.

I am not allowed a computer to use at work. I am not given a place to hang up my coat or store any supplies. I have been instructed by the administration to carry my supplies and my belongings with me from site to site, and from room to room. I have also been instructed to give homework to each of the classes I teach there on the three days, MWF, that I am at Lifeline School. This is difficult as three classes are sharing only 9 copies of “The World” books in total.

On Thursday morning, at approximately 8:10 am I knocked on Principal W’s open office door, at the Hillside Zucker site. She appeared to be the only person from the administration present at the time. I asked if I could use a computer to type up some homework for the Lifeline students. Principal W responded “You are not following the chain of command. This should be addressed by an assistant principal.” I explained that it appeared that none of the assistant principals were present. Principal W stated that AP BN was present, but I should wait by her office to ask her for permission.

I took my coat off in the teacher’s lunch room and was instructed to stand by AP BN’s door, and not to move. AP BN came to her office a few minutes later, yelling “If you looked, you would have seen that I was by the secretary in the back of the clerical office, I am big enough, for goodness sake.” I repeated my request to use a computer. She picked up the telephone and pressed the principal’s extension. She cryptically said “Ruth Wenig” and began to nod as she was being given some instruction. She hung up and said that there was none for me to use at this moment. I responded that I was on two adjacent prep periods until 10 am and I needed to type up some work for the students. I was instructed by AP BN to go to the two classrooms that I worked with and ask if I could use the one in there, while the classes were present.

At 8:30 am I went to Teacher Mr. B’s classroom and asked to use the computer. His students were using the computer, and he suggested I come back in an hour. I went to Teacher Mrs. F’s classroom, and I was told that the computer and the printer were not connected. She said that if I could connect them, I could use them. Upon further investigation, the printer drivers were not installed and a disk was not available. I explained this to Mrs. F and she responded that she would look for the disk. I went to the Teacher’s lunch room, and began to grade some papers. Ms F came in with an Apple Installation disk, and I told her that it would not help with the printer, and it was incompatible with her PC.

At about 9:15, during my prep period, AP BN came into the Teacher’s room and demanded to know why I was not on any of the computers. I explained the situation, and she said that one was free at the moment. I responded that I was grading papers, and I would try again later during some free time. AP BN demanded that I come back to her office. I followed her into her office.

Principal W was waiting in the office and instructed me to take a seat. She closed the door and stood extending her arm, holding her hand against it firmly. She said that AP BN was her witness and she was very angry at me. She stated that she and I had a private discussion regarding the Leadership Team, and she was angry that I discussed it with the UFT representative Ms. Kaplan. Principal W stated that if I could not be “adult enough” to discuss things without going to the Union, then I was not an asset to the school. I told her that I spoke to the union almost daily, and that it was my right to question them if I felt that something was not correct. She said that I had no right to involve UFT representative Sheila Kaplan, and “Perhaps I should consider leaving the school.” I replied that if offered a different and acceptable transfer I might consider it. However she responded “No. just leave, I want you to stop teaching.” I said that I would not leave my job with the Department of Education. She then told me to find another placement. I said that I had a placement in P23, and the transfer list only came out in the spring, and I would be remaining in my job at P23 as long as that was the only position offered to me. Principal W became more infuriated and again insisted I resign from my job then and there. Again I refused.

AP BN then began to yell at me. She first said that I was “All hot to use the computer, and then I was sitting in the Teacher’s room.” I again explained the computer situation. She said that I should have continued to go into the other classes in the site. I replied that I did not know the other teachers or classes, and I was not instructed to go to them. She yelled that I should have introduced myself. I said that I decided to use the Prep time to do other activities.

Then AP BN said that she was also disturbed that I contacted the Chancellor’s office. She stated that I had no right to write to Chancellor Joel Klein and complain about continued harassment. I replied that this was not a result of writing to Chancellor Joel Klein, but it was probably reported to his office by the Queens UFT officer Harolyn Fritz. (I am awaiting several Step III grievances and arbitrations to be scheduled.) She yelled that the complaint had my signature on it and if someone was forging her signature on documents, she would demand to see it. She said that I was “an idiot” if I let someone else use my name. I asked her if she saw the document. She said no. I asked her how she would know that I signed my name to a document. How did she know such document existed? I reiterated that it was most likely an action by the UFT and I was awaiting further instruction from them. Principal W then told me that it was not acceptable to her that I was lying to them. I responded that I did not lie; this was the situation as I was told by the UFT. I told her that I had two letters from Harolyn Fritz to await scheduling dates. Principal W again called me a liar.

AP BN then said to me “You always act like you are so religious; you wear long skirts and take off all the Jewish holidays, and you won’t eat any of our food because you are so kosher. I personally associate these behaviors as someone who is deeply religious, and pious, but you apparently have no problem lying. How can you consider yourself religious?” I reiterated that I was not lying, and she had no right to question my religious values. Both Principal W and AP BN again stated I was a liar. AP BN then said that either I was a liar or perhaps I was losing my memory, and perhaps she should report that to the Medical Bureau, and that maybe I needed to be put on medical leave once again. I replied that my memory was intact, I was not lying, and I wanted to leave the meeting as it was taking up my preparation time.

AP BN said that they were giving me such a nice schedule and I should be more grateful to them. I replied it was not a nice schedule at all. I stated that my position as a teacher at St. Mary’s was taken from me. Then I was assigned to Queens Children’s Center. Then I was assigned to sit in the office. Then I was assigned to three different schools, carrying all my belongings and supplies from site to site and from room to room. Principal Weinfeld then suggested “perhaps you don’t deserve better.” I replied that it was UFT regulations that I be given a place to hang my coat and a place to store my supplies. Principal W then told me that “It’s not happening.” And opened the door and told me to leave.

I left, and then followed my schedule of walking to the LIJ Schneider’s Children’s Hospital, a 15 minute walk around the Hillside Hospital and adjacent parking lots, through a locked door, and then additional parking areas, into the hospital. I then taught two periods there, and walked the 15 minute walk back to the Hillside Zucker Pavilion, where I taught the other scheduled classes, until the end of the day, carrying my books, a large briefcase on wheels, my coat, and my pocketbook.

I filed a report based on this occurrence. I received a letter from the Superintendent Susan Erber’s office. Based on her conversation with Principal W, she is confident that I imagined the entire incident, and there was no religious bias. Not only was Principal W unbiased, the letter also stated that she ALLOWED me to take the orthodox religious days, as if she had a choice in the matter. I assure you that the entire incident happened, and I could play it out for anyone.

On January 4, 2006, I was told to go into the city for a grievance meeting. Due to the location and the weather conditions, I felt it was best not to drive there and to take public transportation. Principal W wanted me to go into work first, and then leave for the 10am meeting. The union intervened, and I was allowed to go directly from my home to the meeting. At the meeting, the paperwork from the UFT was totally incorrect. It claimed that I got a U rating already for the summer or 2006, rather than the past summer of 2005. It did not contain any details of why this rating was illegal or based on harassment. Al Mancuso said that he had to start all over again, because it was written up wrong. Once the meeting was over, I took public transportation back to my house arriving at 1:45pm. I called the school to tell them that I just got home. Principal W got on the phone and spent ten minutes berating me for not bringing my car to the meeting, and coming directly in to school. She told me that I had to come to school immediately. I arrived in school with about 10 minutes of school time left. Site coordinator Gary Harrow was appalled that I was sent to come in at this time of day, however, I sat in the teacher’s room, and soon after, went home.

On January 5th, 2006, I received an email from Randi Weingarten regarding the summer 683 program. She was responding to the letter that I had sent her earlier regarding the incompetence of the way my summer 683 grievance was being delayed. Although she fully agreed that I was fully correct in being harassed, she advised me to allow the people at the UFT to do their job and get my position back. I spoke to James Vasquez, special representative, and he said that he was going to try to fix the situation, and perhaps get me another appointment for a grievance. He wanted more evidence of improper behavior in order to file an article 23. I informed him that there was already enough evidence, and I had rights to work in an environment free from harassment and menacing behavior. As I write this in July, nothing was ever done to either get me the summer 683 position, based simply on the UFT rules of observations and ratings, nor has Mr. Vasquez filed an Article 23 against Ms. W.

On January 6, 2006, at approximately 10:15am, as I was teaching social studies in Mr. F’s class, I was summoned by assistant coordinator E to leave the classroom, and was asked to go into the coordinator’s office. Waiting for me there, were two uniformed officers. They gave me their business cards and told me that they were there from the Chancellor’s Police. They asked me if I wanted union representation, and I said yes. Sheila Kaplan was summoned, and the door was locked. The officers were very loud and threatening, and said that there were there at the request of the principal, the superintendent and the chancellor, as I failed to respond to a summons, or appear in court for a charge of assault. I was under investigation, and could face prison time if found guilty. I told them that there was no such thing. I never assaulted anyone. I never had a summons, nor a court date. I did tell them that they should have investigated the validity of these allegations before they came to the school verbally assaulted me without right, and embarrassed me in front of everyone, and became party to the charges of harassment. They said that they were sorry if they were not true, but they had the right to investigate them further, and if they were found to be true, the Chancellor had a right to bring me up on criminal charges. I notified the union, and they were unconcerned. I felt that a grievance should have been filed, but they union did not want to do this, and just allow the situation to blow over.

I was summoned to a meeting on January 13th, 2006 at the Zucker site. The meeting was scheduled for the close of school, that Friday, and I responded that I could not go at that time on a Friday, as it interfered with my religious rights. The union said that Principal W could not plan a meeting late on a Friday afternoon, in the winter, when my Sabbath began around 4pm. Principal W was unwilling to change the date, saying that if I couldn’t be there it was not important enough to me. After Mr. Mancuso said that the meeting had to be changed to January 19th, to accommodate me, she finally acquiesced. I arrived at the meeting where Principal W, her LES, Al Mancuso, and James Vasquez were present. I was not allowed to bring in my attorney, nor my union rep. The reason for the meeting was for us to discuss the article 23, not to file it, but just to rehash it. Principal W had the list of all the things that she had done to me in the past 18 months. One by one, she denied ever doing anything, however, if I dropped the Article 23 complaint, she would give me my summer 683 job back. This was in the recent wake of the screaming and threatening phone call on January 4th, the visit by the Chancellor’s police on January 6th, and the demand to meet when it would be in conflict with my Sabbath. I replied to her that the fact that she wanted the Article 23 dropped, was an indication of guilt, and there was nothing stopping her from taking the summer 683 positions away from me again in the spring, with a different cause. I told also said that this offer was no less than extortion, and unless I had written assurance of a permanent classroom assignment, along with the 683 program, and a signed document that there would be no more harassment, I would not go along with her request. She denied my request, and the meeting was over.

On February 15th, I was asked to appear at 400 First Avenue and asked to have a meeting with interim acting District Superintendent, Kevin McCormick. We discussed the situation of religious harassment and ongoing harassing and menacing behaviors. Mr. McCormick’s manner was mocking and demeaning. Not understanding any of the issues which go along with Orthodox Jewry, he failed to understand why these insults and injustices were an issue. In a subsequent letter, he said that there was no basis in my complaint. There was complete denial by Principal W and AP BN, and no other witnesses, so I must have imagined the situation.

In early March, the summer 683 retention right list came out and we were asked to sign it. My name was on the list and it indicated that I had retention rights. I signed it and indicated that I would be working. About a week later, the principal came to me and told me that she had crossed my name off the list, and regardless of whether the district had restored me retention rights, she was not allowing me to work.

On May 3rd, 2006, I was contacted by UFT District Representative Al Mancuso, who told me that summer school applications were coming out and I was to fill one out, as if I was a new teacher. In order to qualify for the position, the only thing that was needed was a satisfactory rating for the 2006 school year, which I would be getting. Although insulted by the fact that after 14 years of working summer session, I had to apply like a new teacher, I filled out the application and handed it in. Within the next two weeks, it was announced that all 16 new applicants would be given summer 683 jobs, except for me. I had a U rating last summer and the principal said that I could not work. This was not a legal denial, and all 16 of the teachers given positions had less seniority, and some did not even have tenure.

A grievance for that was set up for May 5, 2006 at 110 Livingston Street. A letter, written and signed by UFT President Randi Weingarten attested to the fact that I had been told, three months prior to the rating period that my work would be fruitless and I would be given a U rating regardless of the quality of my work. I had no representation from the UFT at that meeting beyond a teacher advocate. As to date, I have never received a response to that meeting, although Ms. Weingarten received one. The response apparently is that they were upholding the principal’s decision, regardless of the flagrant disregard of the UFT and DOE rules of observations, obtaining summer positions, or of seniority. James Vasquez, special UFT representative is trying to locate the decision, and is trying to get it to arbitration.

On May 30th, as I came into work, AP H asked me to have a look at her computer since it was not working correctly. I agreed, as it was not only my administrative duty, but I had some time. I started with making sure that all the parts were appropriately connected in the back. I had just started reconnecting them, when Principal W came into the doorway. She started to scream and berate me, what was I doing in the AP’s office? Why was I touching her computer like an IDIOT? I stood up, leaving everything right where it was, and told her that I was fixing Dr. Herman’s computer, but since I was an IDIOT, I was going to stop. I left the office, leaving the computer in several pieces on the floor.

On June 1st, I approached Principal W and asked her if she was sure that she would not want me to work for the summer, as I requested. She responded that I would never work another summer again. I then assumed there would be no problem if I sent in a request for the SC’s position as coordinator, something that Ms. W is trying to protect, although she is no longer allowed to have it according to UFT contract. Ms. W came over to me and pushed her face directly into my face and said the “discussion was over, it was getting ugly”. I responded that it was not ugly; it was just not going her way. She again started yelling at me in the hallway, publicly calling me an IDIOT and a MORON. After this exchange, I wrote to the all those in the UFT, and asked them why it was so impossible to enforce the clear rules written in the contract, and why this was dragging on for over a year without any real intervention by those in power. The response is that all these things take a long time, and they have to go through all the different steps.

On June 5, 2006, I received a letter from Al Mancuso, which he was trying to get a grievance heard before the end of the school year. On June 28th, the last day of school, I went down, once again, to 400 First Avenue. Since summer school was beginning the next day, I felt that this effort was too long in coming, and the response would be too late to allow me to work. Along with my proof of satisfactory service for the year, and the proof that all other applicants received positions based only on the satisfactory performance in the school year, I requested that they let me work for the summer. The union rules state that only the satisfactory rating for the current year are criteria, nothing more. On July 9th, I received a letter from the district office that they were upholding Principal W and interim acting Superintendent Bonnie Brown’s assertion that I got a U last summer, and they would not consider me, even though this had no basis for denying me this 683 position. On July 11th, Al Mancuso wrote that he would be going to ask for a Step Three Grievance. Meantime, I am sitting at home. The U rating was blatantly illegal, and the decision to reinterpret the hiring rules for 683 only for me was also UFT illegal, but it was accepted by all anyway. There is apparently nothing anyone can do.

On June 15th, I had a private meeting with Randi Weingarten, President UFT. She said that she would intervene on my behalf, re: the summer 683 program and the upcoming school year, where I have requested a classroom and a schedule in one school, The Lifeline School, rather than be a transient teacher. Alternately, I have asked to be transferred back to my old school, P811, where I worked for 6 years prior to my site being reassigned to P23 as a total package. According to my level of seniority, I am entitled to one of the choices on my preference sheet, if I stay at P23. Since that meeting I have not heard anything from Ms. Weingarten. Obviously she did nothing to help me get my summer job. I am losing about 14 thousand dollars this summer, based on a principal’s whim, along with losing 24 days this year out of my sick day bank. She wrote to my husband on July 25, 2006, and said that all her efforts were of no use. My husband finds this hard to believe.

The last day of school, June 28th, three coordinator postings went up. They were up for only 7 hours. (They are supposed to be up, during the school year, for several weeks in order for it to be a legal posting). This did not include the SC’s position. I sent in an application for two of the three coordinator’s positions, a request for posting of the SC’s position, and a request to interview for that position as well. The SC’s position has not been posted. None of the people who applied for any of these positions have been interviewed for the jobs. Principal W gave the position to the UFT Rep Sheila Kaplan after a posting of 7 hours. This is a blatant violation of the Union rules. My request for an interview, although I am likely the most highly educated and most qualified applicant, has been ignored. The SC is supposed to go back to a classroom, and she is supposed to be replaced as coordinator. There are more than just a handful of people who are very qualified, who would like her position, and who are entitled to it; I despite my extensive educational history, they have seniority, and I would support whomever was chosen, however, it is just not going to happen. Principal W is able to make her own decisions and rule her fiefdom. Nobody ever stops her. My guess is that I will continue to be treated with disdain, and forced to go from place to place with my coat and all my teaching equipment.

We have a contract. The contract is very clear on certain issues. One would think that they would be upheld without hesitation. But rules are made to be broken. And once broken, they can stay broken. I do not know what to expect when I come in to school for the first day of the fall ’06 – ’07 school year. I have been again warned not to appear at school this first day, and am apprehensive as to what is in store for me.