Stories & Grievances
Ruth Wenig, Harassed by the Principal of her Queens NYC School, Tells All about the Terror, Insults, and Abuse in a Detailed Statement
Many people love Ruth. She works as a special education teacher at PS. 23 in Queens, NY, with the most disabled kids, loves her job, and "her kids", most of whom cannot sit, talk, or communicate in any way. The Principal of her school wants her not only out of the school but has told her to stop teaching altogether. Ruth has sent parentadvocates a statement that will make your blood boil. Throughout this ordeal, Ruth has remained strong outwardly, but random terror hurts everyone. Notice the rejection of any help from the UFT. by Betsy Combier
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 mornin
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 mornin