Mayor Bloomberg was, uh, less than thrilled yesterday with Gov. Cuomo’s plan to help the city lay off bad teachers first. But what did he expect?
Cuomo’s plan may fall short of what the mayor seeks: i.e., an immediate, wholesale end to the state’s “Last in, first out” law for laying off teachers.
But Cuomo has also said that LIFO should go, and that he’d take up the issue after the adoption of a new state budget.
Nevertheless, Cuomo on Tuesday offered a plan that could evolve into a fair compromise. It’s a sign of good faith by the gov — or seems so to us, anyway.
If not to the mayor.
“There is a simple test,” Bloomberg said yesterday. “Does [Cuomo’s plan] repeal ‘Last in, first out’ . . . and allow the city to lay off teachers based on merit this year? Anything short of that will harm our students.”
A city Department of Education memo was even more unequivocal: “The governor’s proposal does not end LIFO and consequently will not allow New York City to make merit-based layoffs.”
Let’s face it: A bill that passed in the Senate on Tuesday might satisfy Bloomberg, but it was never going to get past Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver. That’s because Silver answers to the teachers union — which fiercely opposed the bill.
Meanwhile, the governor does say he wants to “move beyond the so-called ‘Last in, first out’ system.” His plan calls for the expedited development of teacher-evaluation standards that would “allow us to replace ‘Last in, first out’.”
Plus, his aides say outright that the gov’s plan, which hasn’t been formally introduced in the Legislature, is meant to be a starting point for negotiation.
There’s no reason to automatically doubt Cuomo’s sincerity. Silver and the union, of course, are a different matter.
Both say they favor a new evaluation system. Do they mean it? Will they bargain in good faith? (Silver’s record certainly warrants beaucoup skepticism.)
But with Cuomo pushing — should Bloomberg choose to cooperate — New York might yet see sanity in the teacher-layoff system.