As someone who lives in NYC and follows these movements closely, there is always a level of animus at the institutional/political level between the UFT and the

As someone who lives in NYC and follows these movements closely, there is always a level of animus at the institutional/political level between the UFT and the DOE. This animus does not escape the political realm, relationships between on the ground and central admin and teachers are professional and serve the interests of the children. Infighting within the union, however, is new, and sad. Both are true- * the plans that have been made are very far to the conservative- preservation of health and safety- end of the spectrum. * any return involves risk of infection, and with that risk of death or permanent health damage. During the awful spring peak, more than 100 teachers and low level staff and administrators died. Teachers sign up for extremely difficult work- dealing not only with the dynamics of their children in the classroom, but because children are sensitive lenses for their families, with the dynamics of the families as well. That emotionally difficult work is fundamentally different from work that is risky from a health perspective. In an ideal world, all workers would continue to be paid, and those who decided to subject themselves to these new hazards would receive hazard pay for doing so, as well as additional insurance and care protections, but would not be required to and could work fully remotely. That's what would be right, but that's not what is happening, and that it's not happening is not the DOE's fault, nor the union's fault. It's the fault ultimately of the US political leadership.