Okay, Let's Catch Up.
Some of you have been paying attention to every headline, every Facebook post, every union email, every City Council meeting, and every argument in the comments. Others of you are like, ‘Wait…what happened? Are we getting the $10,000 or not?’ Honestly, it’s a fair question. There is A LOT happening. So, let's take a breath, push everything aside for a minute, and catch up. Then we can talk about what it all means for us as paraprofessionals.
First, yes, the ‘RESPECT’ Check became law. On July 16, the New York City Council unanimously passed the RESPECT Check Act, providing eligible paraprofessionals with up to $10,000 in workforce stabilization payments during the 2026–27 school year. The legislation passed with enough votes to override a mayoral veto. Mayor Zohran Mamdani did not sign the bill. He also did not veto it.
Instead, after the 30-day period passed, the bill automatically became law on August 19. The law calls for four $2,500 payments beginning January 1, 2027. So, for the moment, yes, the $10,000 RESPECT Check is law. There's a pretty big BUT. Within hours of the law taking effect, the Mamdani administration filed a lawsuit seeking to stop it. The administration's argument is basically that pay and employment terms for public workers should be negotiated through collective bargaining, not decided by the City Council. That's where the Taylor Law comes into this conversation. Remember that from my last post? https://alymonzon19.substack.com/p/the-10000-check-passed-but-did-we?r=8fc6yn&utm_medium=ios
The Mamdani administration argues that the RESPECT Check legislation improperly bypasses that bargaining process and could create a precedent where elected officials dictate compensation for public employees through legislation. The UFT sees it differently.
UFT leadership says the legislation was carefully written so it would not violate the Taylor Law and has vowed to fight the lawsuit. The union says the RESPECT payments are needed because paraprofessional wages are too low and the City has struggled to recruit and retain paras.
So, the City Council says ‘Pay the paras.’ The UFT says ‘Pay the paras.’ The Mayor says ‘Pay the paras, but let's do it through collective bargaining.’ The courts may now have a say in all of it. Phew. Okay. Now that we've caught up...let's talk.
Of course we want the money. Let’s make something very clear.
I have yet to meet a paraprofessional who says, ‘Nah, I'm good. I don't want $10,000.’ Please. Of course we want the money. If that $10,000 helps someone catch up on rent, buy groceries, pay a credit card, repair their car, help their kids, or simply breathe a little easier, I'm all for it and I would never shame a paraprofessional for being excited about it. I understand why people are excited. We need the money, but here's where I have a problem.
The $10,000 doesn't solve the problem. It's temporary. It's non-pensionable. It doesn't become part of our base salary. It doesn't automatically increase future raises and when the payments are finished, we're still paraprofessionals. We're still dealing with the same cost of living. We're still asking how we're going to make it. So, while I want that check just as much as anyone else, I refuse to pretend that the check is the finish line.
It should be the beginning of a much bigger conversation. So Why Didn't We Bargain for It? This is where things get really interesting. For years, we've been told that paraprofessionals can't simply receive substantially higher raises because of pattern bargaining. If you're unfamiliar with that term, imagine the City negotiates a contract with one major union. That contract establishes a ‘pattern.’ Then other city unions negotiate within that framework. So if the pattern ends up being, for example, a 3% raise, that's generally the benchmark other unions are expected to work around. Let's put that into real-life para language.
Three percent of $100,000 is $3,000. Three percent of $35,000 is $1,050. Same percentage. Very different reality. That's why I understand the argument that we can't simply say, ‘Give paras 10% while everyone else gets 3%!’ There are consequences to bargaining. There are other unions. There are other workers and I don't believe teachers should have to sacrifice their raises so paras can get what we deserve. Teachers deserve what they deserve. Paras deserve what we deserve. We should not have to fight each other for crumbs. That's the problem.
Now, here's what I can't get out of my head. If pattern bargaining is the problem...why didn't we aggressively attack the problem at the bargaining table? That's the part I keep coming back to. The UFT says the RESPECT Check is just the beginning. Its own messaging now says the goal is to make the money permanent and pensionable through contract negotiations and to fix the pattern-bargaining system. Okay, great, but why wasn't that the strategy from the beginning? Why have we spent almost three years making a non-pensionable payment the centerpiece of the campaign?
Why weren't we spending this time organizing tens of thousands of paraprofessionals around a comprehensive bargaining strategy? Why weren't we building a detailed plan for dramatically increasing our base salaries? Why weren't we listening to paras across every borough, every district, every school level, and every assignment? Why weren't we preparing members for the fight that was always going to have to happen at the bargaining table? Oh, because you tell us what we need, how we get it, what its called, what we can do and can’t do. Got it.
They have said they couldn't do it. I've heard the argument. I've heard the explanation. I've heard leadership say that pattern bargaining made it impossible to simply negotiate the kind of salary increases paraprofessionals need and maybe there are parts of that argument I don't know. I'm willing to admit that. I wasn't sitting at the bargaining table. I don't have access to those conversations. I don't know what happens behind closed doors. I also don't pretend to know everything, but here's what I do know; collective bargaining only works if we actually collectively bargain and that's where I get confused. I've heard some people say that salary increases were discussed. I've heard others say they weren't. I don't know which version is completely accurate.
What I don't remember seeing is a clear explanation to paraprofessionals saying, ‘Here is exactly what we demanded for para salaries. Here is what the City said. Here is what we offered. Here is where negotiations broke down. Here is why we couldn't get it done.’ Maybe that exists somewhere. If it does, show us. I'd genuinely like to see it, because transparency would answer a lot of these questions.
Here's the part that really messes with my head. The Mayor is now basically saying, ‘Let's collectively bargain for these raises. The union is saying, ‘Pattern bargaining prevents us from getting what paras need.’ So, I'm sitting here thinking...shouldn't the union be the one demanding that we collectively bargain our salaries? Isn't that what unions are supposed to do?
That's why something I read recently really stuck with me. ‘What is getting lost in the headlines is that Mamdani is doing what Mulgrew and the UFT should be doing: defending collective bargaining. One-time bonuses don’t go into the base pay on which future raises are based and will likely not be offered again. That’s why we bargain contracts. These one-time non-pensionable bonuses undermine collective bargaining. Mulgrew and the UFT should bargain pay raises for paras. That’s what unions are for.
You know what? That shit makes sense to me. What do I know, right? Seriously though. Maybe I'm missing something. If I am, explain it to us. We’re listening, because here's what we DON'T want.
We don’t want paraprofessionals fighting teachers. We don't want paras fighting other city workers. We don't want paras fighting the Mayor. We don't want paras fighting the City Council, and we definitely don't want paraprofessionals fighting each other. It seems like that’s what our union leadership wants. Lets blame, Adrienne Adams, lets blame Mamdani, lets blame everyone who disagrees with us, lets blame anyone asking questions.
I want us to ask a much bigger question. How do we finally build a compensation system that makes being a paraprofessional a sustainable career? WE all know that's the problem. Not just the $10,000. Not just one contract. Not just one mayor. Not just one union president. The system. We need to think bigger.
What if we started with something like this? A permanent $10,000 increase to the base salary of paraprofessionals. Annual raises tied meaningfully to the cost of living.
A completely redesigned, phased in, longevity schedule that recognizes people who stay in this profession for 10, 15, 20, 22+ years. Meaningful differentials for specialized assignments like, District 75, bilingual services, medically fragile students, behavioral support, and other assignments that require additional skills, responsibilities, training, or risk.
That's not even the whole answer. It's a starting point, and I'm sure there are paras reading this right now thinking, ‘Alyson, you forgot ______.’ You fill in the blank. Good. Tell me. That's the point. I'm not trying to be the person who has every answer. I'm trying to be the person who asks the questions and then actually listens.
So, the RESPECT Check is law. The first payment is scheduled for January 1, 2027, but the city is suing to stop the law. The UFT says we are going to WAR to defend the payments. The courts will now have to sort through the legal questions and meanwhile...we're getting ready to go back to work. Back into our classrooms. Back onto our buses. Back into District 75. Back to supporting our students. Back to doing what paraprofessionals have always done. SHOW UP! Maybe that's the biggest thing I want to say today. Don't let all of this political noise make you forget who we are. We are paraprofessionals. We are the people who keep showing up. We are the people who help students regulate. We help them learn.
We help them communicate. We help them eat. We change their diapers. We help them feel safe. We help families. We translate. We help teachers. We help schools function and we deserve to build a life while doing it.
So yes...I want my $10,000. You want your $10,000. We all want our $10,000, but I want something even bigger. We want to stop needing a $10,000 check to survive. That's the conversation I want to have. That's the fight we need to organize for and that's why I'm going to keep talking. More importantly...I'm going to keep listening. Maybe the people who have been telling us what we need should start asking us what we want and we should start answering. Loudly!
Enjoy the rest of your summer, my friends, because before we know it, we'll be back in those classrooms doing what we do. Take a breath. Get some rest. Stay cool, and when we come back...let's be ready.
Until next time.
100 per cent agree. Y’all need a raise, not this bonus.
Who met, discussed, argued and came to the consensus that this $10K promise was a good idea?