--- title: New York City and Educators At Odds Over Teaching Programs description: New York City has struggled to solve a seemingly ridiculous problem: It spends about $100 million every year paying teachers not to teach canonical: https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/ author: The 74 article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2017-07-14T19:11:15.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-23T16:33:52.151Z article:section: Ideas og:title: What’s Worse Than Spending $100 Million on Teachers Who Don’t Teach? og:description: New York City’s new plan to put "the futures of kids in the hands of ineffective teachers" og:url: https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte4e80470a209067d/6988d5bd656a3f67b4bd0d30/bill-de-blasio-mayor-nyc-schools-new-york-teachers-pay1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 3600 og:image:height: 2025 og:image:alt: New York City Police Foundation 2017 Gala og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: What’s Worse Than Spending $100 Million on Teachers Who Don’t Teach? twitter:description: New York City’s new plan to put "the futures of kids in the hands of ineffective teachers" twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte4e80470a209067d/6988d5bd656a3f67b4bd0d30/bill-de-blasio-mayor-nyc-schools-new-york-teachers-pay1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # What’s Worse Than Spending $100 Million on Teachers Who Don’t Teach? New York City’s New Plan > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=42309360-5b5c-471e-b4e4-44c216b553d2&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=42309360-5b5c-471e-b4e4-44c216b553d2&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=42309360-5b5c-471e-b4e4-44c216b553d2&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=42309360-5b5c-471e-b4e4-44c216b553d2&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) by [Daniel Weisberg / The 74](https://time.com/author/the-seventy-four/) ## Daniel Weisberg / The 74 Jul 14, 2017 7:11 PM UTC  Mayor Bill de Blasio attends the New York City Police Foundation 2017 Gala at Sheraton New York on May 18, 2017 in New York City. (Sean Zanni/Patrick McMullan—Getty Images) Mayor Bill de Blasio attends the New York City Police Foundation 2017 Gala at Sheraton New York on May 18, 2017 in New York City. (Sean Zanni/Patrick McMullan—Getty Images) Sean Zanni/Patrick McMullan—Getty Images by [Daniel Weisberg / The 74](https://time.com/author/the-seventy-four/) ## Daniel Weisberg / The 74 Jul 14, 2017 7:11 PM UTC For most of the past decade, New York City has struggled to solve a seemingly ridiculous problem: It spends about [$100 million every year](http://www.wnyc.org/story/few-teachers-bite-buyouts/) paying teachers not to teach. That’s how much it costs to operate the city’s so-called [Absent Teacher Reserve](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/nyc-eyes-buyout-reduce-teacher-reserve-pool-article-1.3214476) pool, a limbo for about 800 educators entitled to full salary and benefits even though their positions were eliminated. Now, in an effort to shrink the ATR pool and its cost, Mayor [Bill de Blasio](http://time.com/4504190/mayor-bill-de-blasio-stop-and-frisk-donald-trump/) and Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña are resurrecting one of the most harmful and discredited ideas in education policy: [forced hiring of teachers](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/city-plans-place-400-unassigned-teachers-permanent-roles-article-1.3315129). Any schools with open teaching positions this fall could be forced to take whichever ATR teachers city bureaucrats pluck from the pool, regardless of whether the teachers want the jobs or whether principals want to hire them. This approach to hiring was the norm for decades in New York City, with disastrous consequences. Principals played an annual game of hiding open positions and strategically cutting existing ones to avoid having a teacher forced upon them. It created a dysfunctional culture that allowed low-performing teachers to bounce around the system for their entire careers — the infamous “[dance of the lemons](http://www.hoover.org/research/dance-lemons)” that still plagues so many school districts across the country. That’s why the city and the United Federation of Teachers agreed to end forced hiring once and for all in a landmark 2005 contract. (Full disclosure: I led the city’s team that negotiated the deal.) Ever since, the hiring process for teachers in New York City has looked a lot like the one you’d encounter in almost any other field: Teachers can apply for any open positions they want, and principals have final say on which candidates to hire. It’s called “mutual consent,” but it’s really just common sense. Tens of thousands of teachers have used this process to find jobs in the city’s schools, including many who were once in the ATR pool. When ATR teachers struggle to find new jobs, there are often very good — albeit uncomfortable — reasons. Consider a few findings from a 2014 [analysis of ATR teachers](https://tntp.org/assets/misc/NYCDOE-Vacancy+Poverty-Mar2014.pdf): * About 25% had been brought up on disciplinary charges. * Another third had received unsatisfactory evaluation ratings. * More than half hadn’t held a regular classroom position for two or more years. * About 60% hadn’t applied for a single position in the previous year, suggesting they weren’t even trying to find a full-time job. Another third had received unsatisfactory evaluation ratings. More than half hadn’t held a regular classroom position for two or more years. About 60% hadn’t applied for a single position in the previous year, suggesting they weren’t even trying to find a full-time job. It’s no wonder principals nearly revolted the first time de Blasio and Farina floated forced ATR hiring three years ago, leading the chancellor to [pledge](http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2014/03/20/farinas-message-on-atr-pool-no-forced-placement/) that “there will be no forced placement of staff.” Breaking that promise now would have only one possible result: Schools across the city would face an influx of teachers with records of poor performance. Students in lower-income neighborhoods, where teaching positions have historically been most difficult to fill, would be hit hardest. Principals would go back to [hiding vacancies](https://www.wsj.com/articles/nyc-teachers-in-pool-for-excess-faculty-to-fill-classroom-vacancies-in-october-1499731541) and would justifiably argue that they can’t be held accountable for student learning if they don’t get to pick their teams. The city denies that the new ATR policy amounts to forced hiring because after one school year, principals will be allowed to send back any ATR teachers who earn low marks on their performance evaluation. But because only a tiny number of tenured teachers are ever dismissed for poor performance, any who fail this forced “tryout” will likely end up being foisted upon another group of students at another school the following year. More to the point, subjecting thousands of kids to ineffective teachers for even a year is simply unacceptable. There’s a more responsible solution to the ATR problem, one that doesn’t hurt students or bring back the bad old days of forced hiring. The city and the teachers union should agree to reasonable time limits for teachers to remain in the ATR pool at full pay — six or 12 months, perhaps — after which those who can’t land one of the thousands of positions that open up across the city every year would be put on unpaid leave until a principal hires them based on merit. Districts like Chicago and Washington, D.C., already use this basic approach — one they negotiated with local chapters of the same union that represents teachers in New York City. De Blasio and Fariña deserve credit for their persistence in trying to wind down the ATR pool and its drain on city resources. But putting the futures of countless kids in the hands of ineffective and even dangerous teachers is an unconscionably bad deal, no matter how many millions of dollars it saves. They should go back to the drawing board and make it clear that forced hiring is gone for good. _This_ [_article_](https://www.the74million.org/article/weisberg-paying-teachers-not-to-teach-is-absurd-but-reviving-nycs-dance-of-the-lemons-hurts-kids) _originally appeared on_ [_The74Million.org_](https://www.the74million.org)_._ ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/"},"headline":"What’s Worse Than Spending $100 Million on Teachers Who Don’t Teach? New York City’s New Plan","datePublished":"2017-07-14T19:11:15.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-23T16:33:52.151Z","description":"New York City’s new plan to put \"the futures of kids in the hands of ineffective teachers\"","url":"https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/","keywords":["Education"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte4e80470a209067d/6988d5bd656a3f67b4bd0d30/bill-de-blasio-mayor-nyc-schools-new-york-teachers-pay1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Daniel Weisberg / The 74"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte4e80470a209067d/6988d5bd656a3f67b4bd0d30/bill-de-blasio-mayor-nyc-schools-new-york-teachers-pay1.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"New York City Police Foundation 2017 Gala","caption":"New York City Police Foundation 2017 Gala","creditText":"Sean Zanni/Patrick McMullan—Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/education/","name":"Education"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/4858520/nyc-schools-teachers-bill-de-blasio/","name":"What’s Worse Than Spending $100 Million on Teachers Who Don’t Teach? New York City’s New Plan"}}]}] ```