Quick Search
Advertise Here?
PROFESSIONAL TEACHERS OR POLITICAL UNION?
- 4-9-09
- Categorized in: Education
PROFESSIONAL TEACHERS OR POLITICAL UNION?
Â
By John Jensen, Ph.D.
“It’s in their DNA," Bailey said. “They can’t help themselves.â€
Tracey Bailey and I were discussing teacher unions and their seeming drive to politicize education with partisan endorsements and controversial social issues. He is Director of Educational Policy for the Association of American Educators and was National Teacher of the Year in 1993; is extraordinarily articulate, and his command of his subject has enabled him to testify for the AAE before Congressional committees. We talked while he drove south on Interstate 95 and I hunched over my keyboard in Phoenix balancing a portable phone on my shoulder. I was trying to understand the differences between the NEA and AFT on the one hand and the regional teacher associations on the other for which the AAE is a national umbrella.
"The big turning point was in the early seventies," Bailey said. Before that time, the NEA had been more loosely organized, and a teacher could belong to a local organization not affiliated with the national. When the American Federation of Teachers suddenly began drawing members away from the NEA, it took a more assertive approach to organizing.
“The trigger really was what happened to the dues a teacher paid, changing to what was called unified dues. This meant that like it or not, a large portion of your local dues would go to the national teacher union.
“There were waves of revolt about that. Among teachers you have many independent thinkers and many in Right-to-Work states decided to do something about this affront to their independence. In some cases, huge numbers said ‘We’re not going to pay to your national union dues. We don’t want our money going to Washington, DC!†In Missouri, the entire state organization disaffiliated from the NEA en masse. In some states now, the independent associations are 2 or 3 times bigger than NEA.†Bailey placed this turning point in the context of overall union membership.
“How many American workers were in unions in the 1930s?’ he asked me. I had no idea. ‘It was probably about 80% or higher in that industrial age," he said. "And how many public employees were in unions?“ I didn’t think there were any.
“Right,“ he said, “it was against the law then. But how much of the US workforce now is in unions?â€
I estimated 11%, which he affirmed. Depending on how you calculate it, he said, it could be anywhere between 8-12%.
“But how many employees in the public sector are in unions now?†he asked."
The number was big, I knew, but had no idea that it was 80% or higher.
“As our society has changed, union membership has remained flat. In the private sector, workers’ unions have declined while the public sector unions pick up a few more, and overall the membership is steady, maybe up or down a percentage point from year to year. The NEA is the single largest union in the country but it‘s not growing, while independent teacher associations are growing 10% annually.“
“So what is it that attracts people to the independent teacher associations over the unions?“ I asked.
“Now, I don‘t want this to seem critical of many great teachers who are members of a union, but from my perspective I see many of them just putting up with it. Many experienced teachers have said to me, ‘I‘ve been in the union for twenty years, but no more. They no longer represent what I believe in.'â€
‘What does the union do that they don’t believe in?†I asked.
“There are three main problems,†Bailey said. “The first is that the unions spend their members’ money and the union’s staff time on partisan politics. Remember that teachers as a group reflect the makeup of the general population. Some lean conservative and some liberal. So by endorsing or contributing primarily to just one party and having their staff support those candidates, the unions alienate almost 50% of their members every election cycle.
“Secondly, teachers pay between $500 and $1000 annually in union dues, with $750 a good average. This is a lot of money to a teacher so they notice what it‘s used for. Yet because of that ‘social activist DNA’ among union leaders, they cannot help themselves from taking stands on issues that bear no direct relation whatsoever to teaching and the classroom. How does your union‘s political position on abortion or gay marriage affect how well you teach your subject or how well you are compensated? Too often teachers see their union dues going to sheer political activity reflecting neither their classroom priorities nor their personal beliefs.
“Finally, when we ask new members of our association what they like most about it, they tell us they like the updates and the newsletters and so on, but the primary thing is that they get twice the legal and liability coverage. They want help in the classroom and they want to know what’s happening in their profession that might affect them. We spend our resources on these things that matter most to teachers, and they notice it.â€
I wanted to know how membership in a union versus an association might influence how a teacher then affected students. Bailey reframed my question.
“Start with the impact on the teachers themselves. Once I was giving a workshop in a school where the teachers were just great, and we were staying after school talking about teaching and sharing ideas. Unfortunately, the union stepped in and said that we couldn’t do that. We had to leave the school because we weren’t permitted to have the building open any later under their union contract without prior approval. Think how that limits the most productive and creative teachers when they aren't permitted to do things a little differently, or when the union contract and the bureaucracy make it harder for them to do what they know is best for kids.†Instead of union contract issues, our primary question is 'How is this helping the child?"
Acknowledging that this was just one example with generalizations involved, he explained how industrial union attitudes about such things as piece work, hourly rates, and shop stewards were out of step with professional teaching. “I grew up in construction and I know what that’s about,†Bailey said, “but that’s not what professional teachers are like. We’re more like doctors and lawyers and scientists. Our focus is on doing the best job we can for the people we serve.  Our respect for doctors is not due to their being in a union. I tell teachers all the time that lawyers, doctors, and scientists do not achieve their compensation or respect as professionals through union representation or collective bargaining.
“I taught in Florida, where the legislature decided to reward entire schools with $100 a child if the school made sufficient academic progress. From the legislature’s point of view it wasn’t that much money, but in a school with 2,000 students, this was $200,000 for teachers to work with and the faculty got to vote on how to use the money. Did we want more copy machines or higher salaries? Usually we voted for a combination of things. Then the union sued the state, asserting that ’You don't have a right to give extra money like that unless it comes through the union bargaining contract.’
“If your genuine concern is ‘How is the child doing?‘, then that union position is indefensible. It’s worshipping the bargaining contract instead of what benefits both teachers and students. Furthermore, it shows the difference in mindset between true professionals and some union leaders. When you pursue a principle like that and exclude all other reasonable principles, how can you say you‘re a professional?â€
“Somebody told me once that there are three types of people in all organizations including schools: speedboats, barges, and rocks. The speedboats dash around and want to make changes and want to innovate. The barges aren’t bad, either. They consistently carry a heavy load and are great as long as they can go straight ahead though it can be hard to get them to change direction. But the rocks, well, the rocks are bound to cause a lot of damage.â€
I couldn’t help but think about the rocks I’ve known. One of them made my son’s primary grade years miserable. Others would rather see students funneled to juvenile justice than meet their needs in schools. Another humiliates students so they hate coming to school. Last week I welcomed seeing the problem posed in the August 31 issue of The New Yorker, "The Rubber Room: The Battle Over New York City's Worst Teachers," by Stephen Brill, detailing how the union defends incompetent teachers.
I was curious how the historical origin of unions would play out under an association. Since unions arose because employers took advantage of workers' vulnerability with unfair pay and working conditions, I wondered how that issue might play out.
"There are several angles," Bailey said. "We're working now within a system that began a hundred years ago when young women had far fewer occupational choices—usually a nurse, teacher, secretary, or housewife. Their salaries were abysmally low and often considered less important because viewed as a supplemental second income for their family—talk about gender discrimination! Now their options have expanded greatly. They can be astronauts or brain surgeons, but teacher salaries and benefits still have not caught up with other professionals."
Regarding salaries and the difference in teacher representation between unions and professional organizations, Bailey said, "let me give you a personal experience that stands out in my memory. I'd been named Teacher of the Year for the State of Florida, and had a chance to meet several Teachers of the Year from other states.  Three were from Georgia, all members of the Professional Association of Georgia Educators—PAGE. Georgia is one of the states where the independent association with over 75,000 members is far larger than the NEA state affiliate.
"They were consummate professionals, and told me how PAGE had taken the lead in approaching the Governor about teacher salaries. They'd offered accountability, a willingness to do new things, and expected to be compensated as professionals for that. They knew what was wanted and stepped up to the plate, and in four years, in increments of about 6 percent each year, Georgia teachers' salaries went up almost 24 percent. This was not only a more professional approach, but demonstrated to me that it could reap great rewards for teachers."
Once a contract is formalized and the school year begins, the AAE's main concern is implementing it and helping teachers in the classroom. They inform teachers about laws and policies that affect them, help resolve classroom problems, and insure that policies are implemented correctly—that both sides "play by the rules." For what most teachers say they really want from a union or an association—legal and liability insurance—the AAE offers twice the coverage of most union policies, $2 million per member per incident.
A common confusion in union-oriented states, Bailey explained, is the assumption that the union can force a teacher to be a member. "Nobody can force you to be a member of a private organization you don't want to belong to. The union is a private organization similar to a church in many ways. You would never tolerate anyone requiring you to belong to a church and pay tithes to teach in a public school! Unions may give the impression that they can force you to be a member, but they can't.
"In the vast majority of states, teachers can choose whatever association or union they want to belong to, but in a diminishing number, about 18 now, unions can still require a compulsory bargaining "representation fee." Even then, a teacher can demand a rebate of around $100 to $150 of it, and for a religious objection have their entire year's dues be redirected to an independent third-party charity. These are protected rights under state and federal law. Independent professional teacher groups can get started and sometimes decertify the union as the bargaining unit.
"For an individual teacher, I'd just suggest that you know your rights," Bailey concluded, "that you don't need to join a teachers' union no matter what anyone tells you. Join the organization that best represents your needs and your personal beliefs and that most resembles your view of teaching as a profession."
---------------------------
John Jensen is a licensed clinical psychologist and author of The Silver Bullet Easy Learning System: How to Change Classrooms Fast and Energize Students for Success (Xlibris, 2008). He can be reached at jjensen@gci.net.
Â
Â
This is one of the worst pieces of journalism you have ever allowed on your site. I taught 30 years in Ontario Canada where we have a closed shop statuatory union. If you teach in the public system here you are a member of the union period and it has been like this since 1944.
There is no division between being a professional teacher and a tough minded union supporter. One union's slogan says it all "A Union of Professionals" What is good for teachers and what is good for kids is by definition the same thing. "Our teaching conditions are your child's learning conditions" Higher salaries and smaller classes are clearly better for students but can only come from union contracts. Check the salary difference between unionized states and so called right-to-work states. It is $15-20000 annually. The highest test scored are recorded in the states with the strongest unions. Check out Minnesota, Mass. Mississippi and Louisiana. No comparison. Weak unionism corresponds to poor results. Give it up you are way off track.
Obviously things are different in Canada! Come to Texas and you will see things differently! I am admanently opposed to the NEA. They do nothing for the benefit of the students. Their first and primary priority is the right of the teacher to prevail, regardless of the circumstances and their agenda does not align with most teachers of my acquaintance. Many of my friends who are teachers are only members of the NEA because of the insurance. They do NOT agree with the political agenda of the NEA.  Thanks for bringing this alternative to light. If teachers want to be treated like professionals instead of assembly line workers, they need to get out from under the NEA.Â
Thank you "Messing with Texas." Mr. Little certainly seems to view this issue in absolutes and makes sweeping generalizations. He is clearly an extremist, accusing all Republicans/Conservatives as wanting to "destroy public education." I find his inclusion of teaching phonics as one of his examples of this sinister plot hilarious. And on the heels of these polarizing attacks, he preaches tolerance and peace.
Who's the whack job?
Â
The blog is very informative.
Generally everybody feels that teacher’s job is easy but I feel this job is very difficult specially like making class plans, question papers etc.
Yes, this is a hearsay article.
Very poorly done. Â
Why not check the facts - 80% of workers in unions in the 1930s?
Not true. Â Is the rest of the article true? Â Who knows? Â Not my job to fact check an article that the writer should have done in the first place.
And yes collective bargaining states outperform right to work states in general - almost all of the top performing states are collective bargaining states almost all the bottom 20 states are right to work states.
Doug and Everyonesfacts-- My intent was to allow a knowledgeable person to state his case and to be faithful to his version of reality. I kept out of the discussion the fact that I have been a life-long union supporter, much more concerned about the abuses of workers by management than vice versa. I would like unions to succeed and to be effective for teachers and for education While understanding that they are often a force for good, as I understand the evidence now, objections to them concern specific choices that don't reflect teachers' personal values and/or don't serve good education. Unionism itself, to me, is not up for debate, but rather policies that work against good education. If you want to sort out these choices for readers, I'm glad to interview you with the same attention I gave to Tracey Bailey. Contact me at the email address above. John Jensen
   Thank you for this illuminating article!
   I believe that the teacher's union has ceased to be a legitimate union concerned with worker rights and conditions. Rather, it has become a self-serving political party that uses teachers dues to advance leaders' pet political issues. My teacher union in Washington state actually directed local associations to develop criteria to only represent those teachers whose cases advanced the WEA's goals and core values -- note the political orientation rather than a mention of the teacher's rights.  When asked by a local union officer how members could access WEA attorneys, he was told by the WEA that the union's attorneys work for the union, not the members. The WEA even used teachers' dues to sue members of their local bargaining units in order to stop them from informing other teachers about their federally protected rights to opt out of union membership and pay for politics with which they object. WEA did not prevail, but it did provoke Washington teachers to establish an independent educator organization called Northwest Professional Educators, an affiliate of the Association of American Educators (AAE).
   The union refuses to provide members with its spending records, so there is no transparency, hence, no accountability, hence no changing the system by "working inside the union." Only nonunion teachers have access to the spending records and can challenge the union's calculation for their rightful rebate for exenditures not used for representation.Â
   Union leaders use despicable tactics to demean and defame good teachers and others who do not share their left-wing political views. See NEA retiring general counsel Robert's Chanin's speech at the 2009 NEA Representative Assembly for just one example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahb8rBMuDDs).Â
    The teachers union has become a racket that exploits good people with the government's blessing. It is shameful. I am thrilled that teachers now have a choice for associations such as the Association of American Educators that offer career protection and services designed to help them advance as academic professionals.Â
    I hope more teachers take their professional destinies into their own hands and free themselves from the political and financial tyranny of the NEA and its state affiliates by disaffiliating or decertifying their local associations from big labor. A number of teaching staffs have done this, including Sprague-Lamont and St. John teachers in Washington state. They are thrilled to now offer a local bargaining unit that unites members on local issues rather than dividing teachers along controversial political lines.Â
    Teachers can contact AAE at 800-704-7799 or info@aaeteachers.org for more information about their rights and options to develop local only teacher unions or an individual teacher's rights to send their union dues to a charity (religious objector option) or to get a rebate of their dues that do not support representation activity (objecting agency fee payer option).Â
Thank you, Thank you! Cindy, your reply sums it up! Unfortunately, unless someone is put into a position of actually needing legal representation from their local union/WEA, they have absolutely NO IDEA how the process DOES NOT work for teachers! While I appreciate my district's union president and the entire team that fight extremely hard for contract issues, when it comes to unfair labor practices and administrative harassment issues, the WEA/NEA literally turn their backs on their members.   WAKE UP PEOPLE!! Get your head out of the sand, and see what else is out there for US!Â
I am totally in agreement with Cindy Omlin's comments. . . The NEA has become the pawn of a group of secular humanist bullies out to shape the future of this country via the hearts and minds of our young people. With students held captive in public school classrooms, the higher powers of the NEA have the perfect victims to brainwash.
I am appalled at how many public school teachers blindly follow whatever the NEA tells them to do for fear that they won't get their next pay raise. There are higher issues at stake.
I am also angry how the NEA lacks respect for outstanding teachers with integrity who have stood alone against this organization and been defamed.Â
Teachers need to look at the leadership of the NEA with a critical eye and understand that its current agenda is to control education in such a way that its values are propogated. Those values are as far left as you can go. On top of that, there is a prevailing attitude in the NEA that whoever disagrees with its stand on issues should be ridiculed or dismissed.
The radical political focus of the NEA is what has led to the steady decline in education in America's public schools, and  I pray for students that they will be protected from the harm this organization brings.Â
When a country turns away from right and wrong, that country eventually implodes upon itself. That is exactly what is happening today.
Teachers need to maintain their independence so that they can remain true to their calling to teach academics, not to manipulate children toward evil ends.
Â
I am saddened with the current state of today's unions, especially the large teacher's unions. My father was a 30+ year union member. They ALWAYS were transparent and had nothing to hide. It seems now that unions are more for show and not for their real purpose-to give quality to teachers, in terms of decent pay, solid medical and other benifits and other situations that teacher would normally depend on.
A friend of mine works in a district in CA. If it were not for the union, he would not still be employed. Their union is smaller and more interested in their teachers and less in themselves.
This article and those that are sure to come are long overdue.
This is a very timely article. Whatwith the ongoing inquiries about "what is good teaching?" and "what makes a good teacher?" I believe and have long held the opinion that: Until the teaching profession organizes and conducts itself as a boniifde profession a la, - Law; Medicine; Related Clinical Professions; Architecture; whereby there is a more distinctive curriculum and clinical supervision, that connects to the professional challenges to be encountered - from the university to the practicum or intern level - and final examinations that validates professional standing, the teaching profession will continue to be determined by outside forces and poitical ambitions.Â
The only place where the interests of teachers is identical to the interests of students "by definition" is the NEA dictionary of the english language.
Having to pay teachers who are convicted of sex crimes against children for a minium of 9 months is not in the interests of children. (the effect of the union-sponsored law in Washington State and elsewhere)
Stripping the budget of money for college and career counseling, textbooks, and much else so that districts can accede to the demands of higher pay AND small classes is not in the interests of children.
Putting the teachers interests first ahead of less powerful unionized and non-unioned employees like paraeductors is not in the interests of children. ("We don't care about them; we don't represent them" I heard at the negotiating table in my role as school board director)
Advocating for contracts that, by treating teachers as widgets, have the effect of 97-99% satisfactisfactory rating for the workforce when any human resource professional will tell you can not be a reflection of reality particuarly in a complicated and difficult job such as being a teacher.
It's sure ok for employees to represent your own interests, and to do so forcefully, but the pretense that you have no conflict of interest with the people being served, who are in a very different relationship to the institution, much less that your "interests are by definition identical" is BIG, BIG lie. SOrt of like what's good for GM is good for the country.
Â
“If a teacher is given a chance or two chances or three chances to improve but still does not improve, there’s no excuse for that person to continue teaching. I reject a system that rewards failure and protects a person from its consequences.†THis from the new progressive President. THe tide is turning. As with all human group endeavors, we will probably go too far, and the unions have a role in trying to make sure that doesn't happen. However, is telling the big lie the right way to fulfill that role and approach this new era? Will the tactics of the past be effective in the future? I think the teacher's unions are in for some soul searching.
The PTA has also become just another political arm of teacher unions and leftist politics. During this year's legislative session in Texas, the PTA was recruiting parents to testify against disability legislation designed to bring community resources into public schools for those children most at risk for residential placements in order to save that huge public expense and allow them to be successfully educated in their local public schools. The PTA tagged the bill a "voucher" and started a kill campaign without even bothering to understand it. PTA dues-paying parents were unwitting pawns in this agenda and disgusted when they found out their dues are going to support not only partisan political positions but lobbying against local legislation designed by some of those very parents.
You can read more about it here:
http://www.keepeanesinformed.com/abc's_of_the_pta.htm
Â
Â
This article by John Jenson is an important contribution to advancing the discussion about genuine education reform.Â
Basically, he starts to contrast professional teacher organizations with the old industrial-age teacher unions in the US. The comments that flow to this blog tell the tale of why associations are so attractive to teachers in these stressful times where pressures for more accountability are mounting.
They amply support the view that teacher unions are far too political, do not necessarily represent the personal beliefs of many teachers, and certainly do little to contribute to the accountability of government-funded public schools.
However, it should be noted, the first two posts on this blog, quick on the draw, try to squelch the notion of choice of association for teachers.
Doug Little rails against “one of the worst pieces of journalism†and goes on to describe how in Canada teachers who are in public systems are not allowed choice of association -- they have closed union shops under provincial statutes. As if this is something to be proud of!
He goes on to say: “What is good for teachers and what is good for kids is by definition the same thing.†Many in Canada, and elsewhere, I’m sure, would dispute that.
Even though Mr. Little identifies his personal website “Education and Politics in Canada†he does not disclose that he has been, or still is: 1) Executive Assistant to the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Association (a teacher union), 2) Editor of their Newsletter, and 3) Official Legislative Observer in the Provincial Parliament. As an active union leader and with these paid positions it is his job to monitor and respond to any attacks, real or otherwise, on his teacher union domain. So, that’s where he’s coming from.
I now want to add to the conversation on this topic. I am a parent, a grandparent, and long time advocate for genuine parent involvement in education. I have found that teacher unions are generally opposed and give lip service only.
Here in British Columbia the central teacher union, the BC Teachers’ Federation with its associate unions is very active politically. Only about 10 percent of the school population attends independent or home schools, thus the BCTF effectively organizes and purports to speak for 90 percent of the teachers in the province. The public teachers have no option to join professional associations, or to ask for rebates for the part of their dues used for political work.Â
Further, the teacher unions in this province have successfully, in a number of school districts, obtained signed pledges from school board candidates to support their agendas if elected (class size, opposition to standardized tests, etc.)..Beyond supporting certain election campaigns, we often have educators actually succeeding in being elected as trustees on school boards. This really puts a kibosh on the notion that it’s the boards that are supposed to fire bad teachers and the unions are supposed to ensure “due processâ€. There’s a definite conflict of interest here, and we do not have legislation forbidding this.
Even more outrageous is the development of a Masters Program (a cohort development program) at our public Simon Fraser University to begin this fall called: “Teacher Union/Professional Organization Leadership†with the two first lectures given by senior researchers (one an ex president of the provincial teacher union) from BCTF Headquarters. The course will “focus on union and related work… applying organizational, leadership, and educational theories to issues of practiceâ€. Now, tell me, has anyone heard of any such equivalent Masters program anywhere else in the world? Yup, I think BC is a world leader in teacher union power.
There is no question that teacher unions are an obstacle to education reform in Canada. A recent article (Macleans, July 8/09, “Why it’s so hard to fire bad teachers†, http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/08/why-it%E2%80%99s-so-hard-to-fire-bad-teachers/ says “that the dismissal process is so onerous, the risk of reprisal from teachers’ unions so great, that ‘most principals find it’s not worth the effort’†quoting a university professor in teacher training.
I agree with John Jenson, author of this article, that “unionism itself is not up for debate, but rather policies that work against good education.â€Â I hope he does a follow-up article on this very topic and adds all the other culprits, not just the unions, for example, the teacher training institutions and school boards, that sit like dogs-in-the-manger as obstacles to responsive education today.
Many of the comments equate being out of step with members to being out of step with conservative members. It is 100% natural for teachers to line up behind the left half of the political spectrum and oppose the right half of the spectrum.
Â
The right half wants to privatize the schools with vouchers, abolish their unions, put religion back into public schools, teach creationism, phonics, and white male domination.
The left half of the political spectrum wants greater funding for public schools, child care, better teacher salaries, smaller classes, teacher and professional control over curriculum so the creationist whack jobs don't get hold of it. They want the curriculum to foster tolerance, fairness peace, and social advancement.
Now which side are the teachers going to allign with? The people who want to destroy public education or the people who want to save and expand it? The teachers' unions support Democrats, oppose Republicans, support liberals and oppose conservatives,. Is anybody surprised? This is their job. If they did not do this the members would elect someone who did. Get over it. Education just is political, always has been, always will be, that is why we have school boards.
Â
Doug Little seems to suggest that public schoolteachers must necessarily be liberals. Perhaps that should be a requirement on their job applications so they will be giving informed consent that when they accept their position that they are also becoming registered democrats.
Â
Â