Unions: Their Own Worst Enemy?

At the NEA Convention this year in D.C., I had a discussion with a teacher from another district about teacher perceptions of unions, especially the differences in perspective between new teachers and those of more experience. I definitely see a difference in my school and district.

When younger teachers ask about the union, they tend to ask how the union will get them more independent collaboration time and how the union will protect them against students and parents. The elder teachers seem to see more of an “us versus them” situation wanting to protect themselves from the administration.

My sense is that the more experienced teachers were entrenched for a long time fighting for better working conditions, higher pay, and job protections. The new, young crop of teachers have not had to experience this since most of what was fought for years ago are now the mainstays and basics of current teaching contracts. Much of the old battling is over, which makes me think this is part of the union’s problems.

I mentioned my concerns over some of the issues and stances discussed at the NEA Convention this year, and I’m starting to believe the union is a victim of its own success. Because so many of the major fights over basics are over, I got the sense that the union (primarily its assembly members) are searching for something to do. The NEA is a powerful organization with quite a bit of clout, but I don’t necessarily want the union to become a group searching for issues to defend or to fight. I still maintain that the union should be concerned fundamentally with working conditions, due process, and salaries rather than the Iraq War, disaster relief, and other such items.

I think the NEA should focus its efforts on medical benefits, retirement options (80/50 plans and the like), higher salaries, social programs for students and families, certification requirements, and the costs of education. These are issues directly related to teaching as a profession. Other issues do have an indirect effect (the cost of the Iraq War is an easy example) but also tend to help union opponents label the union as a Democrat’s haven or anti-American and other such names.

One of the teachers overhearing our discussion of unions and their members asked me why I thought unions supported more Democrats than Republicans. I think the answer is simple: Democratic candidates tend to agree with the union positions, the teachers’ needs more often, and less likely to support privitization. As an example, in my state the Republican candidate for governor balanced the budget on the backs of teachers (froze our cost of living adjustments for two years) and will not respond to education position questionnaires, so he is obviously not going to get the state union’s endorsement.

I also think local unions have an easier time escaping labeling simply because they are working directly with their constituencies and the results are immediately seen. Plus, the teachers involved in the union business are colleagues, the people teaching next door, the people in the neighboring office desk, and the people eating next to one another in the staff lounge.

What do you think?

5 thoughts on “Unions: Their Own Worst Enemy?

  1. thehurt

    I can’t speak to your comments on veteran teachers, but as a young teacher, I can echo the sentiments you’ve shared. My union concerns largely center around two issues: salary/benefits and additional opportunities to become better at what I do.
    I feel fortunate that our union has worked very hard towards both of those issues: though we were, a year ago, one of the lowest paid districts in our area (and one of the highest scoring, coincidentally), our union bargained successfully to get us enough of a raise to move us to the average of those local districts in the next couple of years. At the same time, they were able to get us individual collaboration time at the end of each half-day and waiver day.
    One of the most frustrating experiences I’ve had as a union member is getting several brocures, letters, and flyers from the state union reminding members to vote for certain candidates. I can’t help but think that the several hundred dollars spent on those mailings could have been put to better use.
    So what do I think? I agree – the NEA could be working harder towards making educator pay a bit more comparable to salaries in other fields or finding ways to increase funding for schools that are struggling, rather than seeking out other causes to espouse.

    Reply
  2. Mystery Teacher

    I quit the NEA many years ago when I found out that I was lied to. We had a teacher accused of touching a girl and he was a member. NEA told him he had to hire his own lawyer and “If he was proved innocent” they would reimburse him. We were told that they had lawyers to back us to the hilt.
    Also, I don’t always like who they support in politics. I don’t feel they should be spending my hard earned money campaigning for candidates that I don’t like. So, I quit.

    Reply
  3. drpezz Post author

    MT – DO I remember correctly that you have a relative high up in the NEA, or am I thinking of another commenter? If you are, how does that go over?

    You were also given horrible information regarding that lawyer and payment. Your leadership should be ashamed.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s