Many readers have been critical of their unions and wish they were more militant in fighting the corporate suits. This reader disagrees and explains why:
| I’m going to go out on a limb here because the comments I am about to post are probably not going to be very popular with anyone who has commented in this discussion.So many people want their state and national teachers unions to launch a campaign of all-out protest toward the corporate reform movement.If anyone here has not yet noticed, there is a great deal of public dissatisfaction with the mere idea of public unions, let alone their actions. It would be political suicide for unions at any level to come out with “horses on fire and guns a-blazing” against these public perceptions. I have found that unions will seek to publicly take the high road in working towards better ways to improve the system.
There are times to get aggressive, but for all the “right-is-on-our-side” mentality among union members, there are plenty of people with the mentality that any aggressive union action (whether in word or deed) is negative. This negative public perception was demonstrated in Wisconsin, and it can and does continually appear in just about every other state in this country. Too many people in the public do not understand the value of unions nor know the history behind the formation and support of unions throughout the last century. Many union members themselves do not even have a background in this. This is not a time for unions to take a defensive position–there are ways to approach these issues without giving the anti-union camp more fodder to spread their “unions are bad” message. There are many facets to the politics of the cause that can work for or against the public perception of the unions. Whether you as a purist believe that the public perception is not important is irrelevant—it is of great importance if one wishes to garner support for public education. There truly are no advocates for teachers and public education with any kind of position of effectiveness outside of the public teachers unions. Therefore, one must tread lightly when publicly criticizing the unions. That is not to say that members should feel as if they cannot have any critical opinions—these opinions must be voiced to the union leadership, but it is never a good idea to publicly criticize your own union as a member. It only weakens everybody’s position including that of the members themselves. Unions invariably seek to effect positive influence on policies that affect public education. One of the most effective avenues of influencing positive public education policies is through conversations with legislators in the public forum. Union members should maintain a presence in their state legislature’s public sessions–the policy-makers need to hear from the unions especially before enacting some of the horrific proposals by some factions of the political arena. Another way to be an effective force in public education is to continually work within a public advocacy program to show the public that unions not only work to continually improve schools, they continually work to improve communities. I ask those who are critical of the national unions: How many of you have taken the time to attend your state legislature sessions to speak up about the policies in the public forum? I’m sure there are some here and there, but it has been my experience that most union members who complain about the union have never done this very thing. Have you at least made a phone call or sent an email to your legislators? If you have not joined in the conversation and simply left that to your representation, then it might be safe to say that you are not part of the solution. It’s so easy to be critical of your union representation when you have not gotten involved. Once you see what is required of union representation on many levels, you can take a more informed position of criticism toward what union leadership actually does. For those who have had bad experiences and felt your local representation did very little to help you, know that you should never be left without recourse. Just like in any other area, there are varying levels of effectiveness among local associations. This is why there are country and state affiliations, just like in the court system. Take it to a higher level if you are not satisfied with the local level. Your personal situations are understandably important to you, but it is not fair to characterize every local in every state across the country as the same, just as it is not fair to characterize every teacher, student, school, district, etc. in the same way. We have used this “avoid generalizations” argument time and again in discussions on this blog. I caution anyone who is using one example as evidence of how all locals operate to be a little more responsible. In my state, engaging in conversations with the public policy-makers is just what one of the state unions does. This practice has effectively prevented many bad policy ideas from becoming law despite what some perceptions of the actions of union leadership might be. I applaud the leaders and members of our state union for having not only the courage to continually speak up, but also for working WITH the legislature to ensure that public demands for improvement are answered without demeaning of devaluing the professionals who work in the school system. We do not operate in a public vacuum–we do need to be quite aware of the needs and perceptions of our constituency. We also need to be aware of how damaging perceptions without evidence can be. It’s amazing that so many union members themselves believe in the existence of “back-door” deals about which so many conspiracy theorists and anti-union pundits are always going on. When did the membership start believing this hype? Where is your evidence that union leaders are conspiring with the “reformers?” This link posted above by another reader (touting how national unions are “in bed” with the Gates Foundation) caught my attention: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/22/education/22gates.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all You have to read a great deal before you even get to the excerpt that speaks to this claim, but here it is: An article on the Gates foundation with an excerpt stating that the foundation gave money to union membership three years ago is not evidence of anything–it is supposition based on a concept that every donation has an agenda. Does the reader have any evidence of how that donation was appropriated? I also wonder where that money went. Let’s find out before we use this as “evidence” that the unions are “sleeping with the enemy.” It is never a good idea to try to sway public opinion by openly declaring war on what many of the uninformed have convinced themselves to be “good” policies (i.e., “corporate reform”). The political stronghold on the public message belongs to those with the power and influence to control these messages, and in case no one has noticed, it isn’t the teachers unions. A great deal of the public does not support the public unions because people have been fed a constant diet of anti-union rhetoric by the powerful voices in politics. I have found even among my teaching colleagues, that just being affiliated with a teachers union turns people off from listening to you. Do you seriously think that you can change the message as a union without flack from the usual anti-union camp that is so powerful in the media and in politics? You need a strategy of positive influence and cooperation, not a defensive posture. One needs to heed the lessons of good public relations as a union member. Start by supporting your own unions–ask questions, yes, but never, NEVER put your union down publicly because you’re so angry. Work from within the system that advocates for you, whether you want to believe it actually does or not. And for those who do not believe that the unions advocate for you, try doing your job without the unions. While I’m sure there would be isolated instances of “great non-union experiences,” the majority of us would be mistreated in our jobs just by the very nature of human nature and the public’s perception of “public service.” |
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I’m a fierce supporter of my teacher’s union — and I’m 100 percent in agreement with you. We’re in a war for the survival of teacher’s unions and public schools, and you win wars through strategy, not screaming. To those of you who want to see more militant protest: I do, too. But I think we use that weapon at the moment when it will achieve the most for us and not spend it when economic conditions will blunt its force. Or, worse, cause it to blow back at us. It’s imperative that, when so many Americans are suffering, that Teacher’s Unions show the kind of compassion and support for them that we do for our students. This doesn’t mean surrendering our hard-won dignity. It might, though, mean something like setting up volunteer job-tutoring centers in local schools staffed by teachers.
We will public hearts by helping–and we will need those hearts to battle the heartless in the year’s ahead.
On the other hand, I think that the NEA, the AFT, the university education programs that are with us, and others need to counter-attack by LAUNCHING OUR OWN PRO-ACTIVE, TEACHER-POSTIVE MODEL OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT. The old adage of politics is that something always beats nothing — even if the something is terrible. So, as long as Charter School/KIPP/Test “Accountability” pablum is the only “alternative” in the public mind, we teachers cannot win the public over.
(Think of this way: we need to come up with a model of school improvement THAT HOLLYWOOD WOULD WANT TO MAKE A MOVIE ABOUT. Right now, the “downtrodden parent fights back against uncaring teachers and schools” occupies the narrative high ground. Not only do we have to, as we are doing, attack it, we need to put our own story in its place. And, by “our,” I mean stories about Schools and Communities, not heroic lone teachers/principals. The brilliant efforts of the PS 187 Community in my neighborhood in Washington Heights, New York, comes to mind.)
You are absolutely right. The NEA and AFT constantly tell us about their school improvement initiatives in their magazines. I just wish that this information could be displayed more openly in public media. It is very important that we play offense more through viable alternatives to current legislation rather than always playing defense.
I agree. Unions and unionized educators with the gifts they bring to the classroom should be able to offer (and could) alternative “reforms” that would better utilize the experience and cooperative nature of teaching teams. The key is lifting the oppressive testing mandates, returning funding and flexibility in meeting varied needs, and being more reasonable and realistic with goals and outcomes. Also, understanding how inexperienced/temp instructor placements of TFA politics-bound teachers-somehow leader in 3 yrs impacts education-and being willing to discuss how and why that sort of thing happens.
We have not gained “dignity” as professionals and the neocon elite, ultra right conservative billionaires who buy the law makers are very busy dismantling our schools: including K-12 as well as higher education.
Be tutors? Sure. We are working more hours for less pay as it is. Would the attackers on free and public education provide us the dignity of increasing wages and benefits, hiring union teachers? They continue and will continue to just say NO.
You’ve drunk the propaganda kool-aide.
Kuhi:
No, I haven’t drunk from anyone’s Kool-Aid. (no “e” — that’s for people). You and I disagree on strategy, which is good — we’ll forge something stronger from dialogue.
Communication being a difficult art, it’s clear that I can do a much better job of explaining the roots of my thinking on non-violent resistance. After reading this, you might still not agree with me, but you probably won’t think of me as a flunky.
So…my thinking comes mostly from my training and study in Gandhian non-violent protest. As I’m sure you know, Gandhi insisted on an approach that allowed for compassion and inclusion of one’s putative enemies. He also demanded — and this is where the idea of tutoring begins — in self-sacrifice. He believed, and I agree, that protesters needed to show the same implacable courage and ability to endure and triumph over hardship of front-line groups.
A lot of people are under the misapprehension that Gandhi was an impractical idealist. But anyone who has studied him closely — as Martin Luther King Jr. did — knows that he was a shrewd political operative.
Kuhi: the key to protesting non-violently, and compassionately is that such displays — especially when broadcast by media — turn the hearts of all but the most vicious enemies. And turning hearts is sound strategy — not just touchy-feely wishful-thinking.
In our current struggle, there are probably only a few thousands ideologues who are irremediably bent on the destruction of teaching. The millions of people who are their fellow travelers would probably just as soon as let public schools alone — if it wasn’t for economic pressures and general dislike of the expense that good schools require. And the vast majority of Americans — who vote — probably haven’t made up their minds about where they stand.
My thinking is NOT directed at converting our true foes. When they are in control of the show — as Rahm Emmanuel is in Chicago — I support direct strikes and forceful (non-violent) protest.
However, acts of compassion (such as public tutoring), and willingness to sacrifice (and, difficult as teacher’s lives are, our lives are NOT as difficult as many, many Americans whose support we can win) are aimed at peeling away the many in the middle from the billionaires on the right.
You’ll say, I think, that as long as the billionaires have the billions, it doesn’t matter how many supporters they have. But I say that if David Koch throws a party, and some of his favorite glitterati decide not to come because they aren’t down with his destruction of teachers that it WILL affect him. He loves those parties. And the way to force him to change his policies is to a) make the price of those policies PERSONALLY uncomfortable, b)make it worth his while to shift his hate to some other disgusting cause, and c)start attacking him on that disgusting cause. (It’s a loooooooong fight.)
If Gandhi doesn’t sit well with you as a mentor, then may I suggest Casey Stengel, the Hall of Fame Manager of the Yankees (and, more comically, the Mets.) Stengel once said on any baseball team of 25 players, “five will love you no matter what you do, five will hate you no matter what you do, and 15 won’t have an opinion. They key to managing is to keep those 15 players from the 5 who hate you.”
I think that’s part of our goal, here.
Finally, we HAVE won a great deal of dignity over the long history of education. When American education began, teachers were seen as tenders of sheep — worse, actually, because shepherds tended to be men, and teachers were disposable women. Pay was among the poorest of any job. Salaries, unions, tenure, health care, sick days, lunch hours, professional designation, equal pay for gender and regardless of age taught — these are victories only of the last 60 years (perhaps you’re not aware of this). We will not give one each of what we have one, back. But it’s important to remember that we have won battles from much meaner situations than our current one. And that no one can take away dignity without the victim’s consent.
Frustration over what unions should or should not do is remote here in a non union no collective bargaining state. Muzzled isn’t even the word to describe how teachers and other personnel feel. Muzzled, trapped and angry. We know what it would be like to every year tow the line with what ever educrat policy the state signs up for and have to act like good soldiers or lose our jobs. With so many other people losing their jobs in other industries there is pretty low concern over yet another member joining the ranks of the under or unemployed. This dynamic makes for a less dynamic and less innovative teaching staff around the state. For example a teaching staff that will not buck the local or state school boards that want limited teaching for sexual education– look at some of our fearless leaders to point out the long term ramifications for ignorance about that looks like. The fear of potential ‘moral decay’ versus national and international consternation at our elected official ignorance over reproduction. Teachers are muzzled and this ignorance will grow until there is no one in sections of the country that will be outraged or concerned when elected officials spout openly ignorant statements and untruths.
This is what it means to have no unions- timidity and fear and the every year stress of contracts showing up and being the good little citizen and going along with the school goals, the district goals and laying out any different knowledge for the good of the students is considered subterfuge. ( Teaching students where a uterus is located and how it has no shielding possible to prevent fertilization is not in the common core yet- maybe it needs to be)
Please, for all those who have unions and union protection, please know you are speaking up for those of the country that can’t even dream of having protection for our jobs. For every superintendent who speaks up it gives us hope that those kinds of superintendents exist who question why RTT teacher evals are being implemented. For every elected official who speaks out against policies ALEC wants means they are one more person who fights against the flood of money ALEC sweeps into town. Parents have more voice in education than teachers do and they are being led down the garden path of sound bites and slick campaigns. Opening up the parent” and community member’s eyes in a way that keeps them open and alert is something that I hope for.
Sorry to not be out in the open in this fight. I stand for children, my own children, who need to have an employed parent, while I fight against ignorance in other people’s children.
I’d like to see a sensible approach that wins the public over and takes on the corporatizers at the same time…for example. a five year contract ended in an illinois district recently, I thought it would be a great idea if the union agreed to a 2 year contract with a one year pay freeze to send a message to the public, that they understand the need to take on some of the hard times too. However, the union could then insist that other wasteful spending be stopped like the money spent on voluntary standardized testing like the MAPs by NWEA or even make a demand on the state or federal requirements to get the point across. What a great way to accomplish the goal…”Hey taxpayers, we feel your pain, and we will agree to a one year pay freeze, and all we want in return is for the govt to save even more money for you be getting rid of some of the testing that your kids and most likely you hate anyway.” Needless to say my idea wasn’t received well. Am I way off here? Thoughts?
My last district union took a one year pay freeze to save teacher jobs (mine for one). I lost my job the next year after my third year as did many other third and fourth year, non-tenured teachers. The union could do nothing for us since we were not tenured, but several of us gave the union copies of our performance reviews that would be hilarious if their consequences weren’t so real. The hope was they could use the information to inform the ongoing contract negotiations. As far as I can tell from reports from former colleagues, those who can are getting out, and retirement is looked on as the proverbial light at the end of a tunnel. The only thing that keeps anyone going is the kids.
Here’s a great video from the People’s Education Convention held in Washington D.C>
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8757
Yes LG you went out on a limb, unfortunately the limb has a huge termite ridden crack and has now broken off. Although I do give you kudos for being brave enough to state your thoughts.
Okay which one is it? A or B:
A) “It would be political suicide for unions at any level to come out with “horses on fire and guns a-blazing” against these public perceptions.”
B) “This is not a time for unions to take a defensive position”
Quite a contradiction in instructions for us peons that would question the tactics of the all knowing, all mighty union bosses. And the NEA is not a “union”, it is a professional organization that has always welcomed and was dominated by administrators for decades and still kowtows to the administrator side.
“There truly are no advocates for teachers and public education with any kind of position of effectiveness outside of the public teachers unions.”
Ravitch, Kohn, Ohanian, Horn, Krashen, Kuhn and the others on Diane’s “hero” lists, etc. . . don’t matter, eh?
“It’s so easy to be critical of your union representation when you have not gotten involved.”
For those of us who have gotten involved we appreciate what the NEA and union folks have done to help further the cause of public education. Just because the union leadership status quo may be challenged by us also, doesn’t imply a “not getting involved”.
“. . . who is using one example as evidence of how all locals operate to be a little more responsible.”
Yes, I’m one example who has criticized my former local of NEA for not doing enough but never have I extended that to be evidence that “all locals operate” the same.
“t is never a good idea to try to sway public opinion by openly declaring war on what many of the uninformed have convinced themselves to be “good” policies (i.e., “corporate reform”)”
Why not??? What the hell else is one to do????
“ask questions, yes, but never, NEVER put your union down publicly because you’re so angry. Work from within the system that advocates for you, whether you want to believe it actually does or not.”
Yes, I know, daddy is screwing his 13 year old step daughter but we shouldn’t question that because he is an upstanding citizen in the community and we should just “bring it up” with mom because we shouldn’t air our dirty laundry in public.
“And for those who do not believe that the unions advocate for you, try doing your job without the unions.”
Doing fine now without the unions, thank you, because in Missouri the “unions” really have no clout whatsoever anyway.
So much bloviation so little time (got to get ready to drive into St. Louis to watch a Cardinals game). Nope, don’t accept this union man’s/gal’s (not sure if your a guy or a gal LG) opinions.
Duane: You are absolutely incorrect about NEA and what you describe as an administrator-dominated organization. I do not believe that NEA has kowtowed to admins for years–if it ever really did. Very, very few locals rep for administrators, so there is little thought given to district or school administrations, except for understanding that many of them are getting as beaten up as we are in this edreform mess. After forty years as a teacher, I do remember the times when we could only refer to NEA or my state affiliate, DSEA (Delaware) as an organization. But, those times are long past. NEA talks UNION all the way. I can guarantee that we walk and talk union in Delaware–I just returned from walking with our folks in the Labor Day Parade. We are pushing union and unionism to our locals and our members, in order to stand together and work collectively.
[And, Duane–that reference to daddy and the 13-year old is a bit over the top, man.]
Duane says: “ ‘There truly are no advocates for teachers and public education with any kind of position of effectiveness outside of the public teachers unions.’
“Ravitch, Kohn, Ohanian, Horn, Krashen, Kuhn and the others on Diane’s “hero” lists, etc. . . don’t matter, eh?”
You misinterpreted what was said. The above mentioned list is filled with people who are effective in getting out a message, and their work is obviously appreciated by many, there is no denying this. However, unions have the resources to make the most difference for their own members which in turn can positively affect the public schools in which their members are employed. It’s obvious that individuals do not have the same strength that organizations do. Your union has the resources to do the very things that were outlined: Keep a dialogue with legislators and support a public advocacy campaign. That is my point, but for reasons unknown, you took it somewhere crazy.
The bottom line is that we need to get more involved, but we need to do it in a way that maintains professionalism. There ARE state unions that are making a difference in small ways. The governor in my state is anything but professional, yet my state union has not only answered his misstatements with an all-out campaign to show how wrong he is, the union went to the legislature and led the way to prevent tenure-decimating legislation from being passed that would cripple the schools by making it easy to “rid” the schools of their veteran staff members. The public was led to believe that tenure was bad, and something WAS going to happen legislatively no matter what the basis for the perception was. We had no choice—the bill was going to be presented because the governor convinced the public that tenure was bad. If we simply protested, we would have garnered no sympathy from the public. So my state union launched a campaign to educate the legislators on due process and thus intercepted the bad policy that was originally proposed. The new bill was passed with some compromises, but due process rights were preserved and the union actually felt that these “reforms” were better overall because the tenure charges would not be dragged on and through the court system.
That is one example of how a positive and professional approach can work toward improving the situation, and that is an example of what was stated in the original post: Get involved and be leaders in this, not protestors that look like zealots. A side note: Not everything that is happening in this state that is against public education is being turned around by both state unions, but there are many irons in the fire, as it were. These kinds of push-backs are part of a larger process to fight the big machine with a member-machine. We have reality on our side, and we can prove what’s working in the schools. As one reader said, unfortunately children do not have many years for these processes to take effect, but in this arena, there are protocols that ought to be followed. One of the biggest points of the original post was: Be professional and promote public education in the public. Speaking out publicly against your union is not a smart move. There was nothing in the original post stating that the unions cannot be questioned by their membership. Go back and read it.
“For those of us who have gotten involved we appreciate what the NEA and union folks have done to help further the cause of public education. Just because the union leadership status quo may be challenged by us also, doesn’t imply a ‘not getting involved’.”
I totally agree—however, there are plenty who have never gotten involved, even to attend their building meetings. If you want to make a difference, do it from within the organization, not from without.
” ‘t is never a good idea to try to sway public opinion by openly declaring war on what many of the uninformed have convinced themselves to be “good” policies (i.e., “corporate reform”)’
Why not??? What the hell else is one to do????”
Take the high road. Take the actions you deem necessary, but do so as dignified professionals working with the union not against. Declaring war on anything makes you look like a zealot. There is a way to fight for what is right without devaluing your integrity along the way.
” ‘ask questions, yes, but never, NEVER put your union down publicly because you’re so angry. Work from within the system that advocates for you, whether you want to believe it actually does or not.’
Yes, I know, daddy is screwing his 13 year old step daughter but we shouldn’t question that because he is an upstanding citizen in the community and we should just ‘bring it up’ with mom because we shouldn’t air our dirty laundry in public.”
I also agree with the other poster who said this was way over-the-top. Again, nowhere does it say in the original post that one should not question anything. Never.
” ‘And for those who do not believe that the unions advocate for you, try doing your job without the unions.’
Doing fine now without the unions, thank you, because in Missouri the ‘unions’ really have no clout whatsoever anyway.”
Obviously, there are many, many posters here who believe that the unions actually DO have clout—that is part of why they feel that their unions are “sleeping with the enemy.” Why would they be so angry if they didn’t feel their unions had clout?
While many here have made excellent points, they took the post to some incorrect places. The main concept behind this original post is: Be professional, and be very careful about publicly ridiculing your union. There are ways to help make the changes you seek. The saddest part about diplomacy is depending on which side of the argument you are on, “compromise” can be a good policy or a dirty word. You decide how you want to be remembered in this fight: as someone who acted professionally or as someone who bit off his nose to spite his face.
My dad was a lifelong Republican, and for nearly 40 years had his own (small) business. He was fervently anti-union. Circumstances required him to close the business and go work for someone else. Eventually, he ended up working for a company whose workers were represented by the Teamsters, though he was an electronics specialist. His pay went up and, when he had to go to hospital for heart surgery, his union medical plan paid for nearly all of it. His antipathy toward unions ended right there. Though he remained a Republican, he was also, paradoxically, a supporter of the Teamsters.
Unions have done many good things for American workers, and some bad things as well. The Teamsters’ leaders have not always kept their noses clean, but the rank and file — and their families — have had better lives because of the union’s representation.
One other point about “never” speaking out against the union. I might disagree with that from a personal experience. I’ve never been a strong proponent for nor an opponent against unions. Politically speaking I’d consider myself a conservative, although most of my Republican friends call me a liberal because I don’t support Romney and I don’t support our Governor Scott Walker as I don’t believe they are conservative at all. I understand the word to mean conserve the use of govt, not just cut spending but increase the power of govt. In any case I work in Illinois and my teachers union publicly endorsed Democrat Alexi Giannoulias in the 2010 U.S. SEnate race for Obama’s vacated seat. I wasn’t a big supporter of Alexi, but I wasn’t an Illinois resident either. In any case, his opponent, Mark Kirk, was leading in the polls as the elcetion approached and in an act of desperation, Giannoulias accused Mark Kirk of Treason, which is defined in the Constitution as, “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” This is a pretty serious accusation to make period, but Mark Kirk was an officer in the United States Navy who served honorably as a pilot in war. As a Navy veteran myself, I was furious. I demanded action from my union to insist that Giannoulias provide evidence of the charges, apologize, or for the union to rescind their endorsement of him. I created a bit of a stir within, but eventually Giannoulias lost and it became a non-issue as the comments were made the week before the election. My point being that sometimes it’s ok to speak out if it’s the right thing to do.
I do it too But then I don’t belong to a union I think Scott Walker is a radical, not a conservative
Diane
To the reader who disagrees:
First let me start out by saying Weingarten was my local leader before she became a national one. Unfortunately, she relinquished many of our rights to Bloomberg and Joel Klein Even though she is no longer our “rep”, she did both jobs for awhile, and now still holds the reigns to our union president. She also stopped endorsing Democratic candidates who supported us. As a result, Pataki became governor. Then during Bloomberg’s 2nd and (illegal) 3rd term, she chose again not to endorse the Democratic candidates. She made many deals that were never ratified by the rank and file among them using VAM. She had her “people” write articles touting its use. Then she did the unforgivable in our ’05 contract. She got an agreement that paid us more, but took away our most important rights–among them the right to be excessed. As a result, many teachers are treated horribly under the ATR provision with no union support whatsoever. These are teachers who are now subs going into a new school each and every week. Yet there was no protection when the DoE sent in principals to “formally observe” these teachers on their assignment. Would you liked to be interviewed if you were the 30th teacher to walk into that classroom? She also took away our right to file a grievance against a LIF as well as our ability to be part of the hiring process–a process she fought hard for teachers to be a part of. Klein didn’t like it so she agreed to scrap it. The icing on the cake was when GATES was the keynote speaker at the AFT convention and she chastised fellow teachers for walking out. You may call that “reaching out”. I call it betrayal.
Now that I have giving you some background, let me tell you where I agree. I too don’t want a “Militant” “Aggressive” union. However I do want one that is assertive. I want want that will say to Obama, I will not endorse you while you let Duncan, Gates. Rhee and others treat us like the enemy, promote evaluations using VAM, co-charter locations, more tests and less teaching, and larger class sizes. RTTT funding has been going to organizations that enrich Pearson, Gates, Murdoch, TFA, and charters, yet none of that money goes directly to the classroom!!
Getting back to the evaluations: Weingarten allowed NYSUT to accept a 40% evaluation based on testing (including truant students which Buffalo teachers are now fighting). 40% might sound like a fair percentage, but if that part of the evaluation is not good 2 years in a row, the teacher can be fired!! Weingarten settled with Rhee and the Washington, DC teachers and now they are being fired left and right. She allowed Colorado teachers to be evaluated with 50% going towards testing. She has bended over to almost every reform out there while speaking out against many of them. So which one is it? It’s not what unions say, it’s what they do.
As for your suggestion to trying to change it… She has very tight control of the Delegate Assembly so teachers with differing points of view can no longer get their points across. She changed the way elections are run. She stopped district chapter leaders from voting who they wanted as their district rep, and now she has them “appointed”. These are just some of the ways she keeps control.
Chicago teachers (who you do not mention in your comment) are my heroes. It took 8 years for them to take control from Weingarten. However, Weingarten still has the power to take negotiation control away from Karen Lewis. Thankfully, the Chicago teachers are still the ones who will decide with their vote on the terms of the contract. They stood up against a bully mayor and a superintendent (who btw, was thrown out of his previous city by both parents and teachers). I wouldn’t call them militant or aggressive. I will call them a union!!!
You did however bring up Wisconsin. The problem was not the unions. It was the Democratic party who put up the wrong candidate. (Yes, that happens.)
I do agree the best action is to start speaking up. Teachers in general are the types to put their heads in the sand rather than speak up. And those of us that do and try to bring about change are still among the minority. The media doesn’t report on strikes that were successful like Tacoma and other cities. It does not tell the whole story about these reforms and reformers. Teachers also have to start reading more and asking more questions. If you look at the many Facebook pages that support public education, you will find less than 5,000 supporters. It took a page called “Petition to Oprah: Please Book Diane Ravitch”, and it took a year to get 1,000 supporters.
Teachers are outraged, but still look to their union leaders to decide, and some have decided against them and their students. It took Chicago teachers 8 years to make the change. Teachers no longer have the luxury of waiting. ALEC is buying local school elections. They are buying candidates and many representatives. State laws are changing left and right. Last year many of us attending the Save Our School March on Washington, DC. There would have been 30,000 more teachers if Weingarten had told her local unions to at least advertise the event. I cannot tell you how many NYC teachers didn’t even know about this event. She obviously didn’t want to embarrass Duncan. She did however contribute money to the event. But more parents and teachers attending would have been a lot better. btw, I was there. Were you??
Teachers cannot sit idly by while they lose collective bargaining and due process rights. I pay dues and I pay into our union’s PAC, yet all I see are is national and local union leaders abandoning teachers and backing RTTT.
Again, I agree “Militancy” is not the answer, but neither is trying to placate the reformers. We are losing this war. The day may have to come when teachers call a national strike. And it won’t be because we are “militant”. It will be to save the profession from being taken over by corporate interests who will be making millions of dollars off the backs of our students.
So understand why many of us feel we have to speak out publicly when our union leaders are making back-door agreements. If we are going to change the leadership, we have to start having a collective voice. And as long as our union leaders are controlling the message, the rest of us have no choice but to alert the members of what’s really going on behind the scenes. In this case, information is power.
I agree with you–you make excellent points. From where I stand, the problems we have today are not the unions, per se, but the LEADERSHIP. Example: on the one hand, you have Karen Lewis. On the other hand, you have Randi Weingarten. Who is the strong, pro-teacher, pro-student one here? Union leaders do NOT kow tow to the likes of Michael Bloomberg, Arne Duncan and Michelle Rhee.
You do not see Karen Lewis saying, “Yes, Mr. Mayor. No. Mr. Mayor, whatever you want Mr. Mayor.” The CTU worked hard, elected the strong leader they needed, and, under this leader, continue to remain strong. Bottom line being, we union members need to make sure that our leaders are strong. Otherwise, as in the case of Chicago (Lewis defeated an ineffective opponent), vote them out, and preserve your union.
Thank you for your support of my comment. Lewis (CORE) defeated the UNITY caucus which Randi heads.. Other UFT members in NYC have tried and failed to get the leadership votes. We did have one caucus that was getting close, but Randi made them an offer they couldn’t refuse, and they are now kissing her ring. The others never quite got organized.
Please listen to the audio of Karen Lewis today in Chicago. Why wasn’t Randi with them?
Linda,
I wouldn’t want Randi there. She was the one who took over the Washington, DC negotiations with Rhee, and as a result over 100 teachers were fired. Randi has a way of placating the reformers. I know. I was one of the teachers who couldn’t believe teachers with seniority could no longer be assigned to a school with vacancies. Instead they were put into a giant sub pool, and principals wouldn’t touch them with a 10-foot pole. Instead new teachers were hired out of college because principals now control the budget.
Keep Randi far away!!!
I am sitting at my kitchen table reading this blog, watching MSNBC pre-convention coverage, and eyeing a stack of student papers that I need to look through (yes, school started last week). Then a report comes on about “Won’t Back Down” and how it will be shown at the convention. Guess who is interviewed? Michelle Rhee, of course. Mention is made by the moderator (Alex Witt?) that the movie has some critics, including Randi Weingarten; (of course Ms. Weingarten is not there and the nature of her criticisms are not detailed). Ms. Rhee says it’s all about parent involvement. Who could be against parent involvement? I am what my mom used to call “spitting mad.” I was going to write something more nuanced, but this brought me back to earth. Are teachers’ unions perfect? No. But they are under siege by powerful forces aimed at privatizing public schools. They provide essential support for principles such as due process, integration, small class size, and even equal pay for equal work.
Rhee is a liar. She only wants involvement (from parents, students, etc) if they agree with her. If not, you are banished. You are not
invited to movie premieres and you will not be listened to…she is a fraud.
I have given up on CNN or MSNBC….they do not want to uncover the truth….that would take investigation and reporting. They just want to stir the pot because they believe that leads to good ratings. I read more and more everyday. It is frustrating but it is informing.
You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.
You can add the NYTimes to that list as well.
I don’t know about MSNBC, but, truly, we need to be DONE with CNN
(I am). As I reported here, earlier, Jim WALTON–son of Sam & member of the 1% Wal-Mart Family–is CNN Worldwide President.
(Google him-Jim Walton–charter schools) and read the article “Education,” which begins with a quote from Dr. Ravitch. He–& they–are ALL about charter schools & privatization–and THAT is the reason for what happened when Randi Kaye (a mere cog in the system) interviewed Dr. Ravitch. The Waltons LOVE Michelle Rhee.
So–no more CNN for news or Anderson Cooper 360 or anything else, thank you. BTW–Chicago Trib. article says their prime-time audience plunged “by more than 40% compared w/four years ago.”
Let’s make it 100%
*Also–insofar as Wal-Mart–just saw the EXCELLENT Robert Greenwald 2005 doc. on Current, “Wal-Mart: High/Low.” Also, Current has the equally excellent 2012 doc. “Koch Bros. Exposed.”
I am shocked about what I DIDN’T know about their involvement in the North Carolina Schools re-segregation a few years back (Koch-funded school board members elected to make this happen!). A must-see!
Yes, done with CNN. I am also no longer shopping at WalMart for school supplies or anything. Many corporations are off my list. I rarely watch tv anymore. I will check out the two documentaries. Thank you.
Agreed that union members should not take their complaints public. Problem is that some unions do not provide forums for their members to present suggestions or complaints to their leadership. Many union members do not feel that they are adequately represented by their leadership and that they are not given the opportunity to express their frustration. What then?
I cannot speak for other locals, but our local has a representative counsel that holds building meetings and takes back any membership concerns to the counsel to be discussed. Our local leadership addresses any and all concerns within the confines of the contract. We have a very active and productive local.
I do know that there are some locals in my state who are not as fortunate, but like someone posted here already, members should work to get people in leadership positions who are dedicated to the membership. It is beyond me how members could not take the action to find the representation that is best for them, but it takes hard work and dedication to the cause.
When I first started out teaching, we had a few representatives in my local who decided to join the counsel because they were unhappy with some of the way things were going. Once they got involved, they were able to help their respective buildings by improving the leadership. We settled our last contract at a time when new legislation governing our health benefits was about to be passed–we settled a week before the new policies were in place and since we had been working for a year without a contract, we were able to apply our newly negotiated contract to the past year thus exempting us from that bad legislation. We did not lose any of our benefits, either…all of this with Chris Christie as our governor. Good leadership does exist.
There is definitely a time to be militant……when the anti-union billionaire goon squad is jumping on your face and attempting to obliterate you from human existence. The forces arrayed against traditional public schools, teachers, the unions, collective bargaining rights, tenure and seniority are rabidly militant, organized and fabulously well funded. The deunionization of America has approached the point where even the traditional ally of the unions, the Democrats, have been very quiet and absentee concerning issues that are vital to union people. I guess the union movement will have to reinvent itself all over again.
Good stuff Joe. The challenge of today is recognizing that forces attacking public schools will only stop when the system is totally private. There is not a single reformer that is interested in a dialogue to discuss a compromise position. The only acceptable outcome for the reformers is a privatized system. To be anything other than militant at this time in history is foolish. If the unions can’t then other grassroots organizations will have to fill the void. The delusional union leadership wants to preserve their precious “seat at the table.” Defenders and advocates of public education that are engaged seriously in this war know that the “table” needs to be turned over.
On the other hand, if unions lose enough members and support, maybe they will wake up. The unions threw in the towel along time ago when they took money from the Gates foundation, which some may argue was for non-reform issues. However, they should have told Gates to go jump in a lake, just like they should have done Obama. But they didn’t and now their just as much to blame as the reformers.
However, I still have hope – there’s AFT in Chicago, and I think that if enough members leave, they will be forced to change their approach from one that just acts as a money collector to one that will do the right thing no matter how many people getted mad. I hope this happens sooner than later.
I agree that much of the public is anti-union and I agree that rioting in the streets probably won’t work. So, yes, we should put forward our best alternatives to improve our schools in a professional manner.
However, I have one, nagging question that keeps me awake at night. If we do not take a stronger stance against the reformers. how on earth do we advocate for our students? The other side stresses a sense of urgency. Do we not have a sense of urgency to help the children who are hurt by these policies?? How many groups of children are acceptable to sacrifice while we peacefully work to minimize the damage? 2 years? 3 years?
Agreed
Diane
I am surprised that this post has accepted the “reformers” moving of the goal posts so readily and assumes that it is commonly accepted. The purpose of unions is to advocate for members’ working conditions and pay. The “reformers” have used slick rhetoric to convince gullible people that the purpose of the union should be to “reform” schools. I don’t buy that at all. As has so often been stated, my working conditions are your child’s learning conditions. We can also work for school improvement but that is not our primary mission and if we accept the “reformers” re-imagining of our mission then we are setting ourselves up for accepting blame for failures caused by them.
For the last 16 years I have been involved quite deeply in both the AFT and the NEA (we have a cooperative union in Florida) and I have been a building rep for 14 of my 16 years as a teacher. I’ve visited my state legislature, written letters, called, rallied fellow teachers and worked the phone banks for GOTV. The first half of my career was spent in NYC. The second half in Florida, a right to work state. Unionism is vastly different in the many states that have adopted right to work, with little opposition or pushback from the national unions that it decimates and destroys. Why is that?
I’ve never bought the idea that it is our responsibility to conform ourselves to whatever our opposition chooses for their own comfort level in the hopes of preventing them from being even more extreme. The positions advocated in this post are exactly why we are in the situation we are in: an adoption of the Clinton-era “triangulation” strategies that supposedly reach compromise by taking the position of your opponent and making it your own. Thus we have Dennis Van Roekel and Randi Weingarten agreeing to VAM junk science, echoing the rhetoric of the “reformers” that schools are mess and in need of saving, and the list goes on and on.
I look at our colleagues in Australia and around the world who rally to shut down the entire school system when they are threatened with harmful, ridiculous reforms and then I compare that to American teachers who are an endangered species as public education is brought to the brink of extinction and I ask why aren’t we out in the streets? If you really believe that being nicer, quieter, and more accommodating will win this war then I refer you to the great Frederick Douglas who taught us that power never accedes ground without a fight and those who decry the battle are asking for a storm of change without the thunder and lightning that accompany it.
We are teachers. If our membership and the public are unaware of union history and the important gains procured through the labor movement then we must teach them these things. If we truly believe that truth and knowledge are the keys to good citizenship then we need to use these tools to further our ends. Playing old-school political games that no longer work will do nothing but hasten our end.
a “reader who disagrees” says: “For those who have had bad experiences and felt your local representation did very little to help you, know that you should never be left without recourse. Just like in any other area, there are varying levels of effectiveness among local associations. This is why there are country [sic] and state affiliations, just like in the court system.”
What insipid White privilege. As if “recourse” were equally available to every union member never mind every teacher. The reader speaks like a union bureaucrat and, if he or she is not reaping any privileges as such, it is doubly pathetic, if he or she is a person of color, triply so. We are long past the convenient platitude that “being nice” will grant us more “honey”. As Dr. Ravitch publishes this point of view under the guise of letting us all see different points of view, I can only surmise that she considers it a rational point to make when at its heart, this point is nothing but a a call to disenfranchise a truly democratic decision-making process that comes from working people–teachers in this case–deciding their interests and only then deciding who will lead them to implement in those interests. I find it particularly telling that of all “defense” of teacher unions and on THIS day of all days, September 3rd, when in Chicago, Illinois, the Chicago Teachers Union is right now preparing to march in unity with other unions to stand up to the corporate reform of education that is bankrupting any semblance of inquisitive, creative, and “positive influence” on society that would come from a free, democratic, and resource-supported public education. The CTU is leading the way, right now, toward mounting a truly “positive influence on policies that affect public education.” How did such a union under its union leadership even make this kind of effort? It did so, by electing a leadership independent of and opposed to the machine politics of the Democratic Party and is conducting an extensive grassroots organizing campaign aimed at winning the hearts and minds of parents and students. They have done so against Party machine and the Duncan/Obama administration in the very heart of the Obama Administration’s base and they have done so despite the rather possible illusions they still might have in the Democratic Party as a “lesser evil”. Here is one discussion describing the stakes behind the CTU’s leadership: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/16/chicago-teachers-strike-blow-organised-labour?fb=optOut
My question is simple, where does Dr. Ravitch stand (I can only assume “reader” would consider a CTU strike as “negative”)? Dr. Ravitch sends post upon post decrying the state of corporate education and the attacks on children. But when organized and mobilized teachers stand up to this corporate onslaught on learning, not ONE word is written in support of the Chicago Teachers Union? Why is that? Is the CTU just a bad example of the “negative” approach to influencing Congress and the President? Or is she going to put her money where her mouth is and stand with Chicago’s teachers?
I stand with you. Teaching, unions, schools, are being decimated with extreme prejudice by an all out takeover of what remains of democracy in America by an elitist, conservative far right. Old rules of engagement no longer apply. Teachers, unions, students, schools, communities have been disempowered to the point of absurdity. Haven’t people learned the lesson the House of Representatives gave Americans? The owners of America will not respond to talk. It’s time to organize. We can learn from the CTU.
Manuel, I agree with most of what you say, but you don’t need to bring Diane Ravitch into this. It’s a good thing that she posts this particular person’s view, because we all need to know where we stand, and how to articulate our position in public. This person’s position has a right to be aired here.
Diane is a friend to students and teachers, and doesn’t deserve our suspicions or mistrust. She gives us no reason to doubt her motives or sincerity. It is because of Diane that we have this space to discuss issues.
I think you have not been a reader of this blog for very long. I have written half a dozen posts supporting CTU. Check out this one: https://dianeravitch.net/2012/06/13/the-chicago-story-karen-lewis-1-jonah-edelman-0/
Maybe you weren’t there when I made a trip to Chicago to speak to the CTU last year at Karen Lewis’s invitation.
If you ask where I stand, it shows that you have not been reading the blog. Ask Karen where I stand.
Glad to know it, Diane. I did try to search your blog for earlier posts on CTU, but to no avail. Hence, my concern. I do read this blog quite a bit and the discussion on the unions seemed a bit too general given the example that CTU is providing and the critical nature of the attacks on public education including on teachers and their unions. I am quite glad to be proven wrong.
Here is another you missed: https://dianeravitch.net/2012/06/14/what-if-the-chicago-teachers-union-loses/
And there is this one too: https://dianeravitch.net/2012/06/03/for-shame-penny-pritzker/
The teachers unions have the truth about privatization on their side. They need to stand together and get it out to the media. Repeatedly.
Look at how many years for Diane to be on guest on Charlie Rose. She wasn’t even part of the original Education Nation panel. Nor was one parent from Parents Across America. And Oprah did not include any teacher or Diane on her 2-part “Waiting for Superman” program. The media is ignoring the facts about privatization. btw, Weingarten has already gave her stamp of approval on charters.
The largest union in America, the NEA, voted to give their very early endorsement of the Obama administration’s education policy. With that endorsement, they literally gave away all leverage in moving the administration away from hurtful and destructive policies. Unforgivable.
Being militant does not mean being violent or rioting in the streets. In the case of teachers and teachers’ unions, it just means being organized and determined. I have never seen or heard of any teachers, striking or otherwise, being violent or rioting in the streets. That notion is ridiculous. Teachers are a peaceful group and want to effect change through peaceful methods, in the manner of Martin Luther King. No one wants violence or rioting, least of all teachers.
Here’s one small contribution for Labor Day. “An Eclectic List of Events in U.S. Labor History” by allan lupins:
http://www.lutins.org/labor.html
It is a long and bloody history, with hired security guards, local and state police, national guardsmen, and American military being used to quash unionization and labor activism under the direction of politicians and often the US Supreme Court.
Learn from the history. All of the advantages won for workers by the unions was paid for in blood, sweat, tears, and jail time, with frequent defeats in the courts and public opinion polls. Solidarity, determination, and the willingness to fight for what is right no matter the personal cost are the qualities we need — not pre-compromise, going along to get along, and appeasement.
This blog article is not about a defense of unions. It’s a dialogue uninformed by the reality of our political climate, and the ownership of America by those who do not listen. They, the neocon, elitist far right billionaires and the Wall Street they own and the Congress they have bought and paid for will continue to just say NO.
Wake up. There is a takeover and privatization of everything in America happening with increasing speed and alacrity. Get a grip. By the time we convinced legislators, even citizens, that teachers’ unions are really a good thing, hell will have, indeed, frozen over.
I have been teaching for 29 years and we have been told to try to curry favor with the public for at least that long. Once private sector unions were eliminated by our corporate culture, the public turned against the public unions. The public as a whole is never going to support unions until union membership increases in the private sector. Get it? If we continue to collaborate and lay down, there won’t be any unions left in this country.is is NOT appeasement that achieve results, it’s action. Industrial action is the ONLY weapon of unions–only! Why do you think we have such income inequality? It isn’t just globalization, it is because workers aren’t demanding their share of production. Why? Because they don’t belong to unions.
Additionally, union leaders are betraying rank and file everyday. My union president signed RttT without a vote from us. later he said he didn’t know what it entailed. Do you think I’m engaging in conspiracy theories. What about union -management non-profits that hire ex-for profit carpetbaggers for its executive director. What about when your own union allows TFA to take jobs away from teachers who still are waiting on the recall list.
The Chicago Teacher’s union is fighting for its rights, because it is lead by Karen Lewis, a member of a break away caucus within the union.
I never thought in a million years that I would be speaking against my union leadership, but I don’t trust them anymore. Dont give me your keep your head down and try to get along bs, I won’t have it. I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to pretend the unions are fighting for us. We’ve lost tenure, seniority, respect, what’s left?
What state are you in? I agree with you 100%. We have been sold out. It is maddening.
Rhode Island
Great dialogue here. There was one commenter who spoke about what was once an administrator led union. I can remember that time in the state I now live in. It was. The presidents that were elected and the elected board members for too many years were from the administrative ranks. A group disgusted with this began a grassroots movement from within to change that. It took a while. But the group was finally successful. I am not always happy about what goes on at my local, state or even national level, but believe me I wouldn’t think of being in a classroom without union affiliation. I’m not sure that militancy is the answer, but being bold, strong, and committed to doing what is right is. The attacks on teachers and public education is wrong. An educator by himself cannot make those attacks go away all alone. We need our unions and our union leaders need us. If you don’t like the leadership you have, start finding one that can get the members standing alongside. It can be done. Disbanding your membership will not solve any problems one alone may have.
I had to address a few points since the original intent of the post was grossly misinterpreted by many here who have obvious reasons to feel disenchanted.
While the points many here have made are well-taken, the main concept behind the original point is this: Be professional in your actions and be very careful about publicly ridiculing your union. There are ways to help make the changes you seek. Two that were mentioned in the post are ways that every union member can be engaged in this fight: Talk to your legislators about some of the destructive policies that have come out recently and advocate for public education in the public arena.
A huge misconception is in the message about expressing dissatisfaction with your own union: Doing so in the public is never a good idea. That was one of the major points in the original post. HOWEVER nowhere in the post was anyone asked to “lay down and obey” the reformers although so many interpreted it that way.
That interpretation is wholly incorrect, and the subsequent ridicule of the original post that took place in this discussion was unfair. A few even went so far as to accuse me (as the original poster) of “accepting the reform movement.” Then some of you asked Diane if she agreed! I challenge anyone to re-post the words where I suggested that we should accept the bad reform policies that politicians and their advocates for privatization are shoving down our throats. You will not be able to do this because these words and the mere suggestion that I said anyone should “accept what the reformers are saying” were never posted. Needless to say, I am shocked at this interpretation, but it only shows that further explanation is required.
What I WAS saying is we cannot deny that so many in the public have fallen prey to the rhetoric of the reform movement. Public perception that the public school system is “bad” and in big trouble is one we need to fight with advocacy that proves the schools are not failing as a whole and that we are doing a better job than the “reformers.” Accepting that the public is on board with such a negative view of schools is not the same thing as agreeing with the reform movement. Just open a newspaper or read an article online about “bad teachers” or “failing schools” to see just how many people agree with the notion. How we “fight” this public perception is with proof that our schools are “not all failing” through supporting the public schools advocacy programs that many unions have in place; we do not fight this perception by bad-mouthing policies that may reflect some of the ideals that members of the public have been led to adopt. Change the concept of the public, but do so with proof of successes, not simple protests against policies.
While there are instances where protests (such as those of the CTU) are necessary, the most effective way to get the public back on our side is through advocacy. Fight the big fights where the fights have gotten out of hand (in the legislatures), but fight the perception daily with advocacy for what YOU and your school are doing well. Of course, one has to accept that the vast majority of the public believes the reformers, and one must also believe that we can win them back for this advice to be sound. If you do not believe that the public has been led against us, then you will not agree that we need to advocate at all.
What was said in the original post is very different from saying that we should accept the reformers lies and policies. The public is demanding that schools be improved, as they always should be improved since no system should remain stagnant. The demands have been increasing in number and intent from the time that “A Nation at Risk” was released to the present, and these demands have reached a fever-pitch. Again, acknowledging this is not the same as agreeing with reformers. However, many of you took a position based on your own thoughts and perceptions and completely turned my words into something they were not.
It’s easy to see how passion can be dangerous if you understand how my message became someone else’s just by the bias of some posters’ interpretations. This is the very reason that I advised caution in the first place. Many of you actually made my point for me: Be careful about how you go about with your protests since these can easily be misinterpreted by those who are fervently angry, i.e. those members of the public who bought into the story the reformers are selling. Besides the perceptions of the average member of the public, I have seen so many misinterpretations in the public perception from those in public service, legislators and educators alike. How many union members in Wisconsin publicly went against their own union? One is one too many. Keep your head level and your cause will be true.
If you did interpret the post that way, you completely misunderstood, but those who are passionate about their cause can easily misinterpret messages. It was meant to be a cautionary statement. There is a better way to express your dissatisfaction but do so in a way that will preserve your position to advocate for public education.
For those who will disagree with their respective union no matter what, perhaps there really is nothing that union membership has done for you that is worth preserving. This post is not for you as you have resigned yourself to believe that unions have become the enemy, and you have obviously made up your minds.
For those who still believe they have a say in their union, it is important to examine those organizations who have demonstrated their “success to the cause.” The CTU is one such organization that has used its resources to take up the fight in a way that most “locals” do not or cannot. We need to ask ourselves what we can do differently if we are unhappy with the results of our own unions. The union is you–not necessarily your leaders, and until you reconcile that concept with your thoughts, you will never really advocate for the union despite the fact that it might advocate for you.
Putting down your union publicly weakens it, and in turn, it weakens you, your position, and the positions of all union members. There are ways to address your feelings—start at the bottom (local) and work your way to the top. For those who have reservations about Randi Weingarten, what is in your local, county and state dialogue about this? It is a legitimate concern especially for those in the AFT. I am not an AFT member nor do I agree with everything the AFT does (especially since its actions represent other unions by association), but if I was, I would certainly be questioning Weingarten’s actions. Why do you think you are powerless? Have you taken any inside action?
You should never give up the fight to improve your system of representation within the system itself. It’s important to keep the fight on a professional level and keep the “dirt” out of the public eye or you could be faced with blinding the public to reality all of which leaves your union powerless and leaves you no advocate within your own job. And yes, question everything you feel that should be questioned–do not just lie down and obey.
I would appreciate it if those of you who put words in my mouth would refrain from doing so in the future.
LG, perhaps you have a local that is responsive, but many of us do not. Many local leadership is trying to make a name for itself by buying in to all Randi’s ideas–union/management partnerships (which I’ve discovered are simply cover to force teachers to comply) our new one is lead by a carpetbagger from Houston who was an ex head of a for profit turnaround outfit, signing on to RttT when teachers aren’t allowed to vote, so don’t speak for all locals, please, don’t, you have know idea what’s going on in many places.
When you find you OWN local turning against you, while at the same time listening is Randi’s appeasement shuffle, you must ask questions. Solidarity is earned. Solidarity is for the greater good, not political currying for the leadership.
What makes me dance with glee is, that with all the toadying from leadership, it will be Karen Lewis, and the smart, committed, willing to take a risk, CTU, who will now lead the way! It won’t be the divisive toady crowd. Diane always says that right will prevail, I believe her.
LG, do you think what have on offer hasn’t been offered up to us, at every union meeting. “oh, be careful, the public doesn’t like us,” oh, don’t say anything against the union, you will hurt our cause, blah, blah, blah…” this is the way the union is now laying down arms, with the foot soldiers being used as cannon fodder in the process. Oh we need a new unionism, as Randi is fond of saying, but it isn’t the “Unity” agenda we need. If we continue to listen to Randi, we will have no union at all.
Can you rally say the AFT’s policies under Randi haven’t vastly contributed to the reform agenda taking hold? Why don’t you ask a New York City teacher what she thinks? This is my 29th year of teaching, and I’ve watched this union go down, much of it because of its own policies. So, don’t you dare suggest I not speak out against the union!
Candace, you are free to do whatever you need to do, and I encourage you to take the necessary steps to make it known that you are angry. But please don’t color MY union the way you color YOUR union because I have seen what a union can do. Unfortunately, when you’re in a union, we are all “union” when we get down to it. But clearly not all unions are run in the same way. Still, we are viewed by the public as the same, so by speaking out against “a” union, you are speaking out against all union members. That is the way of things, and that is the crux of my point.
Weingarten has not done well by any of you–this is obvious. However, I still stand by what I said before, whether or not you feel that it pertains to you. Speak out within your rank and file before, and I will add…do this before it’s too late.
Despite the fact that it won’t help any NYC teacher now, I’m going to ask this so that it can help prevent the scourge of reform from putting veterans in a substitute pool (despicable): What led everyone down this path? What did the UFT membership (not just leadership) do to stop the political path of Bloomberg? How could this have been avoided within the ranks? I remember Giuliani giving teachers a hard time even before Bloomberg–my uncle-in-law was teaching in NYC schools back then. (Thankfully, he has since retired.) Wiengarten was viewed as a hero to outsiders during the time of Giuliani’s “reign.” What changed and how could the membership have prevented it? I’m sure you’re going to answer it this way: Weingarten sold out. However, what did the rank-and-file have to say about it? Did they just go along with it?
The situation in NY is indeed a travesty. Back in 2010, I remember reading an article in the New York Times about VAMs and how they can lead to a great teacher being fired. The reality is everything seemed to happen “around” the teachers and not “with” the teachers. What could have been done to prevent this? Cities with mayors who run school systems seem to be the biggest problem areas–the vast majority of smaller locals do not run this way.
My state union will work to prevent these kinds of things from happening–I have seen my leadership in action doing so already. I have faith, and I know that we will fight to preserve and improve our position in this sea of “reform” despair. I wish there was something that other unions can do to help the teachers in NYC, but I’m afraid that what was lost will not come back anytime soon. They were sold down the river, and this is a lesson for those of us who still have a chance. Work within your ranks to get leadership that stands with you, but engaging the public in a war against unions devalues those unions that are working FOR their membership.
Since you’re telling me what I dare not do I will tell you what I will do–I will fight to protect what we have, and I will be ever-vigilant of policies that seek to devalue us, but sure as anything, I will not voice public dissent with my union. It just puts our bargaining power (and yes, bargaining not just for our rights, but for public school advocacy) at a disadvantage.
There are plenty of people out there who are not in dire situations like NYC–it is those locals that need more than ever to come together in solidarity, but sadly so many teachers put down the union when they haven’t lost anything. It appears that we can learn something from supporting our organizations before it’s too late.
I do feel your passion, and I understand from where you come, but I will still give the same advice to those who can still save their situations. For those situations where teachers have lost, it’s time to change your leadership from within like what is happening in Chicago–make your voices heard by your union within your union. I sympathize–don’t, PLEASE don’t paint me as someone who doesn’t care because I’m saying what I’m saying. You seem hell-bent on telling me off because I believe in what my union is doing, but frankly, there is no value in getting into an argument. Instead, what can we do to support those who have been wronged? That would be a more productive dialogue.
“By speaking out against a union, we are speaking out against all unions.”
I am really sorry you are having a hard time understanding that speaking out against our leadership has nothing to do with being against our union. If anything, it’s to build a stronger union. It took Chicago teachers 8 years to finally learn the truth. The rest of us don’t have that luxury. Those districts with strong leaders are to be commended, and we should all be learning what makes those districts special.
To answer your question: Weingarten changed the rules, so the rank and file have very little say. It seems there are things she can negotiate directly without consent of the rank and file. The VAM agreement being one of them. She controls the message.
I think you need to talk to your uncle. He will explain how hard it is for a few individuals to reach over 70,000 teachers and support staff spread across 5 boroughs. Over 1700 schools in over 30 districts. About 10 schools per district. Each district has a Unity District Representative chosen by the leadership. The majority of schools have a Unity chapter leader. This is how information is controlled. Only 30% of all UFT members voted in the last leadership election. Part of it was apathy and the other part was the challengers didn’t have the organization or money to get their views across. The UFT is a corporation onto itself.
If a school votes in a chapter leader other than Unity, that school will have a hard time getting support from the union. Sad, but true.
I am glad you got to read that article about VAM. Btw, how did you get to see that article? Do you have a Times subscription, or did you see it linked on a FB page?
The biggest problem with this post is that there is no one “teachers’ union.” This is the source of a lot of misunderstanding especially in the public forum.
“I am really sorry you are having a hard time understanding that speaking out against our leadership has nothing to do with being against our union.”
I am not having a hard time understanding something where you and I have a differing point-of-view. The dispositions of the way unions exist (or SHOULD exist) is that leadership is representative of the union, so speaking out against leadership publicly is the same thing as speaking out against the union. This is a catch-22 when you consider what happened in NYC. The public sees leadership and membership as one-in-the-same because that is what unions are supposed to be. Granted, we all know that unions have staff members who are paid salary by the membership, but that is because they provide a service. In my union, all leadership positions are held by members who did the job that the members still do.
No one is suggesting you don’t speak out. The suggestion is you do it “in-house.”
“Those districts with strong leaders are to be commended, and we should all be learning what makes those districts special.”
What makes them special is they serve their constituency by breaking down the bargaining units into manageable pieces. In my state union, we have representation on the many levels: state, county and local which also includes building level. Each district is a bargaining unit unto itself. There are by-laws in place that require membership to vote on changes to the operation of the union. Under by-laws such as these, a Randi Weingarten would never have been able to change the rules. The UFT is not run the same way that my union is run–and I would venture to guess that many NEA-based unions are run. I have taught in two states and found, in my limited experience with differing state unions, that in both states, the organizations were run similarly. What went down with Weingarten would never be allowed in those two state unions. In these unions, the membership has the power to speak up. It’s obvious the problems with the UFT are that it is too large and one person had enormous unchecked power to be calling the shots. The corporation analogy was a good one.
Just like any organization that serves a “public,” systems need to be evaluated and reformed when necessary. The UFT in NYC is ripe for restructure.
It is important to remember this: The public puts paints all unions with the same brush. You need to keep your message very clear when making statements of public dissent that not all unions operate this way. In the meantime, what about starting a grass roots movement among the ATRs to join the NEA?
I don’t have an account with the NYT, and I don’t belong to Facebook. I read the VAM article online (and it was in 2011, not 2010–sorry) in a GSE course. The professor linked his students to the page–he keeps an account for academic purposes. I pointed out that I was so shocked at the “formula” used to evaluate NYC teachers that he asked me to write it on the board since I was the one who asked the question. It took me several minutes. The plight of the NYC teachers is on the minds of many outside of the city.
Unfortunately, the teaching profession is unlike so many others in that a teacher cannot just move to another district or state and start over without taking a huge financial and due process hit. There has to be some way to help the ATRs. Is it possible to organize them separately? The problem with Bloomberg is that he was allowed to change the rules–the legislative bodies allowed this. That is why a union needs to be very vigilant and stay in constant communication with public servants.
First, the NEA is also riddled with problems. The major one is your national president endorsing using testing for evaluations and joining up with Wendy Kopp. Not to mention that early endorsement of Obama while Duncan continues his agenda.
You make it seem all so simple for NYC teachers to bring chance to a major union. It took Chicago 8 years to do it. And like I said before, it takes money, money, money to reach that amount of teachers. The UFT is a conglomerate at this point. And now Weingarten is bringing many of her NYC people down to Washington to continue that path.
Right now we have MORE and GEM. They are grassroots organization. They are in the beginning stages and some of the members see themselves as what might be called “militant”. So there is one point we do agree on.
So let’s agree to disagree because I will not stop bringing the truth not only to my membership, but to all those locals that think Weingarten is the best thing to happen to them.
As for VAM…it was Gates’ pet project and Randi bought into it. Now other cities and states around the country are using it. I suspect it will soon be coming to your district unless you are lucky to teach in Montgomery County.
Be grateful your union structure gives you a democratic process and let’s hope it continues.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-education-dems-20120904,0,6567521.story
“First, the NEA is also riddled with problems. The major one is your national president endorsing using testing for evaluations and joining up with Wendy Kopp. Not to mention that early endorsement of Obama while Duncan continues his agenda.”
It’s funny you should say that–years ago I asked my local president why we do not get an automatic subscription to the NEA newsletters, and she quietly mentioned that our state union isn’t always in total agreement with the national one. That POV is one that is not advertised, yet it is a vigilant one.
“You make it seem all so simple for NYC teachers to bring chance to a major union. It took Chicago 8 years to do it. And like I said before, it takes money, money, money to reach that amount of teachers. The UFT is a conglomerate at this point. And now Weingarten is bringing many of her NYC people down to Washington to continue that path.”
I wasn’t suggesting that the change will happen overnight, and I wasn’t suggesting that the UFT be changed inasmuch as its membership re-organized with a different affiliation. Maybe a break-away from the AFT is necessary. I just got back from the city, and while I was walking down 8th Ave. on the way to the bus station, I remarked to myself that there is far too much energy in New York for a re-organization effort to fail. If anyone can do it, it’s NYC. It’s going to take time and resources, as you say, but you do have the support of your brethren from neighboring states. Reach out to them and let them know what they can do. You folks should never be alone in this.
“Right now we have MORE and GEM. They are grassroots organization. They are in the beginning stages and some of the members see themselves as what might be called “militant”. So there is one point we do agree on.”
I am slightly familiar with GEM, but not so much with MORE. If you can post any informational links, please do. Efforts from groups like these are what will stop the madness.
“So let’s agree to disagree because I will not stop bringing the truth not only to my membership, but to all those locals that think Weingarten is the best thing to happen to them.”
As you should never stop bringing the truth to the membership–they deserve to hear it.
“As for VAM…it was Gates’ pet project and Randi bought into it. Now other cities and states around the country are using it. I suspect it will soon be coming to your district unless you are lucky to teach in Montgomery County.”
In a speech to the district employees yesterday, my superintendent talked about how testing has permeated our public system and is on tap to be tied by state legislation to (you guessed it) evaluations. He made a long pause before even bringing up the subject. Once he said the dirty word “testing,” a hush came over the audience, and it was very difficult to bring back any kind of positivity in the speech. The threat is very real. The state still hasn’t come up with anything significant in the way of tying scores to evaluations, but my state union has already taken up the fight watching every move the legislators make on the topic. The evaluation legislation hasn’t come through the state house yet, but just like anything else that is being pushed through in this “reform climate,” the legislators need to do their homework to even know where to start. They “didn’t think through” the health care benefit percentage mandate until after they passed it (are we surprised?), and they were faced with the daunting task of coming up with a schedule of percentage contributions with a set of contributions for each year a local enters and the subsequent years (based on when contracts are re-negotiated). It seemed that they just did not know how many differences in contracts there were among all state districts. The contribution schedule became so convoluted that I am pretty much betting the law will be changed since it has actually presented more problems with system management.
“Be grateful your union structure gives you a democratic process and let’s hope it continues.”
I am grateful every day, and I wish nothing but better days for the veteran NYC teachers. While destruction takes little time, re-construction takes time. Keep your grassroots movements going, and enlist others to help. Another thing my GSE professor said that shocked me into following the “reform” movement much more closely is this: “Public education is changing. It will not look the same way ever again.” I do hope that it can change for the better instead of what’s been happening. At some point, all the legitimate players “in the know” (that is parents and true educators) will have broken through. We need to keep advocating and never, never stop until we have reached that point.
May I ask what state or city you teach in??? We had 2 groups that tried to effect change. One was bought off by Randi and the other one never got off the ground. Teachers stay with the enemy they know. And while 8th Ave. is bustling with energy, it doesn’t reflect the fear in teachers.
GEM is wonderful. I have been promoting their film. A friend is one of the people helping to organize MORE and he uses me as a sounding board. He wants the process to be a slow one. I totally disagree because with every passing day, we lose more rights. And schools in a few years will be different. Many good teachers will be fired due to VAM and administrators will find ways to get rid of experienced teachers to save on their budgets. Our governor is more Tea Party than Democrat. Our next mayor will continue Bloomberg’s path. Most likely it will be Quinn. She already accepted money from Students’ First. This is why I really want to wake up teachers before they look around and say, “What just happened!!” And my answer will be, “You shouldn’t have buried your head in the sand!”
I’m in NJ, and Weingarten isn’t even a topic at our local and county meetings. I haven’t heard any buzz about the AFT/UFT from my union, but I am doing my level best to spread the word about the plight of the NYC teachers. Newark is also on the watch list.
My biggest concern is complacency. Right now, my building admin is beloved by his staff, but it’s very difficult for most of my fellow staff members to see that there would be any reason to get involved. They separate themselves from the work the union does. Our building reps are trying to change this attitude before it is indeed too late.
And so it’s the same with NYC teachers. That’s why change is resisted. Didn’t NJ just pass a revised tenure law?? And how will that effect you? Is it based on VAM?? And didn’t your union support the measure??
schoolgal, the NJEA supported revisions to the proposed law. Here is the law in a nutshell:
http://www.njea.org/njea-media/pdf/TenureLawQ-A_2012.pdf?1347120492887
In a news article about the law, there was an excerpt about evaluations:
“It’s no secret that Gov. Chris Christie wants to tie teacher evaluations to student test scores on state assessments. Fortunately, NJEA won a provision in the new law stipulating that student test scores cannot be the ‘predominant’ factor in teacher evaluation. The overwhelming conclusion of respected researchers on the use of test scores suggests that they should not be the deciding factor in a teacher’s evaluation or employment.” http://www.njea.org/Home/News/2012/08/31/Lets%20work%20on%20what%20really%20matters
There is currently a great deal of ambiguity in the legislation regarding evaluations due to the fact that the evaluation piece has not been fully developed. Stay tuned.
The part about evaluations is outlined in more detail here with two excerpts following:
http://www.njea.org/njea-media/pdf/TeacherEval.pdf?1347120492887
“WHAT ABOUT THE STUDENT GROWTH PIECE?
Part of your evaluation will be based on measures of student achievement. It is no surprise that this portion of the evaluation generates the most anxiety among educators and for good reason. As noted under ‘If you are in a pilot district, read this,’ the student measures portion of the teacher evaluation system is proving to be a conundrum for the NJDOE. Still, the department is moving forward. That’s why all members should watch a video titled ‘Using student growth percentiles’ found on the NJDOE website at http://survey.pcgus.com/njgrowth/
player.html. NJEA has serious concerns about the use of state scores in teacher evaluation. Because these scores only offer a snapshot of a student’s abilities, multiple measures of student achievement must be used to accurately determine student growth.”
“All evaluations must include multiple measures of teacher practice and multiple measures of student progress.
• Districts must use an evaluation instrument that is based on the professional standards for the individual’s job description. Performance measures in the rubric must be linked to student achievement. Districts must submit their evaluation instrument to the commissioner of education annually for approval.
• Measures of pupil progress cannot rely exclusively on a single standardized test score. Standardized assessments shall not be the predominant factor in the overall evaluation of the teacher.”
Another very important excerpt:
“Aspects of evaluation shall continue to be mandatory subjects of
negotiations if they are not superseded by statute or regulation.”
The NJEA is keeping watch on details of the evaluation process laws as they come up for discussion. Evaluation is the next big topic, and the part about state laws trumping local agreements is going to be a sticky wicket. See this article for information on the NJEA’s recommendation regarding VAM:
http://www.njea.org/news-and-publications/njea-review/april-2012/understanding-the-colorado-growth-model/njea-urges-caution-in-the-use-of-test-scores-in-teacher-evaluation
The good news is that the NJEA helped stop the tenure law from eliminating due process rights altogether. Christie originally wanted tenure to be something that could be earned and then taken away and then earned back and taken away, etc. Basically, he wanted districts to have the flexibility to put anyone whose “work” they didn’t like at the time on notice that they could lose their rights to the position at any moment. This would have put bad politics in the workplace because it would give districts the power to bully and take advantage of anyone who has lost tenure and who needs to “earn it back.” Basically, the governor’s proposal that would have allowed districts to play “you have a permanent position, you don’t have a permanent position, etc.” was a fancy way of saying “you really don’t have a permanent position because we can fire you whenever we want based on whatever reasons we manufacture.” He also wanted to get rid of seniority rights (what he calls LIFO). The NJEA worked with legislators to present an alternative plan that helps the process, but does not strip teachers’ seniority rights. The legislature understands how experience matters.
Two major issues (among countless others) regarding the tenure reform bill on which the NJEA focused are as follows:
1. Skewed public perception of the apparent “problems” in the schools that influenced the legislators to act. The NJEA recognized some of the untruths that have shaped the public perception, and the NJEA continues to suggest more advocacy to get “the real story” about our schools out to the public.
2. Policy makers’ limited knowledge of the inner workings of schools and contracts–knowledge that affected public school legislation. The NJEA also realized that legislators needed to be educated on the policies they were about to change. They were open to the dialogue, and as a result the revised law actually can function as a step in the right direction to offer the help and support to our public schools that is sorely needed without compromising due process rights. Christie (perhaps begrudgingly) signed the law–a huge step for public education. I think he realized that he can no longer strong-arm legislators to do his radical bidding when they are armed with research that brings them to an understanding of just how the legislation affects the system-at-large. Many of these legislators actually said that they originally thought tenure meant “a job for life” until they were educated by the NJEA conversations. We are most fortunate that they were willing to learn about these systems so that they could make more educated decisions.
The NJEA focused on two main issues that the legislators and NJEA commonly identified as problems with the previous system:
1. Due process hearings were costly and took too long to resolve. The new legislation reduces the costs and timeline of due process hearings.
2. Struggling teachers were leaving the profession or fired before they could improve. The new law provides a process of support for struggling teachers so that quality teachers will stay in the field.
The NJEA’s conversations with legislators and public orations in the state house put a stop to the governor’s original plan. By showing that the union was willing to work on improving the system, the legislators were willing to listen and learn about due process. Up until that time, the legislators were voting without having detailed knowledge of the school systems in terms of many of the issues affecting the schools, teachers, and districts. They were blindly going by what they “thought” was reality based on the governor’s strong agenda. They, too, were victims of misinformation in the public perception. This was evidenced in the pension and benefits “reform” legislation of the previous year. We felt abandoned by the legislature on that front–this year was a different story since the NJEA took the bull by the horns.
The whole tenure reform bill action on behalf of the NJEA was the example that drew me to make the original post here. We need to advocate for public schools so that the public (which includes those in the legislatures) know the truth about successful schools and communities, and we need to keep an open dialogue with our legislators to teach them about how these systems work and how their decisions influence their constituency. Was it easier here in NJ than it is in other states? Probably, but that does not devalue the process of contacting and keeping after conversations with public policy makers.
The NJEA’s involvement with the tenure reform bill was an outstanding example of those two things that I posted. The mere fact that so many other associations on local, state, and national levels are being criticized by their own members is the reason I posted this in the first place. NJEA took on a massive movement to prevent a bad policy, so how can we learn from this in other associations? It’s true that we are not all 100% happy with the part about test scores being tied into the evaluation process, but we will be working on that in the future when the evaluation instrument legislation is in committee. This isn’t “laying down and obeying,” this is making progress by inserting ourselves into the “reform” movement in a positive and constructive way. It may be a very hard pill to swallow in the context of what other organizations have allowed, but my state union understands the need to keep a place at the table. We will be vigilant and in constant dialogue with our leadership throughout this process.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.” (Edward R. Murrow)
I, as well as many NYC teacher bloggers, will continue to tell the truth. In NYC, trying to get a different opinion across to your union leaders is non-existent.
If you wish to join the Unity caucus you must sign an oath. Part of that oath is to agree with all Unity positions and to never criticize policy. At every Delegate Assembly meeting which is held monthly, ATRs have asked for their own chapter and have been turned down. Their only reps are the strangers they meet each week when they are assigned to a new school. Some never meet the reps at all even though they are supposed to introduce themselves to the ATR. Principals have called in ATRs for interviews. Many ATRs travel many miles to these interviews for the chance to work in a classroom again only to be told they are not eligible for the job. Principals are required to conduct these interviews. Some just call the ATRs in and say, “Consider this your interview.” How do I know this? Because ATRs have either started their own blogs or have been commenting or sending emails to other bloggers. They are desperate for help.
Any one who has the misfortune to work in a school that’s about to be closed or excessed due to budget cuts become an ATR. Teachers need to know what could happen to them. And teachers should know what IS happening to their fellow colleagues regardless if they teach in NYC or not.
Recently the UFT blog published a post in total disagreement with the NYS principals who signed a petition against high-stakes testing and using these tests to evaluate teachers. I for one would think my union would stand behind this petition. I could be wrong??
A year ago, a group of NYC teachers and parents got together and produced a movie in response to “Waiting for Superman”. It was called “The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman”. Diane Ravitch appeared in this documentary. It has been shown in universities across the county. However, my union leadership has never once screened it or advertised it to their members. It is through word of mouth that teachers are viewing it. (It is available for free on-line). Weingarten would never do anything to upset “the Reformers” as she is now very involved in the charter movement.
So, if this is putting out the dirty laundry in public, so be it. There are many teachers out there thinking Weingarten is terrific. (This is the same woman who held a party for Steve Brill.) If this helps open their eyes, we might have new leadership. Maybe even someone like Karen Lewis 🙂 But as long as union leaders continue to sell-out their rank and file and use “political climate” as an excuse, which is what Randi did with our ’05 contract, then every new contract might as well be written and signed by Michelle Rhee.
In other words, there is power in numbers speaking with one voice. We play into the hands of the corporate reformers if we destroy ourselves from within. It is going to take extraordinary and courageous people to stand up to this destructive reform movement. Since I am unemployed, I am not a union member although I have, in the past, paid dues to both the NEA and the AFT. I have tried to educate myself about the issues (thank you, Diane.), write to the politicians, and share what I have learned with anyone who will listen. Workers being able to speak to power, however, is really because unions gave workers a position of power. Even those workers who pride themselves on going it on their own, owe workplace standards to the voice of unions. Many of us, if not all, have personal anecdotes that we can use to justify dissatisfaction with the unions, and there are certainly well documented cases of corruption and abuse of power by unions, but, in the end, we need each other if we are to represent the value of public education and what is necessary to sustain it.
My comments ended up being posted after schoolgal. I want to assure her that I was not writing in response to her. I’m just slow.
No problem. And we do need each other. This is why truth is so important. Without it, we will continue to have “leaders” who will not lead us.
I just saw picks of the CTU rally. NYC was supposed to have a big rally in response to Bloomberg–and it was an election year. Election time is a great time to make your case. However, at the last minute, Randi cancelled that rally. Teachers were pissed. Here we are again in an election year, and using the Republicans as an excuse, we lost a magnificent opportunity to do what many other groups do, withhold our support until changes are made to RTTT. Instead Duncan’s name never came up at the convention. Biden was cheered even though his own brother is in the charter industry. So how are teachers being treated at the DNC? By showing the film “Won’t Back Down”.
It was the Chicago teachers that stood up to Biden and let him know RTTT is wrong!! Lewis isn’t the type to argue “The lesser of 2 evils”. She will argue “the evil” and do what is needed to change it.
I hope someone posts a list of every Democratic representative who attended that movie screening. Obama had a chance to say no to Michelle Rhee and that film, but didn’t. Rhee is way more important than my vote.
If we continue down this path, we will all end up like Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost their collective bargaining rights before the recall. They did nothing militant. There schools were working and their pensions were not hurting the Wisconsin government. Maybe if all of America was behind that recall (and that should have included Obama) the results would have been different. But Obama had no qualms when he publicly stated Rhode Island teachers should be fired. Did he even bother to get their side of the problem??
I can’t wait to hear what he has to say this time about education, because after his last speech, testing more than tripled in many districts. And Pearson is now in charge of teacher certification.
So how much writing has to be on the wall before we ALL speak up to both NEA and AFT leaders? And I bet by that time it will be too late. Silence doesn’t set you free. The truth does!!
While I understand and respect your position, I have to disagree. Teachers pay their union dues expecting that their rights will be vigorously defended reguardless of public perception. Gay rights advocates, for example, have not worried in the slighest about public perception in Wisconsin. They have proceeded believing that the right thing to do was worth fighting for at every opportunity and teachers’ unions would do well to take a lesson from them. The concept that we need to “keep a seat at the table” by playing nice doesn’t play well either – teachers show up at “the table” everyday. Indeed, we might do well to instruct our unions to simply turn the table over. If teachers’ unions want to proceed without ruffling feathers or stepping on reformers toes, let them do it on their own WITHOUT the dues of teachers who expect them to be constantly fighting in their best interest. Would anyone pay a lawyer to defend them who was worried about offending the plaintiff or public perception?