BY: Mike DiMatteo
Yes, there’s a lot of talk these days about teachers’ unions—and most of it is bad. As a former teacher in Illinois, I spent 35 years in the system at 7 different schools, one of which had gone through a nasty strike a few years before I arrived, and another came close. While much of the teachers’ union backlash is deserved—especially when it comes to the national unions like those led by Randi Weingarten, who uses her platform to support a one-sided political and social agenda—there are other reasons—good reasons—for teachers’ unions to exist.
And that’s the point of this article—to shine light on what my time in education revealed to me: The good, the bad, and the ugly, sans Clint Eastwood.
The Good
There are a number of good things teachers’ unions do, not only for teachers, but also for students, much of it behind the scenes during contract negotiations. One such good is attempting to limit class sizes. Schools are always cognizant of monetary outflows, meaning expenditures, in order to stay within their budgets. It is the primary concern of school boards and superintendents. The single biggest expenditure? Teachers. Salaries and benefits make up (generally) the biggest part of the budget pie.
The solution? Cut teachers, and thereby cut expenditures. The easiest way to do that (other than RIF1 due to enrollment declines) is to increase class sizes, combine classes, or eliminate certain classes due to low enrollment. This means non-tenured teachers can be let go as there is not a need for them, thereby increasing class size and saving money in the process.
The problems with increasing class sizes are numerous, especially in P.E. classes where supervision is paramount, not to mention academic classes where 30+ students could be packed into an overcrowded classroom, creating significant problems for the teacher and students.2 As most who are reading this know, smaller class sizes benefit students tremendously. The teachers’ union’s job is to mitigate some of that, holding the administrative feet to the fire, not only to ensure contract wording is followed, but also to protect teachers and students from overcrowded classrooms.
Here’s a little secret: Some in the administration, especially when it comes to class sizes, will do what they can to increase them, thereby increasing the bottom line.
Another important function of a teachers’ union is to ensure the provisions of the contract are followed, the above just one example. There are others such as ensuring teachers are not doing more than they are contracted to do. Teachers, by nature, are helpers, and administrators will often take advantage of them, sometimes using intimidation tactics to achieve their ends. It’s not right, but it’s often true. The union’s job is to ensure that is not the case, and that administration abides by the wording of the contract. This might involve required supervision at a school dance or after-school function, as an example. Some administrators will attempt to push non-tenured teachers into doing more than they’re contractually required to do—and the union will often step in to ensure that’s not the case.3 In short, the union attempts to ensure teachers are not pressured or taken advantage of.
Unions are often advocates for students as well, primarily by making sure classes are offered, funded, and staffed properly. This advocacy is peripheral, but necessary. This part is often overlooked when discussing teachers’ unions, but needs to be pointed out.
One other significant benefit is that there is legal protection against unfounded accusations. This is a major benefit that teachers’ unions provide for their members, and one that is, unfortunately, necessary during these times,4 and one that is a significant incentive for teachers to join.5
The Bad
Political bias is rampant among teachers’ unions, with most of them (I cannot speak for all of them) leaning heavily left and embracing policies that are biased as well. All one needs to do is open up the pages of the AFT’s magazine, American Educator, sent to all members to see the political as well as social bias contained therein. The NEA (National Education Association) is no different, especially when it comes to political bias.6 If programming to a certain political leaning was in print, the magazine of the AFT (American Federation of Teachers) would be it. It’s interesting that I was, for a long time, a member of the AFT during my career, but never signed up for it. Never.
Unions should not be political, but when it comes to teachers’ unions, they, quite often, are. Our local union would send out “who to vote for” lists, and all of the recommendations, save one or two, were Democratic candidates. To my mind, teachers and their unions should not be advocating for any political party, but, at least in Illinois, the expectation was that if one was going to vote, the preferred choice for the union was the Democrat on the ballot.
There was also the “fair share” provision in teacher contracts, providing that should one not join the union (either local or state), they would still pay a percentage of the union dues due to “fair share,” meaning since the union negotiated the contract, and you, non-union member, are the beneficiary of said contract, you should pay a percentage of the union dues anyway…your “fair share.”7 Even though this is no longer in place, many teachers will still, despite their trepidation, join the union as they don’t want to be outsiders, people who are sometimes ostracized in the building due to their non-union membership.
The Ugly
The “ugly” part is when teachers’ unions use students as pawns during contract negotiations, by going on strike or protecting teachers who are simply bad at their jobs. I’ve worked in school districts where the union, during tense negotiations, threatened to go on strike right at the beginning of the school year, threatening the high school sports season. I’ve also worked in districts where the opposite is true—school boards manipulating the negotiations to fall directly during the athletic season. Both are what I consider “ugly” and using students as pawns, which should never be the case, but often is.
Further, unions, mainly because of tenure laws, will defend a teacher despite demonstrated incompetence or poor behavior. Again, much of this is due to tenure laws, but the union also plays a part in it. Yes, defending union members is paramount, and ensuring accused teachers are at least given some form of due process (a benefit not enjoyed by non-tenured teachers who can be fired “at will” before they’re tenured) but all too often, unions will defend those in the profession who deserve to be removed, damaging their reputation in the process.
As an aside, this is also true of administration, who will often “move” an administrator to another building or another position rather than terminate them—giving the impression they’re protecting their own. This is more common than one thinks, but it doesn’t make it right when either party engages in such behavior. It is one thing for a union to ensure a member receives due process; it is quite another to defend egregious behavior or actions simply because they belong to the union.
There are other examples as well, such as blocking meaningful teacher evaluation reform, significant opposition to the charter school movement, and the massive sums of money unions spend on political candidates—again, mostly from the Democratic Party.
***
The fact is teachers’ unions, like many things, are chock-full of good and bad…and sometimes, ugly. What the focus should be is on all of the good, with great effort to eliminate the bad and ugly at the same time.
Sources:
1 RIF stands for Reduction in Force. If a school’s enrollment declines, even tenured teachers (those on the bottom of the hiring list) will be “Riffed,”—laid off.
2 This is especially problematic for the new or inexperienced teacher who has enough on their plate just trying to prepare for classes along with all of the other administrative things one must do.
3 The issue of teacher tenure varies by state, as well as its efficacy, will be the subject of an upcoming article.
4 It should be noted here that the same protection can be obtained through insurance companies like Allstate, often for less money than union dues.
5 There are other examples of the “good” as well: supporting professional development, health and safety advocacy, Due process for all teachers.
6 Campaign finance data shows the NEA’s PAC contributions overwhelmingly go towards supporting Democratic candidates (90+ percent over many election cycles).
7 In the case Janus vs. AFCME, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled public sector unions cannot collect fees from non-members eliminated the “fair share” provision.
