When my son was about 14 he got involved with the Vermont Workers Center, which is a
statewide consortium of labor and human rights groups. The director of
VWC put him on the statewide steering committee. Ben needed a ride to the
steering committee meetings. So I ended up on the steering committee
too. There I sat with all these union activists, AFL-CIO/Teamsters/AFT
(and yes NEA) leaders. I was just a rank and file NEA member. I
just paid my dues and let others do the work. When a contract got
negotiated I really didn't understand it. I'd just vote for it because
the negotiator told me to.
Sitting with the VWC folks (whose
general Bernie-style socialist politics I shared) I came to feel I had no
street cred with all these awesome leaders. So I volunteered to become
the building rep for my school and started doing the trainings and all the nuts
and bolts work of organizing, member servicing and negotiations.
Negotiations were particularly formidable task, as the scenario in Vermont is
very complex and technical. The UD snookered me into trying to propose a
"lift up and set down" of our single salary schedule. In
retrospect I was so ignorant that I made a fool of myself in failure, but I
learned a ton about salary schedules (and adversarial industrial style pattern
bargaining.)
The rest is history. When
the local needed a president, I became the president. When the Upper
Valley needed an area director, I was appointed then elected to the VT-NEA
board.
My point in telling this story is
that my path to state level NEA leadership was from OUTSIDE the NEA. I
came to union work not because of self interest in salary and benefits, or the
legal protections ("insurance") it afforded, but because of a belief
that unions themselves, both public and private sector, are a fundamental
public good - I'm 3rd generation union. They built the middle class in America. I got involved
in the scut work of teacher unionism out of conviction that I have a
responsibility to build my union as an expression of my political and social
values. I spent many years laboring in the vineyards so to speak.
Now, when I speak to other labor
leaders, there is a camaraderie born of shared experience. I have street
cred. When I advocate on the board, or with professional staff for
professional (which is the CETT frame) or social justice (which is my home)
unionism, I do so with authority, because these people know that I am one of
them by virtue of the hundreds and hundreds of hours of volunteer work that I
have performed in solidarity with my brother and sister co-unionists, both in
the NEA and in the wider movement in general.
So when I advocate for the
complex of ideas that we call "guilds" at the Center for Teaching Quality, and we
call “professional unionism” in the Teacher
Union Reform Network, I am not just blowing smoke. I actually have my
hands on some of the levers that can move these ideas, and I am yanking on
these levers with all my might.
The thing that motivates me is
that having done all this work, and having had a lot of opportunities to learn
both within NEA and the wider labor movement, I understand both the strengths
and the weaknesses of my union. There are corrupting structural forces in
NEA and they represent a real and present threat to both my union and all other
unions. Union reform means to me not that my union is bad and needs to be
"reformed" in the "reform school" sense (i.e. punished),
but that by embracing the very best thinking and practice the NEA can reach its
potential. Mark Simon, former president of the Montgomery Co. MD NEA
affiliate, expressed this beautifully: "Teacher Unions have a
responsibility to advocate not just in the narrow self-interest of their dues
paying members, but in the public interest, from a teacher’s perspective.”
There's an irony here. In
my experience, the path to moving beyond the bread and butter issues of
industrial frame unionism to a broader and more powerful unionism that acts
consistently in the public interest runs through deep engagement in the tasks
of industrial frame unionism. We can't eschew these tasks - we have to
embrace them, understand them, and use them to build our power for
change. I worry a great deal that in embracing any aspect of industrial
unionism I am reinforcing the stodginess and structural corruption of the very
thing I value as fundamental public good. But doing so gives me the
access I need to promote a change agenda.
So to me it’s not an either/or
thing; it's both/and. It's not unions or guilds, its unions AND guilds,
or as I prefer to think, industrial, professional AND social justice
unionism. It is an infinitely more powerful union capable of
"advocating in the public interest from a teacher's perspective."
The NEA Commission on Effective Teachers and Teaching report Transforming
Teaching is a tool that can help move this forward. There is a
powerful message embedded in the report: accomplished teachers need to step up
to union leadership on both the local and national level. We have to be
willing to get our hands dirty in the messy business of labor organizing so
that we can get those dirty hands on the levers of power to move the union
reform agenda forward.
I worry that already this
document is being studiously ignored. It is being ignored because it
calls on the leadership of the union to change, and because it demands that
accomplished teachers stop throwing darts at their unions from the outside, roll
up their sleeves and get involved. It makes demands on people.
There are plenty of reasons for the forces of comfortable complacency to walk
away from these recommendations. It is incumbent on those of us who value
our unions, and the greater aspirations of working people that they could
represent, to demand that people pay attention.
Thanks for talking about the report! I appreciate your perspective and your commitment to "the common good".
ReplyDeleteWhile I have heard from many Association leaders who are behind the concepts in the report, it will take concerted effort to effect lasting change in our union and our profession.
Maddie Fennell
Commission Chair