Standing Up for the Rights of Working People to Organize

Union and non-union workers from across the nation stood together and raised a strong collective voice on February 26 outside the U.S. Supreme Court in their fight for the right of working people to join unions.

At issue in the Janus v. AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees) case being argued inside the courtroom is the question of whether government employees who are not members of the union, but are covered by and benefit from a union contract, should have to contribute to the union’s costs for contract negotiations.

Outside the courtroom, one speaker after another commented on the impact Janus could have on public employee unions and the need to beat back wealthy special interests and their attacks against workers and communities.

“The Janus case is extremely harmful to labor,” said Terrence Wise, a fast food worker from Kansas City, Mo., and labor leader with Fight for $15, an organization advocating to raise the national minimum wage. “In the words of Abraham Lincoln, ‘All that harms labor is treason to America.’”

Wise was among a dozen speakers representing a wide range of social justice, civil rights, and labor organizations. Another speaker, kindergarten teacher Kember Kane from Silver Spring, Md., said it is through negotiating collectively that educators can advocate for the conditions that support student learning such as safe schools, small class sizes, and for resources that help educators do their jobs.

“The Janus case is a threat not just to working people but to children themselves,” said Kane, a member of the Montgomery County Education Association. “The National Education Association is built on unity. NEA advocates for all of our needs and for all of us.”

A Rigged System

Illinois is one of 23 states that allow unions to charge “fair share fees.” At job sites, workers vote on whether or not to form a union in the workplace. Even if a majority votes for a union, workers who don’t want to join don’t have to. They just pay a reduced “fair share fee” or “agency fee” to cover the cost of bargaining and representation that the union is legally required to provide for all workers. Such fees are reduced amounts charged to workers who opt out of union membership yet continue to receive the union representation and bargaining services that unions provide for the benefit of all employees. These fees are not charged for any political purposes.

In the nation’s 27 right-to-work states, where employees are not obligated to join a union as a condition of employment, union density is significantly lower. As a result, educators have less negotiating power to advocate for student learning conditions. According to several speakers, as nurses, educators, firefighters, sanitation workers, and other public employees enjoy the benefits, job security, and other protections the union negotiates, it is only fair that all employees contribute to the cost of securing those benefits and protections.

If the court bans fair share, it will mean that some workers will have to pay for the benefits enjoyed by all workers. Also, such a decision will make it harder for teachers, firefighters, nurses, and other public service workers to negotiate for decent wages and benefits. Every public employee who benefits from a negotiated contract should contribute to the costs of securing that contract.

AFSMCE, the defendant in the Janus case, is the nation’s largest public employee union. At the gathering, AFSCME President Lee Saunders said the intention behind the legal action was to gut the power of progressive forces.

“The billionaires and corporate special interests behind this case don’t believe we should have a seat at the table,” Saunders said.

Conservative organizations, think tanks, and other right-wing activists backed by corporate donors including the Koch brothers, the family of U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, and the Bradley Foundation, have long been preparing for a case like Janus as part of a larger campaign to break unions.

“Whatever the decision in this case, these oligarchs won’t stop working families from realizing our American dream,” said NEA President Lily Eskelsen García. “Make no mistake about it, we are living in a system that is rigged to benefit special interests and billionaires at the expense of American working people.”

The corporate special interests behind this case are, according to Eskelsen García, “dead set on eliminating the rights and freedoms of working people to organize, to negotiate collectively, and to have any voice in working to better their lives. It is no shock to most that it has become harder and harder for working people to get ahead and provide stability for their families.”

A decision in the Janus case is expected in June, before the court adjourns.

Despite the potential for setbacks from Janus and other attacks, NEA and NEA affiliates will remain the leading voices of the education professions and will continue to work on behalf of students and public education.

To learn more, visit neatoday.org/janus.

Teacher Burnout or Demoralization: There’s a Difference and It Matters

Why so many teachers leave the profession is one of the most often discussed topics in public education. While encouraging and long overdue, it is a conversation that can only be productive if we truly understand the reasons why so many dedicated educators make this decision. The exhaustion, despair, anger, and sense of helplessness many teachers feel is usually branded as “burnout.” But is this always an accurate diagnosis?

Doris Santoro, an associate professor of education at Bowdoin College, believes it is not. Teachers can certainly burn out, but Santoro argues that many are more likely to be demoralized by the direction of public education and the effect it has had on their profession, a dynamic she explores in her new book, Demoralized: Why Teachers Leave the Profession They Love and How They Can Stay.

Were the teachers you interviewed for the book generally resigned to thinking they were just burning out?

Doris Santoro: Yeah, I think they just thought they were burning out, although some had a hunch about what it meant to be demoralized due to the profession losing its moral rewards.

The burnout narrative comes down to, ‘Sorry, you blew it! You couldn’t hack it, you didn’t preserve yourself.’ With burnout, there’s nothing left, no possibility for regeneration. If you are demoralized, however, you are not done. For these teachers, it’s a new vocabulary.

The transformation that happens to these teachers when they can reframe what they are experiencing can be liberating and empowering. Teachers are able to access a whole new set of tools and possibilities when you are able to reframe your diagnosis.

And the term burnout—by suggesting that the individual is essentially at fault—leads to calls for teachers to show grit or be more resilient, two more pervasive buzzwords.

DS: Absolutely. If the focus is on the individual, then the problem is not systemic or institutional or policy-based. It pushes the resolution right back on the individual. It comes down to, ‘If you were more this way, this wouldn’t be a problem.’

When we talk about resilience in teachers in teacher education, it’s usually centered around self-care. Now, I’m all for self-care, I believe in self-care, I participate in self-care. But that is an insufficient and entirely too passive way to address the problems teachers are encountering today.

We obviously need more policy shifts to create a better climate for teaching, but what are some of the steps schools can take to help the re-moralization process?

DS: I hope schools would have a series of conversations with teachers. It could start with talking about what good work looks like. What do you need to engage in good work? What’s preventing you and what can we change right now to move us a little closer? Obviously, we can’t remove all the obstacles, but what small shifts can we make?

Some of this is about having school leaders who are willing to have these types of conversations or are willing to think about good work over and above just following policy. Flexibility is key and real change isn’t going to happen in three 40-minute faculty meetings. This is deep work, but the work itself is re-moralizing because it’s helping create an authentic professional community.

In the book, you address some ways leaders can be sources of teacher re-moralization, including unions. What were the teachers you interviewed looking for in their unions?

DS: The teachers I talked to were excited when unions articulated the ideals of the profession. The bread and butter issues are important, but whenever they heard language articulating their moral concerns about what was happening to the profession coming from the union, they felt supported and connected. Here is what the profession of teaching is all about, here is what our students deserve, and this is what we are going to do to stand up for you and your autonomy as a professional.

A big piece of re-moralization is involving educators in initiatives to find solutions. Whenever teachers are brought in to investigate and develop interventions, you’re creating opportunities for authentic community and taking action, in a way that feels less isolating. Unions can be an incredible source of support for teachers and help create those communities that can make change.

MORE THAN S’MORES:

NEA and Girl Scouts Promote Civic Education

Most people would agree that knowing the history, principles, and foundations of American democracy, and the abilities to participate in civic and democratic processes, are vital to our citizenry. NEA and the Girls Scouts of the USA agree, which is why the organizations recently signed an agreement to work together to promote civics education.

NEA believes this education begins in the classroom, helping to cultivate well informed and educated students who are confident and ready when it is their turn to take their place in the voting community. The Girl Scouts are teaching the same lessons in troop meetings around the country.

In support of this new partnership, NEA members are being asked to volunteer with their local troops and to use the Girl Scouts’ Civic Engagement Curriculum to instruct students on the struggles that created the rights they enjoy today and ways they can get involved in their communities.   

To learn how to volunteer with your local troop, visit www.girlscouts.org/NEA.