by JC Bowman
Teacher unions, particularly in their current incarnation, often stray from their foundational mission to enhance educational outcomes, becoming entangled instead in the quagmire of political activism and social agendas. This shift not only distracts from their primary purpose but also risks undermining their credibility as advocates for educators.
Take, for instance, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), which has allocated a staggering $16.5 million in political spending for the 2024 election cycle, all directed towards liberal organizations. This has raised eyebrows and prompted accusations of a troubling nexus between union leadership and Democratic interests. Critics contend that Randi Weingarten has leveraged union dues to exert political influence, raising serious questions about ethical governance within the union.
Weingarten’s long-standing affiliation with the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has sparked allegations of a conflict of interest. How can a leader of a teachers’ union maintain such a prominent role in a political party without compromising the interests of her constituents? Some critics have even gone so far as to characterize the union’s financial contributions to Democrats as a form of “money laundering.”
Similarly, the National Education Association (NEA) stands as the largest labor union in the United States, boasting 3.2 million members. Yet, under the leadership of President Becky Pringle, the NEA has faced its own share of controversies. Pringle’s reported salary of $500,000 has become a focal point of criticism, highlighting a disconnect between union leadership and the realities faced by many teachers.
In the 2024 election cycle, the NEA’s political expenditures have continued to raise alarms. With total political contributions exceeding $22 million, including nearly $2.8 million earmarked for lobbying and over $1.2 million in outside spending, the union’s priorities appear misaligned with its core mission of supporting educators. The NEA Advocacy Fund, its super PAC, raised nearly $28 million, with a significant portion supporting Democratic candidates and conspicuously no contributions to Republicans.
Pringle’s fervent political activism has, paradoxically, alienated many educators who yearn for a return to a focus on academic excellence. Her leadership encapsulates the NEA’s growing alignment with progressive causes, leaving educators caught in the crossfire of a union that seems more invested in political battles than in the essential work of teaching and learning.
There are options for Tennessee educators rather than the NEA or AFT. Professional Educators of Tennessee (PET), a non-partisan, non-union association advocating for educators’ interests in education policy and working conditions. PET focuses on education issues without endorsing political candidates or unrelated social agendas. Our members have legal protection, professional development, member benefits, and resources to enhance teaching and improving education in Tennessee.
– – –
JC Bowman is the executive director of Professional Educators of Tennessee.
Photo “Randi Weingarten” by Randi Weingarten.
Excellent summary of the national teacher’s unions.
Would love to see an article on the TEA.
I applaud your effort Mr. Bowman. I will encourage people to support your organization.
Professional Educators of Tennessee may very well be a better alternative to NEA or AFT. The unlimited financial resources controlled by academia are people educated by NEA and AFT supporters. Unfortunately the overwhelming majority see increased revenue as the goal. Actual education will remain an accidental by product unless and until that fact is changed.