NEA General Counsel: Union Dues, Not Education, Are Our Top Priority
Posted July 9th, 2009 at 12:03pm in Education, Enterprise and Free Markets 
Print This Post
General Counsel Bob Chanin explains to NEA convention why Big Labor is so powerful:
Despite what some among us would like to believe it is not because of our creative ideas; it is not because of the merit of our positions; it is not because we care about children; and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child.
The NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power. And we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of million of dollars in dues each year because they believe that we are the unions that can most effectively represent them; the union that can protect their rights and advance their interests as education employees.
This is not to say that the concern of NEA and its affiliates with closing achievement gaps, reducing drop rate rates, improving teacher quality, and the like are unimportant or inappropriate. To the contrary these are the goals that guide the work we do. But they need not and must not be achieved at the expense of due process, employee rights, or collective bargaining.
That is simply too high a price to pay.
Where to begin? First of all, there is little that is voluntary about the millions in dues paid to the NEA every year. The NEA is strongest in states without right to work laws, and if you want to teach in a public school that is under an NEA contract in those jurisdictions (like California and New York), you must pay dues to the NEA. It is the law. There is nothing voluntary about it. Second, that is tax payer money he’s talking about, which is exactly what is so corrupting about public sector unions: the government is lobbying itself for its own expansion.
And what are “employee rights” and “due process,” you might ask? Well, those are what require New York City to pay 700 union teachers $65 million a year to do nothing. Same thing in Los Angeles, where 165 union teachers collect a total of $10 million a year from tax payers for doing nothing.
If you have the time, do watch the whole 25 minute address. Chanin recounts the rise of public sector collective bargaining, with a rapid rise in teacher unionization in the late 60s. He talks about all the victories the NEA has won for teachers since then. But ask yourselves, as the NEA has exploded in membership, budget, and power, how have American students fared? What have unions done for their education? Absolutely nothing.
Author: 
25 Responses to “NEA General Counsel: Union Dues, Not Education, Are Our Top Priority”
Dexter Massoletti, Sr. San Francisco CA on July 9th, 2009 at 1:48pm said:
We should thank Bob Chanin for his candor and Conn Carroll for laying it out.
This is the consequence of corporate governance, or perhaps better said, disguised gangsterism: public sector unionism. It is also seen in various governmental divisions hiring lobbyists to leverage other governmental divisions against the interests of the people on the taxpayers’ dime. No different than a seniority system in the House of Representatives — or the uncounted number of little acorns scattered at the foot of this country’s biggest drug-like weed.
The corrupt in the political class perhaps are reaching for their own demise; we can hope they will not disappoint.
Joseph A. Pacinelli, Erie, PA on July 10th, 2009 at 10:11am said:
This is a sad commentary on the power of the union and its abuse of a system that cries for reform. We as a people have become soft, callous, or disconnected from involvement. We should be marching and demonstrating our displeasure over the way our system has become. I am as guilty as the next person.
Natalie, TX on July 10th, 2009 at 11:07am said:
Thank Mark Levin and Landmark Legal Foundation for going after the NEA and taking them to court for their illegal contributions to liberal candidates. It’s truely disgusting that the teachers in our schools participate in an organization like this. We have to be diligent in our children’s education and make sure they understand the basis on which this country was founded. I personally have had to listen to my son come home from school saying things like “we are killing our planet” and “Obama will take care of us”. Thankfully when I talk to him and tell him the truth he sees these things are incorrect. Our educators have been indoctrinated by the radical left and are happy to do the same to our children. They must be stopped and their “power” must be taken away.
Maria, Tennessee on July 10th, 2009 at 11:45am said:
Yes, teachers “volunteer” to pay dues like we “volunteer” to pay taxes…right?
Marshall Hill MI. on July 10th, 2009 at 11:56am said:
These people claim to be well educated and dedicated to Our Children’s Educational Excellence!
Until Greed took over!
Robert T. Davis on July 10th, 2009 at 12:00pm said:
Union monopoly schools need competition in the form of vouchers. If Republicans would ever understand this they can really give big city Democrats a fit as folks realize it its just that politicians of both parties are scared to death of these worthless teacher unions.
Tim AZ on July 10th, 2009 at 12:38pm said:
Most schools are Federally funded based on a childs attendance. I know it isn’t appealing to single parents to home school their children. But starving public schools of federal dollars would greatly reduce the number of teachers needed in public schools. Less teachers means less money for unions to buy a politicians favors. Eventually starving the unions out of existence. Then Americas public schools can once again be a shining example of excellence in education. Teachers could actually witness the fruits of their labors through their students achievements during their adult lives.
Dennis A. Social Circle Ga. on July 10th, 2009 at 12:41pm said:
The union are going to get all they want, obama owes them his election. He is just a puppet on the string for them,as well as the rest of the dems. A union had it’s place and time, both are now gone!!!!!
Rich, Whistler, BC on July 10th, 2009 at 12:43pm said:
The only way to fix this is to follow Denmark’s example and allocate the money to each child to attend the school of her choice. This would encourage competition between schools and for schools to recruit the best teachers. Public schools would have to improve or die.
Tim AZ on July 10th, 2009 at 12:56pm said:
Home schooling Is an option. Not an appealing one to single parents I know. Fewer students means fewer teachers. Fewer teachers means less money for the unions to buy favors from politicians. Soon the unions would go broke trying keep all the goodies bought and payed for with our tax dollars. How can I say our tax dollars? Because public school teachers are payed with tax dollars period. We could place America’s public schools back at the top of the list of the best educated in the world. Or we could continue to treat our children as just an easy way to make a living while creating a dependent society of drones.
Tim Mills, Baltimore, Maryland on July 10th, 2009 at 5:45pm said:
I am shocked that NEA would not see students as the priority. I’m not a teacher yet, but I’m in the education field. As someone who works with student who recieve special education, I don’t know what I shoud say. If student aren’t the number one priority of edcators, what is their real purpose?
Barb -mn on July 11th, 2009 at 12:17am said:
Isn’t this a case of extortion? The tax payers are paying for education. Teachers and administration get paid by the tax payers. Do “union dues” come out of that check? It’s extortion. Unions have nothing to do with the benefit of education. The records show them to be corrupt, increasing corruption. And nobody’s held accountable. Somebody should be filing some law suits? Sure you’ll say it’s garnished from their pay. But I’ll say it doesn’t matter anyway, it came from taxpayers paying for education. In order for it to be “fair”, they would have to cash the check and write them out a personal one.
There’s gotta be a technicality somewhere.
They protect the undisciplined ADULTS with our tax dollars! This can’t be legal! Dismiss all government unions. They are not in the best interest of a civil people and putting children in danger. Home schooling is the safest, best idea!
Tom NC on July 11th, 2009 at 1:58pm said:
This video should be forwarded to everyone on your email list. In North Carolina 49% of the children failed their 2007/2008 end of grade tests and 30% of the children droped out prior to graduating from high school and 33% of those going into prison in 2008 tested at a sixth grade or less reading level. Those numbers are from the NC State records.
Among the ideas to save money in our budget is to eliminate the tests. Thank you, President Bush for the No Child Left Behind law otherwise we would notknow how bad things are.
Dexter Massoletti, Sr. San Francisco CA on July 11th, 2009 at 7:33pm said:
Perhaps the current intense focus on the national consequences of the almost-militaristic centralization of governance as in the case of the Education Industry, distracts from the more serious manifestation of corporate government: State and Local government, leveraged by community activist employment of imported agitation and propaganda, appealing to those with no interests in our way of life AND the ability to use our freedoms and sense of justice against us.
The number of government employees, total about 22 million; about 3 million Federal, about 6 million State, and about 12 million local. We have a government employee for every 13 people in the country, of whom only 7 are the real providers of support for all.
Most of the government is unionized (which is the bulk of all union membership) as if they need protection from their employer: The People. Taxpayers pay for both sides of any litigation generated in this system – as well as any costs or penalties, often instigated by yet another ‘Industry’ (the Legal Business, another non-productive sector of the economy) well-rooted in government at all levels. Again with another union, stronger than its assumed purpose and predisposed to turmoil.
This is the real socio-economic crisis, for which the half-educated have not prepared the uneducated, as was their job.
The proper action today is to start not just at the top of this pile, but at the bottom as well — take back control of local government, beginning with the school boards and school administrations. Cleaning them out will not take as long as it took to see them corrupted, but it will take loud, bold, and firm action. Those now without a paying job can do more important work in this and once it actually begins, it will sweep the country as a new wave of freedom.
John, Fargo, ND on July 22nd, 2009 at 11:21pm said:
Tis indeed a sad situation when everyone jumps on the bandwagon and dishes dirt on comments by a LAWYER, NOT a teacher. But of course, that is what we have done as a nation for the past 30 years, dump on teachers and on their union. Unions have not lost their place in our society, they are needed more than ever as our middle class has faded – the rich get richer and the poor get poorer while the middle class is squeezed from both ends. It is not the employer or the corporate world that looks out for the common man, it is the union. Have there been abuses? Yes, as there is in almost any large group but the NEA and the state unions have done far more for teachers, schools, students, and education than all the politicians combined. Try and be fair when you judge something!
Nelia, AZ on July 24th, 2009 at 2:25pm said:
It has been my understanding the NEA has not done much about salaries for teachers, which I believe was the incentive for the organization in the first place as an attempt to have some negotiation clout. A pay-scale more in keeping with the importance of the teacher’s role would have provided incentive for the best to seek this profession and not have so many excellent educators leave for a better paying profession. Instead the NEA has been busy revising text books and promoting a Liberal agenda with their powerful lobby. As a result, the students have received, and are receiving a dumbed down education.
RDS, Tulsa on July 27th, 2009 at 9:41pm said:
I am an ashamed member of this hideous organization…not by choice. I found out about his comments from our state email update. Here is how they are spinning his speech…
“NEWEST NEA ATTACK- When schools are about to start the new fall semester some organizations start their fundraising efforts by attempting to persuade OEA-NEA members to drop their membership and some media outlets spread untruths. This year is no different. The emails are already flying through cyber space and the presses are already printing distortions about the decisions that were made by 9,000 of your school colleagues who attended the NEA representative assembly.
The newest attack is about a speech that was delivered by NEA General Counsel, Bob Chanin. Bob is retiring after 41 years of service to the NEA and its members. In his remarks, Bob spoke about the battles he fought to ensure school employees the right to bargain collectively, the fight to ensure due process for NEA members, and the fight to rid No Child Left Behind of bad provisions.
He went on to say that NEA’s success brings contempt from some segments of our society. His passionate remarks, wry humor, and word selection has irritated our detractors and they are now attempting to paint the entire NEA family with a negative brush. They are trying to deceive good, decent, conservative members to leave their organization. They deceive faithful local clergy to raise a misguided alarm to members. Ultimately, their goal is to weaken our efforts and lessen our success to adequately fund schools and create a great public school for every child.
If this, or any other issue arises in your local, please give us a call at 800-522-8091 so that President Becky Felts, Vice President Linda Hampton, or any of the OEA staff can help you learn the truth.”
I am a conservative who believes in choice…school choice. I really don’t think the NEA cares about educating kids. They are more concerned with keeping and increasing their power (= more money). And now the general council has actually said what nobody else in leadership has had the courage to say. And of course damage control is hyper-drive so they can try to keep people from knowing the truth. It truly is a shame that great teachers are stuck with leaders who care more about money than teaching. I could go on and on…I just figured you might like to see how they are trying to spin this. I did find it interesting that they didn’t claim it was taken out of context.
Nick, Owensboro, KY on September 25th, 2009 at 12:39pm said:
Unions could care less about the kids. The kids don’t pay union dues. As long as the money rolls in and they keep terrible teachers employed- the union is happy.
Chris, St. Paul, MN on November 19th, 2009 at 2:55am said:
And this surprises people how?
This has been going on for years. We the people, or should I say we the sheeple, have followed along, towing the company line of “it’s for the children.”
Well no more. The line in the sand is drawn. My kids are no longer part of our government’s failed experiment.
Just to make sure my words are clear, this is NOT about teachers. There are plenty of good teachers. (I assume that RDS of Tulsa falls into this category). This is about the failed corrupt system that we have in place under the guise of “education.”
The NEA and government run education is a experiment that needs to end.
Go check out Alliance for the Separation of School & State for more information.
http://www.SchoolAndState.org
Anne O’Neill on March 27th, 2010 at 8:56am said:
Actually, Bob Chanin was quoted by a kid doing an oral history project (in off the cuff remarks made over lunch after the formal interview) that was posted on the web years ago that Chanin stated he didn’t really believe in unions, unionism, or for that matter in representing their members. Since confronting Chanin about it directly I’ve noticed those remarks are no longer in the posted oral history. The student had remarked that in casual comments over lunch Chanin had said that he didn’t really believe in unions or unionism or in representing their members for that matter, which even the student found disconcerting. But he sure doesn’t have any problem with collecting dues.
As for representing their members against unfairness in the workplace, my own CTA union president didn’t even stand up for me when my supervisor openly admitted retaliating against me for asking for union assistance in obtaining a written job description (she changed her mind every week about what my actual duties were and I merely wished to do a good job and receive a fair evaluation)! This boss was unethical and abused her power. And who was she? The proud former “grievance chair” of the union and formerly a union representative on the bargaining committee with the district. The CTA union prez was actually going to let them fire me out of retaliation alone just for wanting to do a good job and to the best of my ability were it not for my own efforts to present my evidence to the union’s executive level and make it clear to them that they’d be getting an unfair labor practice complaint for failing to represent (let alone being complicit in the retaliation) and that I’d be suing them in civil court. Only then did they do a half-ass job of representation. So much for the usefulness of paying union dues for fair treatment in the workplace.
Anne O’Neill on March 27th, 2010 at 9:03am said:
Frankly, since unions have jurisdiction over the employment of public employees in the course of their employment, and given the fact that they view themselves as “partners” with (often) corrupt, unethical administrators, far from being a protection for fair employment practices, unions are the greatest hindrance to such, as they are far more concerned with negotiating for the sake of positioning themselves in the bargaining process than they are in representing their dues-paying members or for that matter even guaranteeing democratic decision-making that is freely arrived at (my last CTA local did not even provide feasible means to communicate with fellow union members without violating the district email policy and therefore suppressed any real exchange among members that was not strictly choreographed by the existing (corrupt) leadership. I had to threaten a complaint to the state attorney general’s office just to get a copy of the bylaws!
Frankly speaking, as far as California is concerned, the due process clause for probationary employees contained in the Ed Code is sufficient, and the corrupt union officials only get in the way.
Anne O’Neill on March 27th, 2010 at 9:07am said:
The most apt criticism of unions today is not ideological criticism from without but justified criticism of corruption and lack of democracy from within.
Anne O’Neill on March 27th, 2010 at 9:13am said:
As far as an overhaul goes, the most cost-effective solution is from the top down. What do superintendents do that is so valuable that they earn more than the president of the U.S.A. or salaries that are equivalent to the CEO of a successful private corporation? And why do they always go away with severance packages that amount to nearly a half million $$ even when they quit or get fired? I worked for a school district that gave away $300,000 to their supt after she voluntarily quit her job (and a year and a half of free medical coverage for she and her hubby) even though even by contract (and those contracts often have such giveaways included and are approved by the board of education) they owed her nothing. The district promptly turned around and announced there was a freeze on spending for classroom supplies. After all, it was the end of 2008 and the economy had just tanked…
Anne O’Neill on March 27th, 2010 at 9:22am said:
And the greatest cause of bad teachers who do nothing to help kids learn is bad administrators who don’t do their job to offer mentoring and supervision. In fact, it is often the case that good teachers are let go for having anything to say about best practices (i.e., people who actually care about doing a good job enough to have a professional opinion and who exercise commitment to and concern for students) while people with “friends” in the district office who sit at their desk and do nothing while kids swing from the proverbial trees are promoted to a district curricular position. I’ve even heard administrators admit that a teacher is completely ineffective but do nothing about even so much as documenting it because frankly it’s a tough job and they’re not up to it. Instead, they get rid of good teachers over petty personal politics. Making administrators responsible for the actual performance of their school and firing them if they fail in their mission is the answer. And it’s easy because they’re all managerial level at-will employees anyway. Make the administrators do their jobs and within the bounds of ethical professional and managerial practices, and you won’t have to worrry about getting rid of bad teachers. No need to worry about the unions, as they are just an extension of corrupt and unethical management anyway and that needs to go.
Kevin Probst on June 22nd, 2010 at 12:25pm said:
When I was in public education here in Georgia, I join PAGE, Professional Association for Georgia Educators. I thought they were a good substitute for the NEA. What I discovered was they will only support you when the solution to your problem serves their agenda, if not, they will hang you out to dry. Don’t expect any reform in NEA….the reigning political party needs this voting block in the elections to come to the goal is to keep their members fat and happy. No wonder homeschooling is a movement that is exploding in popularity.