TURN: Teacher Union Reform Network

Changing the Frame: A Vision for Comprehensive Teacher Unionism in a Post-Janus Environment

August 16, 2018

In the current context of the Supreme Court decision on Janus vs. AFSCME Council 31 centered on public-sector unions' ability to collect "fair share" or "agency" fees, as well as the statewide teacher walkouts in several of the southern states, much of the commentary and discussion convey an extremely narrow view of the role and purpose of teacher unions.

Teachers and their unions are perceived as chiefly interested in "bread and butter" issues such as better pay and benefits and not really concerned about larger issues like quality of teaching and learning and the social justice concern that all students have an equitable opportunity for a quality education. This limited frame leaves out two significant frames that form Comprehensive Teacher Unionism: professional unionism and social justice unionism. It is time for the public, education leaders and union organizations across the country to expand this frame.

The characteristics of a professional union and the long history of craft or trade unions go back to the medieval guilds. Current private sector labor law dating back to the Wagner Act of 1935 essentially only dealt with the industrial sector. Over time, this industrial template was applied to public sector teacher unions and collective bargaining. This is especially true with the notion of management rights that essentially oversee all of the issues that define the nature, quality and accountability for the work of teaching and learning, therefore rendering these issues a management right and responsibility. Craft unions, on the contrary, have a long history of dealing with these quality issues that include control of apprenticeship programs and entrance to the craft.

Early efforts to secure collective bargaining in the 1960's and 70's involved an interest on the part of many teacher union leaders to secure voice in decision-making about the nature and the quality of the profession's work. School management pushback was successful in most places to defeat these interests and impose the private sector industrial frame on the collective bargaining process at the local district level and in the language of state statutes governing collective bargaining for teachers.

In many states, teachers have limited or no venues for collective voice and presence. It is hard to be a true profession without such collective voice and presence.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Al Shanker began to reassert these notions of professional unionism in the mid 1980's, which were later also adopted by the National Education Association (NEA). The Carnegie Report in 1986 argued for turning teaching into a genuine profession and suggested a new type of teacher unionism called "collective professionalism."

From the late 1980's, there have been a number of examples and efforts to expand the more limited definition of industrial unionism to include the characteristics of professional unionism and social justice unionism. The National Teacher Union Reform Network (TURN) and the subsequent Regional TURN Networks (turnweb.org) have been promoting and experimenting with professional union activities. These have included collaborative partnerships with administration, school boards and local communities to improve teaching and learning for all students. There are many local examples across the country of this kind of innovative labor- management collaboration to improve teaching and learning, where the groups work together and advocate for the equitable treatment of all students.

In regard to agency fees or fair share, it has been my experience that local unions who worked collaboratively with school administration were able to secure these agreements. One main reason is that both the union and management saw this as a way to help protect progressive union leaders be able to take risks in the area of quality issues related to teaching and learning in the face of pushback from more traditional members who want the union to just deal with bread and butter issues. One huge unanticipated consequence of abolishing agency fees or fair share provisions could be that it leads to union leaders being more fearful and timid in taking on efforts to improve teaching and learning, ultimately hurting students in the process.

In the expanded frame, the purpose of a union is to be a vehicle for meeting the needs, interests and aspirations of its members. By organizing and banding together, the union's strength in numbers provides more power and effectiveness beyond what individuals could accomplish in isolation. Stephen Covey describes four basic human needs:To liveTo loveTo learnTo leave a legacy

Those needs can be translated for teacher union members.

To live = the need for a decent salary and benefits and fair treatment.

To love = the need to be in relationship with colleagues and to have a sense of belonging in one's work.

To learn = the need to continuously grow and learn in one's practice.

To leave a legacy = the need to make a difference in ALL students' lives.

It is the need to leave a legacy where the teaching profession derives its moral purpose through making a difference in the lives of students. When the union serves as a conduit for teachers to collectively impact and improve the lives of all students, then the union exists for more than just the needs of its own members. Then it also exists for the benefit of students.

In order to improve the lives of ALL students, especially those impacted by poverty, the Comprehensive Union develops an array of community organizing and political organizing strategies to improve the circumstances in which many students live. The union, along with community partners, is a vehicle to organize around the social justice issues that impact the lives of their students and families.

The Comprehensive Union framework provides a vehicle for transforming teaching into a profession that will improve learning forALL students within schools. The union cannot effectively do this by itself. It can work in partnership with administration and school boards to remove obstacles and improve the conditions needed to transform top down bureaucracies into learning organizations.

In order for teaching to be a true profession and for teacher unions to live out their full purpose in this post-Janus environment, we need to embrace the vision and frame of Comprehensive Teacher Unionism.

Jo Anderson, Jr.Co-Executive DirectorConsortium for Educational Change

Jo Anderson Jr. is the Co-Executive Director of the Consortium for Educational Change, a non-profit dedicated to labor-management collaboration. He is a former union organizer, Illinois Educational Association Executive Director and U.S. Department of Education Senior Advisor during the Obama Administration.