Appetizer

The subject of teachers unions often incites two very different responses when raised in conversation. Many in the public are quick to grumble and throw all of the blame for the nation’s education problems at the feet of the unions. Those in the education industry often staunchly defend the unions and regard them as their best friend. While these two viewpoints are polar opposites, neither of them should be dismissed outright, for there is actually some truth to each side.

On the positive side, teacher unions do fill the need for teacher advocacy in our lawsuit-prone world,  many teachers need the protection and insurance that a union offers them against childhood behavioral problems and other difficult work experiences. Many teachers, however, would much rather have this protection without the other aggressive practices their unions engage in.

On the negative side, a large amount of research does demonstrate that teachers unions like the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are often oriented to one side of the political spectrum, aggressive in forcing their members to commit large portions of their salary to yearly dues, and very possessive of their status as the main representation of teachers. Further research also demonstrates their resistance to reform options like school choice and higher teaching standards. These tactics have caused some of their unions' own members to speak out in opposition to their practices, and to urge more choice and competition in the teacher union market.

Suffice it to say, teachers unions are a very large part of the education system today, and true education reform cannot take place without closely examining them. This section seeks to provide information on the history of teachers’unions, their ideologies, their role in school reform, and the alternatives available to the monopolies of teachers unions such as the NEA and AFT.