What’s Wrong With the AFT? An affront to democratic unionism.

[Ichingcarpenter]

The American Federation of Teachers’ top-down endorsement of Hillary Clinton is an affront to democratic unionism.


On Saturday, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) announced that its executive council “overwhelmingly” endorsed Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president. It did so, the official announcement says, on the basis of interviews (not released to members) and the results of a poll.

The decision couldn’t be more wrongheaded, and it’s one that members should demand the union executive council rescind. We should propose instead a decision reached by a very different process: a referendum of members that follows and is informed by debate in union outlets.

Every local should be charged by the executive council with providing space and place for members to air their opinions. The national union should encourage use of its magazine and website for this debate. In this discussion the leadership will have the opportunity to persuade members that endorsing Clinton is the wisest choice, but it will be obligated to carry out the will of the membership as expressed in the referendum.

What is most destructive in the AFT’s endorsement of Clinton is that it has disempowered members at precisely the moment when we most need revitalized teachers unions to save a system of education that is being destroyed as a public good by powerful elites and the politicians they control.

Instead, a rushed decision was made without any semblance of legitimacy. The questions and answers about the process offer few specifics except that the national union conducted polls of members and interviews with (some) candidates. According to the union, the endorsement was made based on this information, though people who know Washington politics have been aware for many years of the public love fest between AFT President Randi Weingarten and Clinton. The process of seeking member opinion was an embarrassingly transparent cover for Weingarten’s longstanding desire that Clinton be the AFT’s candidate.

Not all executive council members approved of this endorsement, though how individuals voted has not been revealed to members. We have a right to know how leaders voted and should demand this information.

While Weingarten holds much responsibility for handling this endorsement, as if it were hers to make, the executive council members are equally responsible. Those who supported the endorsement supported it on behalf of members without having consulted their own constituencies, let alone the national union membership. Their shameful actions should also be called to account.

Bernie Sanders’s teacher supporters are probably the most outraged by the endorsement. They understand that Clinton supports the bipartisan policies that have deprofessionalized teaching and made public education a profit center for transnational corporations like Pearson.

But even those who think the AFT should support Clinton should be disturbed by this endorsement because it undercuts the union’s power. A fully democratic endorsement process would truly inform and mobilize members, strengthening the union nationally and locally, making us stronger in the election and beyond.


more; https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/07/weingarten-president-primary-bernie-clinton/


Lois Weiner is a professor of education at New Jersey City University who is on the editorial board of New Politics. Her newest book is The Future of Our Schools: Teachers Unions and Social justice.

[Enthusiast]

1. We all know there is a corporate American tradition of undermining unions on the sly.

That's how they win.

[BrotherIvan]

2. Nah, it's just Bernistas union bashing and hating

A poll of .04% of the membership two months after the candidates announced and without sharing the results of the questionnaire is clearly enough information to endorse a candidate who supports high stakes testing, charters, is unclear on subjects such as tenure, and is very closely aligned with the reform movement. To say anything at all about the endorsement is just bitterness.

[roguevalley]

3. count this AFT-er bitter then. No one asked.

[BrotherIvan]

5. How do you feel about the answers on the questionnaires?

Are your colleagues happy with this endorsement?

[roguevalley]

6. I never got the questionaire. Bitterness is the king for today.

[BrotherIvan]

7. They have posted them on the website now

Take a look when you can and let me know what you think. Some of us were discussing them yesterday who had read them.

[roguevalley]

9. thank you I will.

[SoapBox]

4. After we got the news that Weingarten is all cozy, cozy with HRC...

That was all I needed to know.

This was not representative of the total membership, no matter how it's spun.

[sabrina 1]

8. There is a call to retract the endorsement which was signed as of yesterday, by

over 2,500 members in less than 24 hours.

Clinton not only supported the disastrous NCLB 'education' business oriented excuse for education policies, in her own words she stated in the interview to GET this endorsement that once again, she was 'disappointed' AFTER having supported something no one who knew anything about Bush, #1 and/or Education would have supported.

At the time, she states, she thought it was a wonderful program.

How many such awful decisions does someone have to make before they disqualify themselves for positions of leadership?

Sanders, in HIS interview for this endorsement, once again, proved to have made the CORRECT judgement of that bill at the RIGHT TIME, not later, he was able to see where it would lead.

But the endorsement went to the candidate who admitted being 'disappointed' in her own judgement.

This endorsement is being called 'cronyism' at its best, or worst depending on how you look at things.