On being disloyal.

An Illinois member of the NEA board of directors wrote and suggested that I was creating disunity in the IEA because of my criticisms of their handling of the pension issue. He asked that I not post his comments and, as always, I will adhere to his wishes.

But  I want to share my response.

I think that your suggestion that I am the cause of disunity is grossly unfair.

That there are differences in our union is an objective fact. Some wish to remain quiet about those differences. I don’t. To be unified around a wrong set of tactics and a wrong strategy does no service to our members nor to the students we teach.

We were too unified when Audrey Soglin, Ken Swanson and others in leadership (you perhaps?) tried to silence criticism of our support for Senate Bill 7. The local that I was president of was a lone voice in opposition to Senate Bill 7 at the start. But now there are others who see what it is. There will be more. Should we have remained silent in pursuit of the  cause of unity within the union?

Nobody can justly challenge my loyalty to the IEA and to the cause of teacher unionism. My resume is there for all to see. But my loyalty to my union does not extend to blind loyalty to leaders who, frankly, are unknown to most of the 130,000 IEA members.

I support the main thrust of the We Are One coalition in defense of the pension protection clause.

I disagree with them on offering up any more member contributions.

I disagree on the tactics, which have left out most of the rank and file membership of our Association.

I think we rely too much on lobbyists and lawyers and not enough on activating members.

I think we call compromises victories. We all make compromises. But we should call them what they are.

I think the leadership is heavy-handed and undemocratic in the way they go after those who disagree with them.

Should all that be kept quiet in the cause of unity?

Should our little Park Ridge local have been quiet about Senate Bill 7. We filled two buses on Lobby Day and our members refused union directives to lobby for SB7. They were courageous. Heroes.

Should I not have been the one who posted the video tape of Jonah Edelman on my blog because it was an embarrassment to our leadership?

To be called passionate is often a way to marginalize a person. It suggests that they are not being objective and are basing themselves on emotions and not facts.

But almost a million readers of my blog visit there because they find it a reliable source of information and facts.

And passion.

I opposed Ken Swanson when he called for a change in our lobbying position on pensions at the RA. I believe it gave permission to the legislature to create a two-tier pension system. I lost that vote. Should I have been for unity or for the young teachers who now have lost benefits. I could only choose one or the other.

You suggest I am looking at things as a retiree and ignoring the views of the active teachers. I was not a retiree then. I have only been a retiree since June. 

Unity is created when differences are allowed to be expressed. The silencing of minority views will always end up exploding like a blister.


11 Replies to “On being disloyal.”

  1. When we pay our association dues, the local recieves a very small portion. The majority of the money goes to the IEA which at times has a different agenda then the local. When I negotiated contracts, I informed the rep that her role was that of an observer, period. We negotioted one of the best contracts our local ever had. You’re correct in being wary of the leadership and their agenda. We must be a watchdog for our own interests.

  2. Regarding some members of the IEA

    “There is always hope when people are forced to listen to both sides; it is when they attend only to one that errors harden into prejudices, and truth itself ceases to have the effect of truth by being exaggerated into falsehood… The gravest of [offenses] is to argue sophistically, to suppress facts or arguments, to misstate the elements of the case, or misrepresent the opposite opinion…” –John Stuart Mill

  3. People seem overly enamored with the idea of (false) consensus. It is not consensus when the union leadership keeps us ignorant. It is not consensus when they try to silence dissenting voices for the appearance of unity.

  4. Why would we condescend with our unions to the same practices we despise in the reformers – secrecy, unbridled power and blind acceptance. Unions exist because of their members. If everybody in the room agrees on everything somebody isn’t thinking!

  5. You know that saying about doing the same thing and expecting different results? Unions and the plight of todays worker in general is the way it is because we have had people in leadership positions that keep thinking they are dealing with rational people with shared values WE ARE NOT. Our situation in IL is a local version of what is going on the federal level. We are dealing with people that are crazy and they are hiding their craziness by lying. We are surrounded by states where once the democratic rights of the citizens were curtailed or denied totally the citizens say some version of “We didn’t think that they were that deceitful.” ARE WE NOT AWARE? Fred keep sounding the alarm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s