Tuesday, January 03, 2006

NEA Members, Want To Know How "Your Union" Is Spending Your Money?

Go to this post at NewsAlert, which quotes from and links to the Wall Street Journal. The expenditures might sicken you--well, unless you're a leftie who believes that this is how union money is supposed to be spent.


Thespis said...


I really enjoyed looking at your blog.

Thanks for your comments on Thespis Journal.

You certainly have a choice about joining the union. It is your choise where you work. Closed shop is legal. You can choose to work elsehwhere.

I'll bet you are a great teacher. I have taught twenty years, and I still enjoy it.

I plan to keep up with your writing, and I invite you back to Thespis Journal at any time.


Mark Manley
Thespis Journal

Darren said...

Mark, thank you for coming here to comment.

Here in California, closed shop *is* legal--in reality, but not in law. Is it legal anywhere, given the Beck Decision? I'm not so sure. But I'm *required* to pay an agency fee to the union no matter what district I choose to work in. Who determines what my "fair share" fee is? The California Teachers Association!

Your comment about my ability to work elsewhere deserves a response because it's entirely wrong. Indulge me as I tell a story, and then I'll tie it in to unions, working, etc.

From its founding in 1802, the US Military Academy at West Point required cadets to attend chapel service every Sunday. There was a "non-religious" rationale--it was for the moral development of cadets. Despite the fact that it's clearly unconstitutional to require chapel, it occurred. Yes, cadets all attended West Point voluntarily, but that didn't make the wrong right.

Mandatory chapel was challenged by a cadet in the late 60s. This cadet was the grandson of one of Patton's finest, and also was a direct descendent of Thomas Jefferson. His case went all the way to the US Supreme Court before West Point was told that it could not require chapel. The Court ruled that knowing in advance about an unconstitutional requirement did not make the requirement acceptable.

So back to the union. Knowing in advance that I have to pay money to an organization I consider corrupt does not make the extortion acceptable. I *could* teach in a right-to-work state, I guess, but I shouldn't *have* to.

Again, thank *you* for coming to my site to post. The posts on your blog show you to be an articulate, intelligent person, which makes me wonder *why* you support the NEA as strongly as you do! But intelligent people can disagree, as we apparently do. You can bet I'll be checking back in on Thespis Journal quite often.