Lessons from the Boeing Strike: Why Opposition Groups Are the Key to Revitalizing Teacher Unions

The recent Boeing strike didn’t just make headlines for its powerful stand on wages and working conditions—it offered a model for how rank-and-file workers can take control, making union action more effective, democratic, and responsive to members. In contrast, public sector unions, especially teacher unions, have often struggled with stagnant leadership that, while well-meaning, may be slow to respond to evolving challenges. For teachers, opposition groups within unions—dedicated factions that actively push for more aggressive action and accountability from leadership—are increasingly essential. If teachers want unions that truly serve their needs, it’s time to strengthen these internal movements and take inspiration from Boeing’s rank-and-file approach.

The Boeing strike succeeded largely because of the power wielded by Boeing’s rank-and-file members, who pressed for more aggressive bargaining and refused to settle for weak compromises. The strike was ultimately driven by the workers themselves, not by distant union executives. This rank-and-file-driven power forced Boeing’s hand and made their demands impossible to ignore.

In the teaching profession, similar rank-and-file power often comes from opposition groups within unions. These groups push back against complacency, demanding real progress on issues like wages, classroom conditions, and respect for educators. By empowering these opposition factions, teachers can ensure that union leadership doesn’t become overly bureaucratic or lose touch with the realities teachers face daily. Without this internal push, teacher unions risk stagnating, stuck in cycles of weak contracts and timid negotiations that serve neither educators nor their students.

One of the reasons Boeing workers found success was because they refused to settle for less, even when it meant extending their strike and facing considerable financial pressure. For teachers, weak union contracts often result from leadership that may be hesitant to disrupt the status quo, opting for safer, more palatable agreements rather than fighting for meaningful change. Opposition groups within teacher unions play a critical role here by demanding accountability from leadership and insisting that members deserve better than incremental gains.

Opposition factions have already demonstrated their impact in recent years. In cities like Chicago and Los Angeles, grassroots-led movements within teacher unions challenged complacent leadership and mobilized members for stronger action. These factions pushed for contracts that addressed classroom conditions, school funding, and community support—issues that are often sidelined in favor of quicker, “safer” negotiations. The power of these groups shows that real change comes not from the top but from a strong, organized base that holds leaders accountable.

A key factor in the Boeing strike was the workers’ resistance to Boeing’s corporate power and influence over politics. This challenge to corporate control is equally relevant for teachers, who face well-funded lobbying efforts by privatization advocates, charter school networks, and those aiming to erode public education.

Opposition groups in teacher unions bring a fresh approach to this fight, often pushing leadership to adopt more aggressive stances against privatization and anti-union political agendas. They’re essential for countering the “reform” movements that aim to weaken unions and strip teachers of their rights. By standing firm against these influences, opposition factions can ensure that unions don’t become mere bureaucratic bodies but remain vibrant, fighting forces that prioritize public education over private profit.

One of the strategies that helped Boeing workers succeed was their ability to frame their demands as part of a broader struggle for dignity and corporate accountability—gaining public support in the process. Teachers’ opposition groups within unions have similarly worked to align their demands with the needs of their communities, framing issues like class sizes, school funding, and teacher pay as crucial to student success. This connection builds alliances with parents, students, and community organizations, creating a coalition that’s harder for school boards and politicians to ignore.

Where traditional union leadership may be cautious in pushing for community involvement, opposition groups have been the ones to lead the charge, highlighting the importance of classroom conditions and adequate funding. These groups understand that the struggles of teachers are tied to the quality of public education overall, making them more willing to engage in bold action and coalition-building that includes the communities they serve.

In the Boeing strike, the strength of the rank and file ensured that union leadership stayed in line with the members’ demands. Within teacher unions, opposition groups serve this role, holding leadership accountable and pushing back against any signs of compromise or stagnation. Without these internal movements, union leaders can become insulated from the day-to-day challenges facing teachers, prioritizing safe but weak agreements over the bold demands that members need.

Opposition groups are the mechanism through which teachers’ voices are amplified, and they make it clear that union leadership works for them, not the other way around. By challenging leadership to be more responsive and transparent, opposition groups ensure that union priorities align with the needs of teachers, not with preserving bureaucratic stability.

The Boeing strike demonstrated what’s possible when workers take control of their unions and demand real change. For teachers and public sector workers, the power of internal opposition groups offers a similar path forward. These groups are not divisive; rather, they are essential for fostering vibrant, responsive unions that can fight effectively for the rights of their members and the quality of public education.

Without the pressure from opposition groups, teacher unions risk becoming slow-moving organizations that settle for “good enough” contracts and shy away from hard battles. But with strong internal movements that challenge leadership, teacher unions can become true engines of change. In an era when labor rights and public education are increasingly under attack, building this kind of internal strength isn’t just beneficial—it’s necessary. As Boeing’s workers have shown, only a unified, empowered rank and file can win the gains that truly matter. For teachers, the message is clear: real change begins from within.

An Empty Win: How the UFT's Holiday 'Victory' Fails NYC Teachers and Families

In response to the press release by NYC Mayor Eric Adams regarding the new December 23 holiday for NYC public schools, it’s hard not to question the judgment — and perhaps even the priorities — of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) leadership. The announcement, which touts an "extra day with family," seems like an appealing gesture on the surface, but when examined more closely, it reveals an unsettling level of superficial negotiation by the union. The real problem lies in how this decision exposes both the union’s inability to secure meaningful concessions and a willingness to bolster the image of an embattled mayor rather than hold firm on issues that impact teachers daily.

One key concern is what, if anything, had to be traded to secure this day. In negotiations, unions seldom receive benefits without conceding something in return — especially when they lack leverage. The UFT has chosen not to address what was given up in this case, likely because they prefer not to draw attention to the fact that substantial trade-offs may have occurred behind closed doors. Without any transparency from the union on these details, it’s fair to question whether the union leadership’s priorities are misplaced. Did the union give up valuable bargaining power or specific provisions from ongoing negotiations to secure a token gesture that benefits the mayor’s image far more than it does UFT members?

Furthermore, one could argue that this decision plays directly into the political theater Mayor Adams is staging. As he faces legal issues and criticism on multiple fronts, this holiday adjustment provides him with a convenient way to curry public favor without addressing any underlying issues within the NYC school system. By standing beside him, UFT President Michael Mulgrew is inadvertently lending credibility to Adams at a time when union leaders should be holding the administration accountable for its actions. This does nothing for the long-term gains for teachers or students; it only serves to make a compromised mayor appear proactive and responsive.

While an additional day off sounds like a win for both teachers and students, it’s a hollow one. This minor adjustment fails to address the core issues teachers continue to face, from class sizes and support staff shortages to classroom resources and pay equity. The UFT could have used this opportunity to demand tangible improvements for its members — changes that would make a lasting impact on the day-to-day lives of educators and students alike. Instead, the focus on "family time" appears to be little more than a smokescreen for a weak negotiation strategy.

Ultimately, this decision may come back to haunt the union in the long run. Teachers and union members rely on strong, assertive leadership to secure real benefits and protections. When union leadership fails to negotiate from a position of strength and instead collaborates on photo-ops, it sends a message of weakness. If the union cannot stand firm now, what faith should members have that it will stand strong in future battles? This "extra day off" has revealed just how much is missing from the UFT’s priorities — and just how little it has fought for what truly matters to its members.

Silenced Voices and Broken Trust: How the UFT's Leadership Fails Its Own Members

For many educators in New York City, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) is supposed to be a trusted advocate, representing their interests in a system that often feels adversarial. However, frustration and disillusionment among rank-and-file members have grown significantly in recent years, fueled by what many view as the union’s increasing detachment from the issues its members face daily.

Rather than providing transparent, responsive support, the UFT’s current leadership seems more focused on maintaining its power and allegiance to the Department of Education (DOE) than on protecting teachers, guidance counselors, and school staff.

Here’s a look at how the union's handling of members’ complaints, questions, and essential advocacy has deteriorated, often with serious consequences for New York City educators.

One of the most basic ways members should be able to seek assistance is through the union’s helpline. However, teachers and other school staff members report that their calls are often met with robotic menus that seem designed to frustrate rather than to help. Michelle, a third-grade teacher at an elementary school in Harlem, recounts her recent experience: “I called the UFT for guidance on dealing with a principal who was routinely scheduling mandatory meetings during our prep periods, which I knew was against our contract. After navigating a maze of options and waiting on hold, I was finally routed to an automated message that ended up hanging up on me. When I finally reached someone on a second attempt, they told me to ‘speak to my district rep’ without any clear guidance on how to do that.”

This impersonal and ineffective phone system only serves to deepen frustration and anxiety among members who are already overwhelmed by their daily responsibilities.

Ideally, district representatives would be chosen based on their effectiveness, knowledge, and advocacy skills. But in reality, district reps are selected more for their loyalty to the UFT administration than for their ability to support members. Daniel, a science teacher from a middle school in the Bronx, shared how his district rep, though personable, seemed unprepared and uninterested in addressing his school’s concerns. “We’ve had issues with overcrowding and lack of resources for years, but our rep never seems to bring these issues up with union leadership. When I asked him directly, he just shrugged and said, ‘These things take time.’ It feels like he’s more interested in keeping his position than actually advocating for us.”

This practice has created a network of district reps who are loyal to union administration but often out of touch with the real issues teachers are facing, leaving schools and staff to fend for themselves.

When members approve a contract, they expect the union to uphold it. But for many teachers, contract violations by principals and DOE officials are rarely, if ever, challenged by the UFT. Maria, a bilingual guidance counselor at an elementary school in Brooklyn, described how her principal regularly asked her to work through her designated lunch periods, a direct violation of her contract. “I filed a complaint with the union, hoping they would step in, but I never heard back. A few months later, I learned that the union had apparently discussed my complaint with the principal—behind closed doors, and without my involvement.”

Maria’s experience is unfortunately common. Many teachers feel that the union’s leadership is more interested in appeasing principals and DOE officials than in upholding the rights of their own members.

Perhaps the most significant betrayal of trust is the way the UFT has negotiated away essential health and welfare benefits without members’ consent. In the last MLC negotiation (the body the UFT heads to negotiate health and welfare benefits), the union accepted a deal that increased out-of-pocket costs for many members and reduced certain healthcare benefits, including mental health services that have become crucial as the demands on teachers grow. Tom, a math teacher previously at Washington Irving High School, feels particularly disappointed: “We’re already stretched thin financially, and then they go ahead and make it harder for us to access healthcare. It feels like they sold us out to save a few bucks.” This lack of protection for health benefits, particularly at a time when they are so necessary, has left many members questioning the union’s commitment to their welfare.

Union leadership insists that delegate assemblies offer a platform for open discussion and democratic decision-making. However, many delegates report that these meetings are heavily scripted, with little opportunity for genuine questioning or debate. Joanne, a delegate from a school in Queens, described her frustration: “Whenever I try to ask a real question about our contract negotiations or the lack of support for our Chapter Leaders, I’m either ignored or given a canned response. It’s clear they don’t want dissent; they want agreement.” The lack of transparency and open discussion has created a stifling atmosphere, where dissent is quietly suppressed rather than openly addressed.

The union’s failure to maintain an organized structure within schools is another serious concern. Many schools are left without Chapter Leaders, making it difficult for staff to communicate effectively with the union or to advocate for necessary changes. Schools without Chapter Leaders often struggle with critical issues like unsafe working conditions, overcrowded classrooms, and a lack of resources. Sarah, a cluster teacher at an elementary school in Brooklyn, has been working at her school for three years without a Chapter Leader. “Without someone to represent us directly, it’s like we’re invisible to the union,” she explains. “Whenever I try to reach out for help, they tell me to go through my Chapter Leader—which I don’t even have!”

When it comes to negotiations with city officials, the UFT’s ineffectiveness has become glaringly apparent. Despite Mayor Eric Adams’ administration facing various corruption scandals and a revolving door of DOE leadership, the union has made little progress in advocating for its members. The lack of stability in the DOE should theoretically be a bargaining chip, but the UFT has failed to use it to its advantage. Instead, teachers feel the union is more likely to make compromises than to stand firm on important issues.

John, a special education teacher in Staten Island, put it this way: “It feels like our union is more interested in making nice with the Mayor’s Office than actually securing us a fair contract. Adams is indicted, his DOE leadership changes constantly, and yet the UFT is content with settling for weak compromises that don’t actually protect us.” This lack of strong bargaining only weakens the union’s influence and leaves educators feeling abandoned in the face of systemic issues.

The union’s behavior has left many teachers feeling as though they no longer have a voice within their own organization. As the UFT continues to ignore contract violations, script delegate assemblies, and sell out vital health benefits, members are increasingly left with one pressing question: who is the union truly working for?

If the UFT is to regain the trust of its members, it must start with accountability, transparency, and a renewed commitment to advocate for the welfare of educators. Without real change, the union risks not only the erosion of its influence but also the alienation of the very people it is supposed to represent. As long as the UFT’s leadership prioritizes loyalty, secrecy, and compromise over its members' needs, teachers and school staff will continue to be left without the support they deserve.

Crossroads for Change: Why the UFT Election is as Pivotal as a U.S. Presidential Race

by Rebel Teacher

The United Federation of Teachers (UFT) presidential election this spring represents a crucial turning point. Much like a national election, this decision is a referendum on leadership, direction, and values, one that will shape the future of New York City’s educators, schools, and students. For decades, the Unity Caucus has held near-total control over the UFT’s leadership, dictating its policies, priorities, and strategies. Yet, under Unity’s rule, many members feel the union has grown increasingly insular, self-interested, and unresponsive to the needs of everyday educators. If this leadership is reelected, the UFT risks further disconnecting from its own members, leaving the very educators it claims to represent feeling unheard, unsupported, and disenfranchised.

Unity Caucus’s domination of the UFT has fostered a culture that prioritizes the maintenance of power over advocacy for change. Over time, this insularity has led to a fundamental shift in priorities, with Unity leaders focusing on consolidating their own positions rather than addressing the needs of rank-and-file members. Many educators believe Unity stopped truly caring about their struggles long ago, instead choosing to direct its energy toward securing its own influence within the union. As a result, the union’s leadership has grown increasingly detached from the challenges and frustrations experienced daily by teachers, counselors, and support staff in New York City’s schools.

If the current Unity-led leadership is reelected, members fear that the union’s lack of transparency and accountability will only deepen. Unity’s approach to communication has often been perceived as superficial, with meetings and announcements feeling more like public relations exercises than genuine efforts to address pressing issues. This pattern is unlikely to change with Unity at the helm. Instead, educators are concerned that Unity will continue to employ the same top-down methods that have stifled member input and prevented open, democratic engagement within the union. Without meaningful change in leadership, the UFT is likely to remain resistant to the kinds of structural reforms—such as transparent decision-making and member inclusion—that would empower rank-and-file voices and strengthen the union from within.

Unity Caucus’s self-serving approach has also fostered an atmosphere in which innovative ideas are either discouraged or ignored entirely. Union members who call for reform, suggest new strategies, or advocate for inclusivity often find their contributions unwelcome or dismissed. The centralized nature of Unity’s control over elections, committee appointments, and key decisions leaves little room for new voices to emerge, contributing to a stagnation that many members view as detrimental to the union’s long-term health. With Unity in power, this stagnation is unlikely to abate. Instead, the union’s leadership will likely continue down the same path, recycling outdated approaches and ignoring the demands of educators who want a stronger, more adaptive union.

Unity’s internal divisions have only exacerbated this sense of disarray. Reports of infighting within the caucus have emerged, revealing a leadership that is not only disconnected from its members but also divided within itself. These conflicts prevent Unity from presenting a strong, unified front, weakening the UFT’s ability to effectively negotiate on behalf of educators. With Unity reelected, this division is expected to persist, further diminishing the union’s bargaining position with city and state officials. As public education faces an array of external threats—from privatization and charter school expansion to standardized testing mandates and budget cuts—the UFT needs a leadership capable of unity, clarity, and vision. Instead, Unity’s internal discord compromises the union’s influence, leaving it ill-prepared to stand up for educators and students alike.

The Unity Caucus’s self-preserving behavior has also translated into an alarming detachment from the challenges that educators face on the ground. New York City teachers and school staff are navigating a range of unprecedented issues, including increasing class sizes, funding shortages, administrative burdens, and critical concerns about safety and working conditions. Yet, under Unity’s leadership, many educators feel that these realities are overlooked or dismissed. Rather than engaging directly with these issues, Unity has focused on preserving its control, leaving rank-and-file members feeling abandoned by a union that should be their strongest advocate. If Unity remains in power, it’s likely that these challenges will continue to be met with superficial responses, rather than the proactive and robust advocacy educators need.

In addition to lacking responsiveness to member needs, Unity has consistently failed to outline a clear, forward-thinking vision for the UFT. As the landscape of public education changes, the union must adapt to protect both educators and students. Yet, under Unity, the UFT has largely adopted a reactive stance, only addressing problems once they reach crisis levels instead of anticipating issues and preparing effective strategies in advance. Without a shift in leadership, this reactive approach is likely to persist, leaving educators without the proactive support they need in the face of mounting pressures. The absence of a cohesive vision undermines the union’s ability to inspire confidence and creates a sense of disarray, as members feel their leadership lacks both foresight and preparedness.

Ultimately, if Unity Caucus retains control of the UFT, the union risks becoming even more disconnected from its core mission: advocating for the welfare of educators and the quality of public education. Many educators are demanding a leadership that values transparency, inclusivity, and accountability, and that is genuinely committed to representing the interests of rank-and-file members. The UFT presidential election this spring provides a rare opportunity for members to make a choice—a choice to either continue down a path of stagnation, disunity, and self-interest, or to pursue a future in which the union serves as a strong, unified, and responsive advocate for its members.

Just as the U.S. presidential election impacts the nation’s future, the UFT election will determine whether New York City’s educators have a union that stands firmly by their side or one that prioritizes internal power struggles and self-preservation. The stakes are high, and the consequences of this decision will reverberate across New York City’s schools and communities. Members have a choice this spring: to either reelect Unity and endorse a continuation of the status quo or to embrace change and elect leaders who will commit to transparency, genuine advocacy, and a clear vision for the future of public education. The future of the UFT—and by extension, the future of New York City’s educators and students—hangs in the balance.

Survey Request - Please Complete

Hi Everybody, hoping your 2024-2025 school year is off to a good start! We're asking all UFT members, both in-service and retirees, to please complete the survey below.

The UFT General Election (where we vote for UFT President, UFT Secretary, UFT Vice Presidents, etc.) is coming up in May 2025. For the last few months, a group of educators and UFT members across the city have been meeting and working to plan for this election. We’re concerned about what is happening to our profession and our Union. 

If you are interested in  protecting your healthcare and pension, as well as your pay, benefits and working conditions, then please complete the survey below. 

After completing the survey, please send the survey link to at least three other UFT members that you know. Better yet, re-post the survey link on your social media account(s) and/or email the survey link to all your UFT friends and colleagues. We want ALL UFT members to be involved. 

The survey will take about 5 minutes to complete. All personal information you provide will be kept confidential. Let's work together to create a more responsive, more democratic, and stronger UFT. Thank you!

In solidarity,

Chad Hamilton
Special Education Teacher
P231K UFT Chapter Leader
District 75

http://survey.uftmembers.org

ICE Calls For a Unified Effort to Replace Unity Caucus and Bring our Union into the Modern Age

The Independent Community of Educators (ICE), a key advocacy group within the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) since 2003, calls on all UFT members, regardless of political affiliation or caucus connection, to join in a mission to replace Michael Mulgrew and his Unity Caucus and install a broad based leadership that genuinely fights for its members, broadens decision making in the UFT through democratic reforms, and gets tangible results in alignment with the priorities of its members. This effort may require the caucuses to at times restrain themselves from competing with each other to achieve this common goal. Let's build a united front where individuals within the UFT, no matter caucus or not, join in a common effort and aim at restoring a key tenet of unionism—being member drive .

As we witness the growing discontent among our ranks and the erosion our ability to meet the needs of our students and patients, it is clear that the current leadership has failed to meet the needs and expectations of UFT members or protect the people we serve. Our members deserve leaders who are not only committed to advocating for their rights but also capable of delivering meaningful and positive changes for the community as a whole.

In the wake of the historic victories in the Retiree and Paraprofessional chapters, we urge all members to come together and support this movement to bring about the leadership change that our union and our city desperately needs. We need leaders who will prioritize the well-being of educators, support staff, and retirees, and who will stand up to external pressures without resorting to intimidation or bullying tactics. In addition to a leadership that understands what unionism truly stands for and contributes to the elevation of all the people in the city whom we work with and serve.

ICE-UFT envisions a future where UFT leadership is transparent, democratic, and responsive to the concerns of its members. A leadership that fights for its members, instead of focusing on alliances with politicians and administrators that actively work against us. Our voices are being silenced by management and by our union which directly affects us and what we can provide to those who rely on our expertise. 

Our goals include:

Fighting for Members: Ensuring that all negotiations and decisions are made with the input of all members in the best interests of educators, nurses, support staff, and retirees in mind.

Ending Bullying by DOE and UFT Staff: Creating a respectful and supportive environment within our schools and union where every member feels valued and heard.

Achieving Results: Delivering on promises and implementing effective strategies to improve working conditions, compensation, and benefits for all members by activating our membership so they are empowered to advocate for the the conditions and systems that work for all. 

We believe that with new leadership, we can restore trust in the UFT and build a stronger, more unified organization that truly represents and advocates for its members and the people they serve.

We invite all UFT members to join us in this crucial effort. Together, we can bring about the changes necessary to ensure our union remains a powerful and effective advocate for educators, nurses and support staff  who contribute to and serve New York City and its citizens. 

A Victory for Our Voices, A Fight for Our Future: Healthcare on Our Terms

We did it! Michael Mulgrew's reversal on forced Medicare Advantage Plans is a monumental win for UFT retirees. This victory wasn't handed to us – it's the result of tireless grassroots pressure and unwavering resolve.

For too long, the narrative has been: the Union leadership makes decisions, we accept them. But this win flips the script. It proves that our voices have power. It's a reminder that we, the members, are the Union.

This victory exposes a crucial truth: the current leadership structure leaves retirees particularly vulnerable. The secret Medicare Advantage agreement is a glaring example. We need a fundamental shift to ensure our healthcare needs are truly represented.

Here's how we turn this win into lasting change:

Dissolve the Municipal Labor Committee (MLC). Their negotiations ran counter to our interests and shrouded in secrecy. We deserve better.

Demand real negotiations for health and welfare benefits. Every decision impacting our healthcare must involve our input and approval.

Eliminate conflicts of interest. Union-run benefit bureaucracies can prioritize their own agendas over ours. We need independent representation.

Separate retiree and active member healthcare negotiations. This removes conflicts and allows each group's needs to be addressed fairly.

Transparency, transparency, transparency! No more backroom deals. Every negotiation needs to be open and accessible to the membership.

The fight isn't over. We can't trust the current leadership to represent our best interests if they operate in the shadows. Let's harness the power of this victory, demand a transparent, member-driven approach to healthcare, and secure the benefits we deserve.

Together, we can build a stronger UFT that truly fights for ALL its members.