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.
It is almost November and there is still NO group of folks who are going to run against the Unity Machine. Any group will need to collect thousands of signatures to get on the spring election ballot.
ReplyDeleteWhile I appreciate the great work by militant retirees and the United for Change opposition on the health care issue, none of the opposition caucuses seem connected to the working teachers. Specifically, I’m referring to the professional issues in the classroom and the schools.
ReplyDeleteFrom every thing that I have seen and heard, the system is in crises, and the kids are suffering from very poor educational practices. The changes brought in over the last 30 years have created a system that fails the students and makes little sense to the teachers. In fact it has led to a degradation of the teaching profession leaving a generation of teachers that lack the knowledge, understanding and skills to teach critical thinking and college readiness.
Although United for Change campaigned on the issue of getting rid of high stakes testing, Danielson, abusive supervisors, and unreasonable performance expectations, the elected 7 opposition high school members who won seats on the UFT Executive Committee have done nothing about any of this, aside from a little angry rhetoric. In the schools, I have seen no organizing or educating of the members that is a pre-requisite for any teacher activism.
In the UFT, as with any established American union, activism must come from below, especially the young, to push the established leadership. The “activists” complain about the conditions and the Union leadership but their role is to suggest and push for reform and they have failed to do so.
UFT leadership will tell you that they have successfully saved teachers’ jobs and careers and they are right. They will also tell you, correctly, that NY State has the highest teacher salaries in the country and that our pension system is quite good compared to everyone else.
The reforms pushed by Bloomberg and the business class reformers were meant to break the union and fire thousands of teachers. This was prevented by opposition activists, working with the union leadership. That activism included major mobilization, rallies, and successful court cases. We pushed Mulgrew and Mulgrew moved. Just like he has done on health care. While UFC launches into personal attacks against Unity officials, Leroy Barr will stand up at a meeting, pointing out that none of the opposition complaints mention the needs of the students nor the day to day misery faced by the working teachers nor the union’s enemies still active out there that are behind the attacks on teachers and our schools. There remains an entire national political class, both Republican Party AND Democratic Party that wants to smash unions, eliminate pensions, control the classroom, AND privatize retiree health care.
Lap top militancy is not activism. By the way, one of the elephants in the room: Aside from the health care issue, there is absolutely no unity of purpose among the United for Change caucus partners. James Eterno, the individual who cobbled together a unifies slate among the caucuses, has sadly passed away and there is no one now capable of filling that role.
Educate. Organize. Mobilize.
You’ve captured many of the complexities facing educators today and the challenges in pushing for meaningful change within the union. It’s clear there’s a shared concern among many of us about the system’s failure to support students and teachers effectively and how disconnected some of the union’s leadership can feel. However, I think it’s important to recognize that the opposition is making strides and that many current teachers feel optimistic about the work being done—even if the impacts may not yet be immediately visible.
ReplyDeleteThe United for Change (UFC) coalition, for example, is not just composed of retirees but includes a broad base of active teachers who work in classrooms every day and are fully invested in seeing improvements in professional conditions, student outcomes, and classroom practices. These members respect and look to the militant retirees who continue to champion critical issues, including health care, as a source of wisdom and experience. They see them as models of sustained activism and are actively seeking to integrate that spirit into their day-to-day work in schools.
You’re absolutely right to say that real union reform often requires a bottom-up approach, and in some ways, this is exactly what we’re seeing emerge from United for Change. Active members are engaging with young teachers, organizing discussions within schools, and even building networks to tackle issues like oppressive supervision, unrealistic performance metrics, and the overemphasis on high-stakes testing. This isn’t to say that progress is happening overnight; systemic change is always slow, particularly in a union as complex as the UFT. But the seeds are being planted, and a foundation for real activism is growing.
The challenges of activism in today’s union landscape are real, especially with political pressures from both sides of the aisle, as you pointed out. But these challenges also underscore why so many active teachers are willing to push forward, despite the frustrations. The larger political class may indeed be aiming to undermine public education, weaken unions, and erode our benefits and protections, but that is precisely why many are not giving up the fight. It’s no secret that some of the opposition caucuses within UFC don’t always see eye-to-eye on every issue; however, there is unity on the core belief that our schools, our students, and our colleagues deserve better.
As for Leroy Barr’s comments, it’s fair to acknowledge that our students' needs are the reason many teachers become activists. For many UFC members, improving our schools for students and advocating for working teachers' rights are two sides of the same coin. We can support each other in a way that uplifts students by creating a teaching environment that respects and values educators. Addressing classroom concerns is, in fact, a direct way of supporting our students, and this is a central focus of UFC’s agenda.
It’s easy to become disillusioned and view the current environment as static, but many younger teachers are stepping up, inspired by the retirees and seasoned teachers who have fought hard battles before. They’re learning from past victories and mistakes and bringing a renewed sense of purpose to union activism, which we should all encourage. The new generation of educators, working alongside retired advocates, are gradually forming a powerful force that we hope will ultimately create real change within the UFT.
The call to “Educate. Organize. Mobilize.” resonates deeply across UFC, uniting educators who believe that the union can serve both teachers and students more effectively. So while the journey may be challenging, I believe it’s one we’re well on our way to achieving—thanks to the partnership between committed, active educators and the wisdom of our retirees. Together, we can strengthen the foundation for a union that truly represents the needs of its members and the communities we serve.