In the spring of 2018, teachers unions had a wave of victories with a string of red
state strikes, but summer brought a major defeat when the Supreme Court ruled
in Janus v. AFSCME that agency fees are unconstitutional.
Before Janus, some states compelled non-union teachers to pay an agency fee to the union
that represented them in contract negotiations.
Agency fees have kept teachers union membership, and revenue, high in these states.
Unions have anticipated this verdict.
In the words of one union president, they are “preparing to become voluntary organizations.”
In advance of Janus, the NEA projected significant losses over two years,
predominantly in agency fee states.
Well... former agency fee states.
Big losses after Janus could easily be a game-changer for national teachers unions, which are among
the most powerful interest groups in American politics, and easily the most powerful on
education issues.
A tight bond with the Democratic Party has worked for unions.
It's been pretty effective blocking unwanted education reforms, and in blocking
attacks on the linchpins of union power, like agency fees.
However, the blocking that has worked well in legislatures, couldn't stop the Supreme Court.
Now, unions will have to go on offense.
But now playing offense will be even harder, because to prove their value to teachers after Janus,
unions will have to do more with less.
One path forward is to close ranks, as
in New York, where unions pushed a state law that would bar non-members from
receiving full union benefits.
Fair enough, but closing ranks may not be the best bet.
At loggerheads with the state and national NEA over political endorsements, Nevada’s
largest local took a radical step in 2018 of disaffiliating from both, and
the losses were staggering.
Perhaps going on offense will avoid such losses if unions can build a bigger tent for members;
one that is focused on local teachers’ concerns first and less on remote political concerns.
But what about the red state strike strategy?
That strategy caught fire in non-agency fee states.
Could that be the unions' answer after Janus?
Maybe, but it will be a tough strategy to bring to the states long used to agency fees.
The red state strikes stood out, in part, because they were the first statewide strikes
since 1990.
But they stood out for other key reasons.
First, they all had legitimate statewide complaints to rally around, like statewide salary schedules,
and markedly low teacher pay.
But only 15 states set teacher pay at the state level, and three of them just went on strike.
So for most teachers, the key rallying point is a district issue, not a state issue.
Those strikes also confronted low state education spending, but that isn’t markedly low across
the country, either.
Another distinction: These strikes were spurred less by unions, which were relatively weak in these states,
and more by local teachers who started Facebook groups
that quickly grew to tens of thousands of members.
The solidarity that galvanized these grassroots movements of “teachers next door” will
be harder to come by for unions easily pegged as special interests.
And here is where unions in agency fee states may prove the victims of their own successes.
Agency-fee states tend to have higher salaries and education funding, leaving them without
salient issues for teachers to rally around.
Unions will have a hard time using the red state strike playbook in the very states where
they expect the heaviest losses.
So it sounds like unions are dead, huh?
Well, not quite.
They'll be smaller. The question is if they'll be a lot different.
While hard times may be coming at the state and national levels, Janus doesn’t
alter the basic reasons teachers join unions: to organize around their common interests
and have a seat at the local bargaining table.
So the most pertinent question may be what will change at the local level,
particularly in agency fee states.
Most locals will get smaller, but smaller unions can take a few different forms.
Here's four possibilities.
First: Many will lose their least committed members, leaving their more ardent supporters
to push for more strident positions.
For instance, groups like the Bad-Ass Teacher Association push locals to be more confrontational.
Where such groups become dominant, expect less stable, and more contentious, education politics.
Second: Many shrinking locals won’t become more strident—but may go dormant—until new
adverse state or district policies awaken a resurgence.
That’s a likely pattern in agency fee states accustomed to bargaining advantages,
that policymakers may now aim to pare down.
However, this pattern could push unions once powered by agency fees to refocus squarely
on local issues.
Third: Other locals could go for a bigger tent. Taking a page from the red state strike playbook,
some locals could shed the strong association with union headquarters and Democratic party priorities.
They could remove party lines to attract a broader coalition of active members.
That route wouldn’t make local politics less contentious, but it would center them
on local teachers’ shared priorities, potentially leading to more representative,
and more durable, local unions.
Finally, some locals might just fade away.
The red state strikes suggest that today there are alternative means of organizing
which could compete for the right to exclusively speak for teachers.
Janus could crack the virtual monopoly unions have representing one of the nation's largest workforces.
School districts will have to bargain, and teachers will be represented on the other side of the table.
How unions evolve, and whether new entrants come on the scene, only time will tell.
But Janus will amount to a historic change in how teachers organize.
What do you think will happen to teachers unions after the Janus verdict?
Let us know in the comments below. And check out the links to my work on Janus in the description.
Also, let us know what other topics you 'd like AEI scholars to cover on "What If?"
and be sure to subscribe for more videos and research from AEI.