Intercepts

Yesterday's little joke about Steven Van Zandt inspired NYC Educator into a serious line of thought about what members want from their union leaders.

NYC Educator is among a substantial group of city teachers who are, shall we say, less than thrilled with United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten. The main accusation is that Weingarten routinely sells out member interests in the name of personal aggrandizement and patronage concerns.

Instead, he suggests, "Let's get a mobbed-up boss and pay a million a year. Two million a year. What's the big deal if we're already paying 40 million a year in patronage? For that, we still have no one to stand up for us. And the fact is we need someone who will stand for us, rather than simply doing whatever advances her personal ambitions."

This is, of course, not an unusual sentiment. The appeal of the enlightened despot has been around nearly as long as despots. Pakistan is even now in the midst of one of its periodic swings between corrupt democrats and benevolent dictators.

But the point is well worth discussing. Teachers' unions are, at their core, agents/advocates. Authors and plaintiffs often seek out representatives with reputations as "jackals" or "sharks." The idea is that if your lawyer is milking McDonald's for millions because you spilled hot coffee on yourself, who cares if he's double-billing you?

There are about a million angles to this and I hope both NYC Educator and I will get reaction from our respective readerships about this concept. Here's one to get the party started:

What do you call it when you pay an individual additional money to get the result you want?