Intercepts
A listening post monitoring public education and teachers’ unions.

I know I made fun of one of those confabs for NEA activists a few years ago, but I can’t find it in my archives anywhere. All my relevant keywords – facilitator, groupthink, kumbaya – turn up nothing. Anyway, you’ll get a better flavor for them from a source with intimate knowledge of the process, and its results: Hans Moleman.

No relation, but this headline is a strange coincidence anyway.

Over at GothamSchools, Elizabeth Green clues us in on the news that the New York State United Teachers are about to affiliate the 1,200-member state lifeguards’ union.

What, you didn’t know New York lifeguards had a union? Not only do they have a union, but even lifeguard supervisors have a  union, complete with allegations of cronyism, featherbedding, and a union president who made more money than the police commissioner.

Why is this a big deal? Well, now there are approximately 30 lifeguards who belong to the New York teachers’ union for every KIPP teacher who belongs to the New York teachers’ union.

The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 in support of an Idaho law banning unions from collecting PAC contributions through payroll deductions.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts expressed the obvious:

The First Amendment prohibits government from “abridging the freedom of speech”; it does not confer an affirmative right to use government payroll mechanisms for the purpose of obtaining funds for expression. Idaho’s law does not restrict political speech, but rather declines to promote that speech by allowing public employee checkoffs for political activities.

It isn’t immediately clear how the decision will affect other states, except it will very likely lead to the reestablishment of Utah’s paycheck protection law, the review of which was delayed by the U.S. 10th District Court of Appeals, pending the outcome of the Idaho case.

The Idaho Education Association declared itself “disappointed” in the ruling and suggested it would solicit PAC contributions through electronic transfer.

A proposed bill in the Utah legislature would ban school districts from contributing to the salaries of release-time union presidents. It’s customary for local unions to reimburse districts for the cost of a substitute, but some contracts have the district sharing the cost.

It’s the usual political wrestling match, but I found one particular union argument against the bill to be curious.

“Local association presidents, however, say there’s nothing wrong with receiving part of their salaries from districts. Susan Firmage, Davis Education Association president, said 95 percent of what she does as association president is for the district. Firmage makes more than $50,000 a year — the same she made as a teacher — half of which is paid by the district and half by the union.”

If this is true, then why is the union paying half her salary for only 5 percent of her time?

Click here to read:

1) Latest NEA State-by-State Membership Numbers
2) Last Week’s Intercepts
3) Quotes of the Week

You have your choice today. For light entertainment, you can head over to Eduwonk and enter the Rename the No Child Left Behind Act contest (promoted in yesterday’s New York Times), vote in Education Week‘s teacher seniority poll, and play the Fordham Foundation’s Accountability Illusion Game.

For more serious fare, check out The Quick and the Ed for teacher pension incentives, and Alexander Russo‘s background story on the KIPP unionization drive in New York. The UFT put him in touch with a teacher who attended a meeting to discuss unionizing, but not with the teachers who called the meeting. Hmmm.