They know full well that education reform is putting unprecedented pressure on teachers. Increasingly, they hear requests for assistance from members looking to unions for help with problems of practice, not just benefits and grievances. And by embracing professional development as a new role, the national unions could take another step toward forging new organizations that reflect the complexity of teaching. Leaders acknowledge that in the late 1990s, industrial-style unionism is a poor fit with the movement to give teachers more leadership and decisionmaking roles in their schools and districts. But it is also true that, in some districts, union practices themselves are a major barrier to improving professional development.
Contracts can put strict limits on teachers' activities.
Some teachers, steeped in the union mentality, resist putting forth any extra effort if they are not paid for each hour of their time. In the worst cases, teachers walk out of workshops when they've put in their allotted time for the day. Eagle-eyed shop stewards in schools also can discourage willing teachers from getting together with colleagues if it means violating contract rules. Keith B. Geiger, the president of the NEA, admits that too-rigid contracts can harm teachers more than help them, especially as they are expected to take on more tasks. In the whole shared-decisionmaking process, all of us have to look at more flexibility.