I didn't actually attend the Democrats for Education reform panel where the union bashing happened, but I met Dana at their reception and it turns out that bashing unions=really delicious food and so I sort of see the attraction. Even so, it's a shame. Demonizing unions won't get reformers anywhere. You're not going to get anywhere with the schools if you're not bringing teachers along. Having panels composed of corporate leaders and big city politicians and no teachers doesn't exactly enhance credibility or aid in efforts to co-opt educators. More often than not, it'll just get reforms trashed. But for the unions, resisting most any attempt at innovation or labor flexibility in school districts that are in an advanced state of decay shreds their credibility among vast numbers of potential people -- and anecdotally, since most folks experience unions through teachers unions (a lot of people have kids and visit their classrooms, very few tour manufacturing plants), when teacher's unions sacrifice their credibility they end up doing harm to the labor movement more broadly. It's an extraordinarily dysfunction dynamic, and it exists in no small part because labor leaders and reformers hate each other, and don't trust even anodyne proposals or objections as being offered in good faith. This doesn't keep the reformers from feeling superior or the unions from keeping their contracts, but it's pretty bad for kids. If the union leaders and the reformers would think through Dana's piece. on the disconnect evident at this convention, both would be better off.
