MEGHAN PORTFOLIO And FRANK RICCI: Teachers Union Uses ‘Crises’ To Reshape School Governance

“Never waste a good crisis.” That maxim isn’t just for politicians anymore. It has become the operating principle for Randi Weingarten and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

Perceived “emergencies” are treated as opportunities to expand its influence, reshape institutional governance, and lock in union priorities, often at the expense of students and families.

On Jan. 28, Weingarten and the AFT hosted a webinar  titled “Immigration Enforcement A Nation at Risk.” Marketed as a discussion about safety, civil liberties, and how educators should respond to immigration enforcement actions, the event quickly revealed a broader and more troubling agenda.

What began as a conversation about immigration enforcement soon became a case study in how crisis rhetoric can be used to accelerate decision-making, bypass normal governance structures, and transform temporary disruptions into lasting institutional control.

The AFT is not merely reacting to immigration enforcement. It is leveraging the moment to expand bargaining power and normalize yet another failed experiment in virtual learning.

Compassion was the framing; strategy was the objective.

For  years, the AFT has moved far beyond traditional collective bargaining into a form of institutional collectivism that reshapes education policy itself. Contracts are no longer confined to wages, hours, and working conditions. Instead, they are used to shape policy, constrain superintendents and principals, and limit management’s ability to lead and manage school systems effectively.

Contracts are negotiated on behalf of taxpayers and parents, yet those stakeholders are often excluded entirely from the process. Increasingly, unions exploit moments of “crisis” to bypass standard bargaining timelines and school board policies in favor of hastily drafted Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs).

These MOUs carry the full force of contract law, while frequently avoiding public scrutiny, debate, or formal board approval.

During the webinar, Sarina Roher, president of the Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals, stated the strategy plainly, “We all know that contract language is power.” She continued, “Contract language is a way to turn ethical responsibility into enforceable obligation.”

What she described is deliberate use of labor contracts to decide issues that traditionally fall outside the scope of collective bargaining, decisions that rightly belong to elected boards and professional administrators.

That helps explain what unfolded in Minnesota. As immigration enforcement activity increased and student attendance dropped, Saint Paul Public Schools announced a virtual learning option for families who said they no longer felt safe sending their children to school.

Leah VanDassor, president of the Saint Paul Federation of Educators and a webinar presenter, described what followed as a success story. This demonstrates how quickly fear can be converted into permanent policy.

Within days, more than half of Spanish-speaking students were absent. District officials said they were flooded with demands for an online alternative. That pressure produced what VanDassor proudly described: “We wrote an MOU in a day, which in our district is definitely a record.” Under normal circumstances, agreements of this magnitude take weeks or months to negotiate and approve.

That MOU now locks the district into a new operating framework. Unlike formal contracts, MOUs typically require only a single management signature and a single union signature.

State labor laws and collective bargaining agreements often reduce school board authority to one individual, allowing grievance settlements or stipulated agreements to be implemented without the board’s deliberation, vote, or public input.

Nearly one in four students shifted into remote learning almost overnight. There was no academic impact analysis, no assessment of learning loss, no evaluation of mental-health consequences, and no public debate.

According to Fox News, Saint Paul’s “temporary” virtual option has no set end date, while Minneapolis Public Schools plans to end its online option on Feb. 12.

VanDassor presented this as a victory. This is how unions can exploit fear to rewrite school operations, normalize remote learning, and lock significant changes into place through contract language.

Protecting management rights and democratic governance requires training, competence and clear policy frameworks that prioritize transparency and student outcomes over collectivist control.

Boards of Education must first determine whether an issue raised by a union is a mandatory, permissible or illegal subject of bargaining.

If the issue is mandatory, negotiations must explicitly protect the interests of taxpayers and parents. Any agreement reached outside the normal bargaining process should be published on the board’s website within 24 hours including a clear expiration date, and state plainly that the MOU does not establish a past practice or bargaining history.

If the issue is permissive or illegal, it should be addressed through board policy, not labor negotiations.

Ultimately, this debate is not about immigration policy or even virtual learning. It is about power. When unions exploit a crisis to rush agreements, evade public oversight, and hardwire “temporary” measures into binding contracts, democratic governance erodes and students bear the cost.

Crises demand calm leadership, transparency, and accountability, not backroom MOUs that reshape public education without debate. If school boards fail to reassert their authority now, emergency politics will become standard practice, and classrooms will be governed not by what best serves children, but by whatever most rapidly expands union control.

Meghan Portfolio is the Manager of Research and Analysis at Yankee Institute. She is a syndicated columnist in CT writing the Hartford Portfolio.

Frank Ricci is a Fellow at Yankee Institute, past union president for New Haven Fire Fighters and a retired battalion chief. He was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v. DeStefano. He is the author of Command Presence.

(Featured Image Media Credit: Inside My Classroom/Wikimedia Commons)

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].