Was it worth shutting down San Francisco schools for a week for a 2% raise?

This highlights a significant moment for the San Francisco Education Alliance, the union representing around 6,000 educators in the city. It’s quite the achievement for them to navigate a strike against the public school district successfully.

They initially sought a raise of 9%. By adding a couple of extra training days each year, they could squeeze out an additional 1%, which adds up to only about one-third of what they originally asked for. So, that’s roughly 3%, not even close to the full raise they aimed for.

Interestingly, unions are framing Friday’s agreement as a win. Sending kids home for ten days, they argue, shows they still hold some bargaining power, signaling that the temporary setback was all worth it for such a minor increase.

Moreover, the union is promoting the district’s commitment to fully finance the teacher health benefits program as a significant victory. But, in reality, this doesn’t seem all that impressive, especially when factoring in the costs involved.

The unions’ struggles can’t simply be chalked up to poor negotiation skills.

In fact, an independent fact-finding commission looking into the dispute sided with the school district, highlighting some notable issues. Even the left-leaning editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle pointed fingers at the union, raising valid concerns.

One critical question they posed was whether teachers are actually seeing raises, given the dismal educational outcomes. And honestly, the answer is pretty clear.

There’s a political motive here, with elections on the horizon. Unions are seizing the moment to showcase their influence.

This isn’t just a San Francisco issue; teachers’ unions across California—from Los Angeles to Sacramento—are taking strike actions against various school districts.

Could it be that all districts are grappling with similar pay and benefit challenges? Or is the underlying theme actually tied to the significance of the approaching 2026 elections?

Politicians depend on labor unions, particularly teachers’ unions, for votes. Union leaders are aware of this and seem eager to remind everyone of their power.

Yet, a new wave of change appears to be blossoming in California, starting right in San Francisco.

Voters are tired. They’ve taken action, recalling certain public officials and choosing a reform-oriented mayor, Daniel Lurie.

This teachers’ strike put Lurie’s leadership to the test. He deserves acknowledgment for striving to alleviate the impact of the strike on San Francisco’s working families, who faced challenges finding childcare during the picketing.

Other leaders in the state might want to take note: when we push back against injustice, we can come out on top.

Unions have a vital role to play. Yet, they seem to have lost touch with their primary purpose of representing teachers, instead pursuing a more political agenda.

At this point, they seem to represent only a narrow set of political interests, and they certainly aren’t advocating for the teachers or the children effectively.

The recent San Francisco strike was unnecessary and should ideally be the last of its kind for quite some time.