NEA Encourages Students to Skip School

May 1st, known as May Day, saw activists around the country participating in synchronized protests under the slogan “No work, no school, no shopping.”

This movement embodies broad political themes, such as immigration reform, cultural discussions, and domestic partisan disputes.

The National Education Association (NEA), which is the largest labor union in the U.S. with approximately 3 million members, joined other organizations in endorsing this initiative. They even provide a “Solidarity Toolkit” on their website for those wanting to engage.

Understanding May Day

Unions have long celebrated May Day as a crucial part of the labor movement, and its origins can be traced back to the late 19th century and the fight for an eight-hour workday.

However, the celebration also carries a complex history. Over the 20th century, it became strongly linked with socialism and the global communist movement. In the U.S., it frequently resurfaces as a platform for broader political dissent.

This overarching political agenda is reflected in some of the NEA’s highlighted demands:

• “Stop the Trump administration’s billionaire takeover and rampant corruption.”
• “Stop attacks on our communities, including policies that target immigrants, people of color, indigenous people, people with disabilities, and people who identify as LGBTQ+.”

These issues go beyond traditional labor concerns, venturing into a wide array of political discussions.

NEA’s Mission

This situation raises an important question: How do these actions align with NEA’s stated goals?

The NEA describes its mission as uniting members to advocate for educational professionals and to fulfill the promise of public education in an increasingly diverse world.

Encouraging participation in protests that seem to dismiss educational priorities poses a significant concern regarding their mission. And May Day is just one example of a larger pattern.

According to a recent report, teachers’ unions have allocated over $1 billion to political activities since 2015, with significant portions at both federal and local levels.

Some of that spending is fairly predictable. For instance, unions invested over $20 million in California to support Proposition 15, a ballot initiative aimed at increasing funding for public schools, though it ultimately didn’t pass.

Yet, a lot of their funding extends far beyond such initiatives.

Political Spending

The investigation shows that unions also contribute tens of millions to major Democratic support organizations, like:

• $32 million to Senate Majority PAC;
• $25 million to House Majority PAC;
• $60 million to the State Engagement Fund;
• $44 million to For Our Future, a group focused on bolstering voter turnout.

Additionally, at the state level, unions are heavily involved in political battles, actively opposing school choice measures and backing various candidates.

In California, for instance, the California Teachers Association PAC spent $1.8 million opposing the Gavin Newsom recall in 2021 and has pledged significant funds for upcoming election measures.

The same report also mentions financial backing for organizations like Midwest Academy, which aims to give activists the skills needed for systemic change.

Since 2015, the NEA has contributed $1.7 million for creating activist training resources tied to ongoing protests.

The Role of Teachers Unions

Teachers’ unions have always engaged in politics, especially when it relates to direct classroom concerns like salaries, school funding, or working conditions.

However, as their activities broaden into political mobilization, election campaigning, and now protests, making the connection to classroom priorities increasingly challenging.

Unlike standard political organizations, teachers’ unions are funded by member dues, which educators typically pay due to professional requirements. So, their political influence takes on a different character compared to ordinary advocacy groups.

The underlying question isn’t really whether unions should be entirely apolitical, but rather if their current focus truly reflects the needs and priorities of educators and the students they serve.