Why young educators reject teachers` union

Teachers appearing in the Educational Broadcasting System documentary “Teachers Have Changed” seem more interested in becoming good teachers than in engaging political struggle. Most teachers with sound ideology and common sense regret hearing criticism that school teachers are not as knowledgeable and enthusiastic in teaching than tutors at private cram schools, and thus aspire to learn how to teach better. Has the progressive Korea Teachers and Educational Workers’ Union recognized this change in understanding among young teachers, and what can it do to support them?

According to review materials presented at an interim meeting of the union’s representatives Tuesday and compilation of educational statistics by the Korea Educational Development Institute, the portion of 20-something teachers in the union declined from 5.3 percent in 2009 to 2.1 percent this year. The proportion of union membership by all teachers has declined, but those in their 20s have effectively shunned joining the union. This can be attributed in part to people in their 20s being more interested in self-development and quality of life rather than politics. Yet this trend should be construed as reflecting distrust in the progressive union by young teachers due to the union`s overly political and ideological nature.

According to the union’s own survey, 49.4 percent of non-union member teachers say they are less than enthusiastic about joining due to the union`s “overly political and violent activities.” This means more than half of non-unionized teachers are negative toward the union for its political activities that have nothing to do with the essence of the union`s mission, which include education and teacher welfare. Young teachers also feel burdened over the union’s method of struggle, which causes conflict with school principals, colleagues and parents. Such questionable methods by the union include teachers’ declarations against political issues and calls for struggle, rejection of a national scholastic assessment test, and opposition to teacher incentives.

Considering the way the union has behaved, this sentiment was largely predictable. In 2005, a teacher took some 180 students and parents to a memorial ceremony for "ppalchisan," communist militia in South Korea who were active after the Korean War. Another teacher taught in an elementary school class that the Anti-Communist Act was a law enacted to justify the stripping of civil rights from populists and oppressing them. The union also took the lead in protests against Korea’s resumption of U.S. beef imports, and is now demanding a halt to the construction of a naval base on Jeju Island opposing the appointment of new Prosecutor General nominee Han Sang-dae. Why should a teachers’ union, which is supposedly not a political group, protest the construction of a naval base?

The practice of violent struggle by the teachers union, which uses outdated ideology, is the root cause for its waning influence. Whichever type it is, any organization shunned by the younger generation is doomed to lose its vitality and energy. If the union fails to grasp the trend of young teachers shunning membership and does not change, it has no future. In contrast, glimmers of hope can be found in Korean education from among the ranks of young teachers, who have realized the union’s falsehood and made a rational judgment.