Staff Reports
The New York Post this week dropped a bomb: it says American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten tapped union staff, contractors and vendor work that add up to more than $1.4 million to produce and promote her trade book, Why Fascists Fear Teachers. If true, this isn’t a memoir — it’s a union-funded vanity tour. Union members should be furious, and Congress should stop smiling politely and actually demand the receipts.
What the filings really show
The allegation rests on the AFT’s public LM‑2 financial report, which lists vendor payments and payroll for the union’s reporting year. Reporters and watchdogs have pointed to line items like roughly $171,715 paid to a PR firm and other six‑figure disbursements to vendors such as limousine services. The AFT also continues to promote the book on its own web pages and in union communications. The LM‑2 doesn’t always spell out the exact purpose for every dollar, but when a union is actively advertising a leader’s commercial title while paying contractors and staff, the optics are terrible.
Why this matters to union members (and taxpayers)
Union dues are supposed to go to bargaining, legal defense, member services and organizing — not to bankroll a president’s commercial book project. This isn’t abstract. Millions of Americans pay dues or support public education, and they deserve clear answers about whether their money is funding advocacy for the union’s mission or the boss’s brand. Congressional oversight has already been sniffing around; Chairman Tim Walberg and Chairman Rick W. Allen asked questions before. Now those questions should be sharpened into subpoenas if the answers stay fuzzy.
What AFT and Weingarten owe the public
The AFT will likely say the book is part of its mission to defend public education and democracy. That’s a convenient talking point when the union’s own pages are selling the book and payments to PR firms match the timing of promotional pushes. The straightforward fix is transparency: publish the contracts, invoices, and time sheets that link staff and vendor work to official union business. If any dollars were used primarily to benefit an officer’s personal commercial enterprise, ethics rules and labor law may have been crossed — and union members should expect remedies.
Call it a vanity project or call it an institutional campaign, but don’t call it settled. The $1.4 million figure is an allegation drawn from public filings that deserve verification. In the meantime, union leaders who mix personal ambition with members’ money should be ready for probing questions and real consequences. Union accountability isn’t a partisan hobby; it’s basic respect for the people who pay the bills.
