One-Third of NEA State Affiliates Lost Money in 2009-10
Interesting to see how the unions are under financial pressure (courtesy of EIA's Mike Antonucci):
One-Third of NEA State Affiliates Lost Money in 2009-10. An Education Intelligence Agency analysis of Internal Revenue Service filings reveals more than one-third of the National Education Association's state affiliates lost money in the 2009-10 school year.
EIA created a table, now posted on its web site, that lists the financial figures for NEA and each of its 53 "state" affiliates (50 states plus the directly affiliated Federal Education Association, which represents NEA teachers overseas and on military bases, the University of Hawaii Professional Assembly, and the Utah School Employees Association). The numbers include each union's total revenues, dues income and the amount devoted to employee compensation. The statistics do not include the income of any of NEA's 14,000 locals.
The numbers in the table include not only salaries and benefits for current teacher union staff, but set-asides for their pensions and post-retirement health care. In most cases, the growth in the amount devoted to these purposes greatly exceeded the increases in income.
The figures show that 18 of these affiliates - Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Hawaii, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, UHPA and USEA - took in less revenue in 2009-10 than in the previous year. A 19th - Indiana - was placed under NEA administratorship that year and received a multi-million dollar shot in the arm from the national organization.
NEA and its affiliates collected $1.4 billion in member dues during 2009-10 (and another 181 million from other sources) but spent more than $863 million on salaries and benefits for employed and retired union staffers. Three affiliates - Connecticut, Michigan and New Mexico - spent more on staff than they received in dues.
The 2009-10 figures probably represent the high-water mark in revenues for NEA and its affiliates, as both public spending and union membership have decreased since that time. Staff reductions at NEA headquarters are a harbinger of similar cuts in state affiliates as national bailouts will be much harder to come by.
One more note about interpreting the table: The smaller the ratio of dues-only revenue to total revenue for a particular state affiliate, the more likely that it is dependent on one form or another of NEA subsidies, and will be more susceptible to any budgetary problems at the union's national headquarters.