Union leaders, school officials, and administrators are sounding a collective alarm: state and federal cuts are pushing public education to the brink. Late last month, members of AFT Connecticut affiliates gathered in Hartford for the 2026 CT Education Issues Summit to demand the investment and protections our students and educators deserve.

The January 28 event was co-organized with the Connecticut Education Association (CEA) and advocacy partners in the Connecticut Association Boards of Education (CABE) and the Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents (CAPSS). The purpose was to elevate real solutions for a workforce under strain and a looming funding crisis.

“Educators and support personnel are being asked to do more with less at a time when students need more than ever,” said AFT Connecticut Vice President for PreK-12 Leslie Blatteau (left, in collage, above). “Chronic disinvestment and political attacks from Washington have pushed schools to a breaking point. We are demanding that leaders act now to protect our kids and communities.”

The Workforce Crisis

The day opened with a deep dive into the recruitment and retention crisis. Panels featuring PSRP and higher education members highlighted how stagnant compensation and top-down mandates are driving talented professionals out of the classroom.

Don Akew (second from left, above), Meriden Federation of Paraprofessionals member, said, “you have to decide if you’re going to do something you love, like working with kids, because that doesn’t pay the bills. Especially new paras are forced to decide if they’re gonna stick around. I’ve seen many great paras just bow out after a year because they couldn’t figure out how to make things work.”

Jan Perruccio (second from right, above), CSU-AAUP member, added, “once we get people in the profession, give them a seat at the table. Constantly having top-down mandates really begins to erode educators’ feelings that they are important. Sometimes they find themselves doing things in the classroom that don’t make sense for their children.”

Defending the Freedom to Teach

The conversation shifted to the increasing politicization of the classroom. Former U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona shared national insights, followed by a discussion on the importance of maintaining job protections against censorship and “cancel culture.”

“We should always have encouraged more debate, dialogue and dissenting opinion,” said Quinnipiac AAUP member Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox (right, above). “Maybe we shouldn’t have been so quick to ‘cancel’ and dismiss controversial speakers. There has to be a place for figuring out how we can allow controversy to have a space for dialogue.”

The Privatization Threat

A “working lunch” moderated by AFT Connecticut President Jan Hochadel featured national AFT President Randi Weingarten, U.S. Rep. Jahana Hayes, and author Josh Cowen. The panel focused on the dangers of the federal “One, Big Beautiful Bill Act” and the expansion of tax credits that drain resources from public schools.

Josh Cowen described voucher schemes as a bait-and-switch for families.

“Why I call vouchers education’s version of predatory lending is that it gives parents this false hope that everybody’s gonna go to the Hotchkiss School,” he said. But, in fact, you take the coupon, and there’s no ‘room at the inn’ for you. That’s the most dangerous and insidious part of this.”

The Path Forward

The summit concluded with a unified mandate: lawmakers must prioritize public education investment and safeguard the profession before further damage is done. Our members remain committed to leading this charge in the legislature and in our communities.

Editor’s note: includes contributions by Lesia Day, CEA.

The post Uniting to “Protect Our Kids and Communities” first appeared on AFT Connecticut.

Our national “Real Solutions for Higher Education” campaign is actively countering attempts to undermine academia by advocating for increased college accessibility. Leaders of our AFT Connecticut-affiliated CSU-AAUP notched a major victory earlier this year by extending free tuition to the state’s four public universities. In a recent interview for AFT’s “American Educator,” Chapter President Louise Williams (left, in collage, above) and Secretary John O’Connor (right) shared how they took action for their students and to “advance the common good:”

AMERICAN EDUCATOR EDITORS: Connecticut currently has a pathway for debt-free community college. How does that work?

LOUISE WILLIAMS: Connecticut’s four state universities and one community college with 12 campuses are part of a single system, the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities, with one board of regents. In 2019, the state legislature passed a bill that created the Mary Ann Handley Award to cover community college tuition and enable students to complete associate’s degrees debt-free. It is a “last-dollar” program that covers the remaining costs of tuition and fees after financial aid is used. Importantly, students are not expected to take out loans as part of their financial aid. There’s also a basic needs grant of up to $1,000 that covers anything from books to childcare for students whose tuition and fees are covered by a Pell Grant.

The program has been successful in the community colleges. Last year, it served more than 13,000 students. Students receiving these funds are 17 percent more likely to persist from fall to spring and 9 percent more likely to graduate than their peers who are not receiving the funds.

JOHN O’CONNOR: This higher education program is important because Connecticut is one of the wealthiest states in the nation, yet it is defined by serious levels of inequality. The progressive movement in Connecticut often points out that there are “two Connecticuts,” where opportunities and outcomes in the state are defined by our zip codes. One’s prospects in East Hartford are very different than those in West Hartford; same in Bridgeport and Westport.

How did you plan to make four-year degrees more accessible?

WILLIAMS: Extending the PACT/Handley Award – now renamed the Finish Line Scholars program – into the state universities was a broad, collective struggle. Our CSU-AAUP colleagues drafted a bill to extend the debt-free program to the four state universities. A version of that bill was folded into the state budget, creating a program in which students who received the PACT/Handley Award for community college will now be eligible for two more years of support at the state universities. We’d like to eventually expand this program to other students, so they can complete all four years at a state university without incurring huge debt.

Union members, students, community allies, union siblings, and legislators all worked in unison to get the win. We found sponsors in the legislature to introduce the bill, lobbied politicians, held a public hearing in the higher education committee, and got about 100 people to testify. Faculty and students continued their advocacy right up to the end of the legislative session. It was a real nail-biting experience – the program was in and out of the budget, changing by the hour. But we never stopped advocating. And we succeeded.

In all honesty, we didn’t think we would win, but we did. We got much further than we expected – and we’ll be back next year to push it further.

O’CONNOR: It is a CSU-AAUP victory for our members, staff, lobbyists, and students, but it is also a victory for all progressive forces in the state. You don’t win something like this without a lot of help. CSU-AAUP is part of two important coalitions that stood with us. Both the Connecticut For All coalition, which is made up of 60 labor, community, and religious groups, and SEBAC (the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition), made up of 15 public sector unions, understood that public higher education is about opportunity and progress, so they lined up behind our bill.

Our campaign benefited from, but also strengthened, the relationship between CSU-AAUP and AFT Connecticut. And the national AFT and the Real Solutions for Higher Education crew forced us to think through key elements of the campaign. The Real Solutions grant we won from the national AFT allowed us to engage student interns to help us demonstrate the importance of this program in a clear, compelling way. It was students who testified in favor of the bill, held a press conference, and pushed the politicians.

WILLIAMS: While our main focus was on expanding opportunities for students, the added funds that the Finish Line Scholars program will bring to our university campuses are also much needed. Since the Great Recession in 2008, funding for public higher education has remained flat, meaning it hasn’t kept up with inflation. This has created a vicious cycle in which tuition goes up and enrollment goes down. We’re hoping that expanding the debt-free program will save our universities from austerity politics at a time when higher education is more important than ever.

Politically, we have a trifecta in Connecticut: a Democratic governor and Democrats controlling both houses of the state legislature. If we cannot fully support debt-free higher education for more residents, our public higher education institutions are in trouble. Connecticut should be a model for all the other states. We want to help our students, but we see this as a much bigger issue about the value of higher education.

O’CONNOR: In the past, there was a pipeline from our community colleges to our state universities. That pipeline has become broken, likely because of permanent austerity causing tuition increases and because of COVID-19. We are hoping to reestablish that pipeline.

WILLIAMS: The AFT’s Real Solutions for Higher Education campaign says it all: it’s about access, affordability, and equity. There are many people in Connecticut who do not have access to higher education – and many of our students face significant challenges. Some are first generation or come from less well-resourced high schools. John mentioned the inequities across Connecticut. Debt-free community college is a good start. Expanding access to bachelor’s degrees by itself will not end those disparities. But it will help.

Why is expanding access particularly important now, as we face democratic backsliding?

O’CONNOR: I believe we can trace today’s democratic backsliding to the causes and consequences of neoliberal policies that have been in effect for more than 40 years. Neoliberalism, in its essence, is about a massive transfer of resources from the bottom and middle to the top – dramatically increasing inequality, narrowing opportunity, and making life difficult for working families. In order for corporate America, and the politicians loyal to corporate America, to engineer such a massive transfer of resources and have their policies virtually unopposed for so long, they had to depoliticize the population and destroy progressive forces. Politicized folks tend to be highly engaged. They follow the news, track what their representatives are doing, build coalitions to make their voices heard, and ensure that others know what is happening at the local, state, and federal levels. Depoliticized folks are often too focused on surviving and do not “interfere” with corporate America’s agenda. Ultimately, that’s what’s driving the far right’s attack on higher education.

A university education helps people develop the ability to dissent and to participate in democratic decision-making in a real, concrete way. For most people who have power, who have wealth, the last thing they are interested in is meaningful democracy. The elite can pay for their children to attend private universities, so they understand that it’s in their interests to starve public universities.

WILLIAMS: Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the private universities lobbied hard against our bill.

O’CONNOR: Not long ago, higher education in the United States was hailed as “the great equalizer.” But today, higher education institutions consolidate the inequality that exists. Connecticut can afford to change course. We have over $4 billion in our rainy-day fund – we just needed lawmakers who were willing to make access to a bachelor’s degree a top priority.

WILLIAMS: The governor has been saying recently that if the federal government starts doing anything to withhold money from Connecticut, he may be willing to get around some of the state’s spending caps to deal with that loss. So far, he’s not willing to get around the spending caps to support higher education. His recent biennial budget is like previous ones that did not provide adequate funding for operations without cuts or tuition increases. He seems to have bought into the notion that people should pay for their own higher education. But when austerity politics result in higher education being so expensive that it’s impossible to afford even for those with a full-time job, that isn’t realistic. Many of my students work full-time, and they simply can’t afford college. Even many of my students from middle-class families have to drop out. Politicians complain that our retention rates aren’t very good, but they overlook the reason that students are being shut out of higher education.

Our bill focused on the neediest students – but our long-term goal is for Connecticut’s state universities to be tuition-free for all four years for everyone who would have to go into debt to afford a bachelor’s degree.

O’CONNOR: To create a vibrant and serious democracy, we’re going to have to re-politicize people – that is, empower them to say no. Making higher education free is an important first step. But we also need to revitalize our unions and social movements. Being organized and in the streets is critical for making our voices heard.

WILLIAMS: It is interesting that a union, CSU-AAUP, is pushing for free tuition. Some people have said to me, “Why are you doing that? That’s not about faculty wages or benefits.” But it is about saving higher education, not just for faculty, but for students and for the nation. So, it’s the union movement that is really pushing for this.

How does higher education bolster democracy?

WILLIAMS: When we think about Connecticut’s neediest students, inner cities like Hartford and New Haven come to mind. But we also have a great deal of rural poverty and isolation. One of the great benefits of our state universities is bringing these students together, along with their wealthier peers. In my classroom, we create a community where people have to talk to one another and discuss their assumptions. They look at the facts and have to think critically.

When students from very diverse backgrounds listen and talk to each other, I see the transformation in them. They come in with certain assumptions, but as they examine evidence, hear others’ perspectives, and think independently, they develop their own ideas. Thankfully, we don’t just have students from different parts of the state. We have a lot of students from different countries, and we have a lot of students from immigrant families. This gives my students many different perspectives to consider.

I taught a course last semester in which we engaged in complex role-playing games about historical events and eras like the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution. The big questions were about democracy and opportunity: Who should vote? Why is it important to vote? When do revolutions happen? Why did the French Revolution happen? What is the role of the government in helping the poor? Should we have a minimum wage? Students debated real-world issues, and they viewed issues from all sides.

O’CONNOR: Higher education is one of the few institutions within our society that can provide a critique of that society. That is not something we should censor; it’s something we should celebrate and strengthen.

WILLIAMS: We introduce students to ideas, events, and people they would never know about otherwise. In a course I teach on the British Empire, students learn about political systems and cultures. We engage in an elaborate game on the creation of India and Pakistan as independent states. My students understand what’s going on now between India and Pakistan because they have studied the issues, including the issues of the Hindus as opposed to those of the Muslims. They understand cultural differences. That’s what history is: a storehouse of human experience. I’m not telling them what’s right or wrong, or what they should believe. I’m giving them options. I’m saying, “Here’s one way things were done. Here’s another way things were done. Here are the consequences.”

What are the next steps with the change you have won?

WILLIAMS: We’ve done a great job in winning this, but there is more to do. Given what is happening in our nation right now, all of higher education needs to be defended. Just bringing up the issue and focusing on higher education is really important. But we’ll keep fighting year after year for our students to have the debt-free access they deserve. There is more work to do.

O’CONNOR: We are committed as a union to expanding access to our state universities. So we’re going to continue to fight.

WILLIAMS: I agree with John, and I also draw broader lessons from our fight. I think it’s important for people to know that regardless of what happens, you have to try and you have to push. Whatever injustice you see that you want to address, try. You may get further than you think. But even if you don’t, you’ll still bring an important issue to light.

O’CONNOR: Given the unprecedented moment we’re in, the only way forward is to continue to build stronger connections with one another. Part of that is building stronger unions – unions that are embedded in our communities.

How do we advance the common good? We have to stand up for each other. This brings us back to when the labor movement in the United States was very healthy and could think beyond its own members. When the union movement was robust and strong, when we thought about class and community, when we thought about increasing opportunities for all working people. The way forward at this moment is to think about what labor did very well in the past and do that today.

The post Safeguarding Our Democracy by Empowering the Next Generation first appeared on AFT Connecticut.

Study after study has found that family-friendly policies improve performance by increasing productivity, morale and loyalty while also reducing absenteeism, turnover and “brain drain.” In a recently published op-ed, a member of our AFT Connecticut-affiliated UConn-AAUP chapter called out her employer’s failure to ensure access to paid parental leave for all of its workforce. Associate Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology Sarah Hird (at right, in photo, above) urged University of Connecticut officials to right this wrong and “to believe in a better future:”

When I was two to three weeks postpartum (living in California), I was at home with a seemingly healthy baby but I was falling apart.

I was getting less than 90 minutes of sleep at a time (because my baby had lost “too much” weight and I was told to feed him every 90 minutes around the clock); post-partum depression made it feel like breastfeeding a baby for the next six months was functionally equivalent to infinity and I thought I would never smile again; I had a seven inch incision healing across my lower abdomen and an itchy rash all over my body from a reaction to the anesthetic of the c-section.

What medicine for me would be safe for the baby? Did I have mastitis? Did I eat anything today? Why is he crying? Why isn’t he crying? Why am I crying? Ah yes, because my nipples are bleeding.

Difficult postpartum experiences like mine are common following the birth of a child. Put simply: recovering from birth takes time. Bonding with a newborn takes time. Adjusting to the new reality of parenthood takes time. But these investments provide the foundations for healthy families and productive workers.

I started at the University of Connecticut with a 1- and a 2-year-old and was shocked to hear stories from faculty who had babies here. Some were back in front of a classroom before I would have even been cleared to lift my baby (the incision hadn’t healed). One faculty member was on campus when his wife fell down the stairs carrying their newborn. Another had only one day off teaching before being back in a classroom – while his newborn twins were in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in New Haven. Yet another was at the emergency room in another state with their adoptive 3-day-old son while teaching her classes, abruptly moving them online but without interruption.

I have personally heard dozens of similar stories from UConn faculty spanning departments and decades and they all share this in common: UConn professors get zero days of guaranteed paid family leave.

UConn currently lets every pregnant/expecting individual reinvent the wheel, cobbling together a leave plan with whatever resources and departmental grace they can muster. The bottom line is that no person recovering from birth should take on the task of leading a classroom of college students. Because even standard new parent difficulties like spit-up-on-my-shirt-has-made-me-late or sleep-deprivation-has-muddled-my-brain can negatively affect students.

And while insufficient parental leave is suboptimal for students, for new parents it is downright cruel. And what do we gain from this cruelty? We get worse educators in the classroom, less creative and less productive scientists in the lab, unreliable committee members and poor decision makers.

The administrators at UConn are guaranteed 12 weeks of paid family leave. The graduate students at UConn are guaranteed six weeks of paid leave (birthing parent). Connecticut state law ensures all workers get 12 weeks paid family leave but UConn professors are exempt from that law because of our union. I’ll say it again: UConn professors get nothing. Zero guaranteed paid family leave.

The paid part is essential. New professors, frequently people of prime ages for starting or growing a family, have spent years on stipends and low postdoctoral salaries, likely moved across the country for their job multiple times, and thus may have started their faculty position with little to no savings.

Good professors leave UConn for a lack of family leave and resources – after we’ve invested substantial funds in their salaries and research groups. With a humane and robust and automatic (meaning, not dependent on someone judging then approving of your need) family leave policy, UConn could recruit and retain faculty of the highest caliber, while simultaneously creating a community that supports families. Everyone – from newborns to the elderly – needs care at some point. Minimizing the bureaucracy involved with meeting that need benefits us all.

This has been a fight on parents’ radars for decades but various local and national crises always let it fade into the background. Families are the fundamental unit of society and we cannot let this go any longer. Yes, it will cost money. But that’s what society is for. To invest in, to believe in a better future.

UConn President Radenka Maric’s email signature claims: “Our expert researchers, faculty, staff, and alumni drive Creativity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship (CIE) for a better tomorrow. We fuel the State’s economy and are committed to inclusion with emotional intelligence in benefiting the greater good. This is UConn. STUDENTS FIRST, UCONN ALWAYS. HUSKIES FOREVER.”

The moral, ethical and humane choice for a better tomorrow that benefits the greater good through inclusion and emotional intelligence (that also puts students first) is obvious: professors deserve guaranteed paid family leave. Yes. “This is UConn.” But it could and should be better.

The post Standing Up for Paid Parental Leave for All first appeared on AFT Connecticut.