I’m a teacher. I’m also a consumer. So why is a teachers union telling teachers where they should spend their money?
The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), led by its president, Randi Weingarten, has launched a new campaign called “Shop Smart, Support Working Families,” urging its 1.8 million members and their families to skip Target when buying back-to-school supplies.
This isn’t simply a suggestion to support local businesses. The AFT has adopted a formal resolution calling on its members to shop elsewhere and plans to take the boycott to the AFL-CIO, potentially reaching 15 million union members.
The reason? The AFT is unhappy with Target’s response to issues involving immigration enforcement and ICE activity in Minnesota.
But here’s the question: When did telling teachers where to shop become part of a teachers union’s job?
The AFT itself says teachers spend an average of $895 of their own money each year on school-related supplies, totaling approximately $3.4 billion nationwide.
If teachers are spending nearly $900 of their own money, shouldn’t affordability, convenience and choice be the priority?
Instead, the AFT has created a shopping website directing members toward retailers that align with the political priorities of its leadership. The site promotes more than 5,000 retailers and emphasizes businesses with significant union representation.
And that’s where things get interesting.
I explored the website and searched several major cities. Again and again, many of the same large retailers appeared — Safeway, Albertsons, Kroger and Costco.
Where is Walmart?
Walmart is one of the largest retailers in the country. It is everywhere, offers a huge selection of everyday products and is known for competitive prices — including on the very school supplies teachers actually need.
Yet Walmart is noticeably absent.
Could the reason be that Walmart’s corporate leadership and public policy positions tend to be more conservative or business-oriented than those of many retailers promoted by the AFT?
If so, that raises an even bigger question: Is this really a list of affordable alternatives for teachers, or is it a list of retailers whose values align with Randi Weingarten’s?
Teachers deserve to know the difference.
The AFT even tells members that if they prefer to shop online, they should consider Costco. Really? Costco is great for many things, but when teachers need glue sticks, crayons, markers, pencils, folders, construction paper and scissors, Costco isn’t exactly the first place that comes to mind.
And remember — the AFT says teachers are already spending hundreds of dollars of their own money on classroom supplies. Shouldn’t they be free to find the best prices and products wherever they choose?
This isn’t an argument that Target is perfect or that anyone has to shop there. But the picture being presented is incomplete.
Target says it has committed 5 percent of its profits to communities since 1946. In 2025, Target reported one million employee volunteer hours. Through its Target Circle program, customers helped direct $42 million to nearly 8,000 nonprofits in 2025.
Target also supports organizations including Feeding America, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and Big Brothers Big Sisters of America.
For 2026, Target is partnering with nonprofits in 20 communities for back-to-school events, providing students with backpacks, school supplies, snacks and $100 Target gift cards.
Target also has programs supporting schools and teachers.
None of this makes Target perfect. It simply demonstrates the company does give back to the communities where it operates.
What’s really going on here? The AFT acknowledges the campaign is intended to use the collective purchasing power of teachers to put economic pressure on one retailer that dares to deviate from Randi Weingarten’s marching orders.
That’s an important distinction. This isn’t just about helping teachers find school supplies.
It’s about leveraging teachers’ spending power to advance the union’s political and social agenda.
A teachers union can negotiate contracts. It can advocate for better pay. It can fight for safe working conditions. It can represent teachers in the workplace.
But should a teachers union tell educators where they should buy their groceries, classroom supplies or back-to-school items?
Of course not.
Teachers are perfectly capable of deciding which companies they want to support.
If a teacher wants to shop at a local business, they can. If Walmart has the supplies they need at the best price, they should be free to shop there.
If they want to patronize at Target, Costco, Kroger, Albertsons or Safeway, that’s their decision, too.
And if a teacher disagrees with a company’s policies, they can make their own decision about whether to spend their money there.
The AFT says teachers have enormous collective purchasing power, and that’s true. But that power belongs to teachers, not union leadership.
And teachers have another choice that deserves just as much attention: They can choose whether to belong to a union at all.
Freedom of choice shouldn’t stop at the checkout counter. And under the law, eligible public employees can also choose whether to financially support a union.
That is a choice worth exercising thoughtfully.
If a teacher disagrees with a union’s political positions, doesn’t want their dues supporting political activity or simply believes the union no longer represents their priorities, they can choose to opt out of union membership and dues.
The same principle AFT is promoting with consumer choice should apply to teachers themselves. Teachers should be free to choose.
Maybe the real question isn’t just: “Where should teachers shop?”
Maybe it’s: “Why shouldn’t teachers be free to choose everything — including whether a union represents them?”
I became a teacher to teach children, not to be told where to shop or what political causes to support.
My money. My choices. My voice.
And for teachers who don’t agree with the direction of their union, there’s another choice — the freedom to opt out.
