Broadly they fall into three camps:
The Union is only as strong as its membership:
This is a point that is made very clearly by a number of people both in responses and in tweets. People point out that it is up to members to shape their union and people such as @emmaannhardy suggest resources to engage with – also pointing out that the a Union can make resources available but can’t force members to use them.
The Unions could do more:
This is a point made by @teachertoolkit who makes the point that we as members pay for union’s work and so the unions should do much more for the profession (You can read his reply in full on the original post). He gives the example of @labourteachers as a good example.
The Unions can’t fight on all fronts:
This is a view that has to be seen in the context of original reason that I started blogging – being that there was a meeting at the Department of Education to which prominent bloggers were invited to discuss the Primary Curriculum.
I am not suggesting that Tim, or edubloggers invited, see themselves as an alternative to unions. As @heymisssmith points out an invitation to a meeting does not compete with the work of activists. But the view is interesting, is it true that Unions are unable to engage in certain debates (when invited) as they are at capacity?