Is a 10 year deal with teachers' union good for B.C.? Laila Yuile weighs in

Columnists Laila Yuile and Brent Stafford battle over the issues of the day.
From: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/06/02/premiers-meddling-derailed-respectful-tone-of-current-negotiations

This week’s topic:

Is a 10-year deal with the teachers’ union good for B.C.?

This week, I'd like to welcome Brent Stafford to the Duel, and wish him the best of luck. This week we take on yet another one of Premier Christy Clark's Fantasy Island solutions for the province. This time, it's the proposed 10-year contract Clark wants for teachers, which has predictably surfaced again post-election.

Like many parents, I have experienced up close the impact of labour disputes between the teachers and employers. So have my children. I don't agree with some of the tactics that have been used by teachers and the union in past disputes — in particular not filling out report cards, which is the only indicator many parents have of how their child is performing in school. Many people agree with me on that point, whether they are parents or not. Clearly it is our children who suffer when job action escalates.

Read Brent Stafford's column

The B.C. Teachers’ Federation has historically been seen to work on an agenda that isn't always supported by its own members. Recognizing that there had to be a better way to conduct bargaining and negotiations, teachers and the BC Public School Employers’ Association sat down and agreed upon a respectful framework to continue talks.

It appeared to be going well — until Clark told the employers to toss out everything and push for a 10-year contract. It's Clark's way, or the highway, and it changes the current respectful tone of negotiations to one that's clearly confrontational.
A 10-year contract with teachers might be good for the government, but is it good for the province as a whole? Absolutely not. The teachers and the employers had been quietly and peacefully negotiating for several months prior to the election, and were about to resume this week. It's not even a case of good intentions with bad execution. This is nothing but public relations and bad politics.
The reason why contracts are generally negotiated for a period of three to four years is to allow both sides to re-assess factors such as inflation and the economy, which impact both an employer and workers. No one can predict what the situation is going to be like four years down the road. Is this really about education and children, or is this about setting a precedent and sending a message to other unions the province must negotiate with in the future? If so, I see anything but labour peace under Clark’s leadership.
Laila Yuile is an independent writer, blogger and political commentator. You can read her blog at lailayuile.com.

Original Post: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/06/02/premiers-meddling-derailed-respectful-tone-of-current-negotiations

Globe & Mail: Why ten year contract did not work in Alberta

Globe and Mail
Canadian Press
July 5, 2004

Talks involving teachers, school board trustees and the Alberta government that appeared headed for a 10-year collective bargaining deal have collapsed.

A government-appointed mediator walked away from negotiations on the weekend, the Alberta Teachers' Association said Monday.

"The (Alberta School Boards Association) is the problem," association president Frank Bruseker said in a news release.

"They refuse to move off their proposal of 10 years of frozen collective agreements and have shown no serious interest in resolving some of the major stumbling blocks through mediation."

To view the rest of the article, click here.

Alberta Teachers' Association: Why Ten? Editorial on the proposed ten year contract for teachers...

ATA Magazine
Donna Swiniarski
Volume 39 - 2004-05

Humans have 10 fingers, so it isn’t surprising that those 10 handy digits likely influenced the metric system, which is based on the number 10. Ten has held significance throughout the ages— God handed down 10 commandments to Moses, a rosary is divided into sections of 10 beads, a decathlon is a track and field contest of 10 events, and special meaning surrounds the 10-year milestones of anniversaries and birthdays.

No wonder Learning Minister Lyle Oberg proposed 10 as the number of years for a long-term agreement with Alberta’s teachers. But what would 10 years mean to teachers and to public education in Alberta?

In Oberg’s view of a perfect world, 10 years of labour peace in public education would mean a decade in which teachers would collectively close their classroom doors and remain silent. It would mean silencing teachers’ demands for smaller class sizes or resources to meet the needs of the children they teach. Oberg’s dream decade would see collective agreements frozen, and school boards alone would decide on local issues such as class size and composition, preparation time, extra-curricular activities and teacher health benefits. No wonder the Alberta School Boards Association supported the learning minister.

To view the rest of the article, click here.

Peace in B.C. schools requires deal with K-12 support staff as well as teachers

Vancouver Sun blog - The BC Education Report
Janet Steffenhagen
May 25, 2013

Premier Christy Clark is promising labour peace in B.C. public schools and says a 10-year deal with teachers is the ticket.

Negotiating such a deal will be a challenge for sure – and the B.C. Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) isn’t the only union in K-12 schools. The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), which represents 27,000 support workers, is also a force to be reckoned with.

To view the rest of the blog posting, click here.

LBR: What happens when one side refuses to bargain in good faith?

What can be done if one side refuses to meet or negotiate in good faith?

For the Record:

Labour Relations Board - British Columbia
Guide to Labour Relations Code
Chapter 5 - Collective Bargaining
Section 3 - What can be done if one side refuses to meet or negotiate in good faith?

The requirement for good faith bargaining generally means both parties must be sincere in their attempts to reach an agreement. This includes meeting with the other side and making every reasonable effort to conclude an agreement. The bargaining process calls for a certain amount of give and take. Failure to agree with the other side's bargaining demands does not, in itself, mean that a party is not bargaining in good faith. However, a deliberate strategy by either party to prevent reaching an agreement is considered to be bad faith bargaining. If one party engages in that kind of conduct, the other party can lodge an unfair labour practice complaint with the Labour relations Board.

Why I am Voting.... The yes/no debate....

I am not telling teachers to vote yes or vote no....

I am encouraging them to think about the whole issue and consider the big picture. I am excited that BCTF and BCPSEA were able to reach a tentative agreement that addressed some of the issues of concern while removing concessions - for now. I have no doubt this one year agreement is just what is needed to get everyone through the summer... maybe even the Fall.

I have no doubt this agreement will be ratified by teachers, in fact, I fear it will be too strongly voted in favour of. While I am glad there has been an agreement, I want the province to know it is a HUGE compromise (on both sides) and in my opinion, a lot of smoke and mirrors to gain allies (from both sides) "Look what we accomplished"

And no doubt, it is a huge accomplishment. It was like a tennis ball bouncing between two brick walls for seceral months so the fact that something, anything, was agreed upon gives me hope.... if even a glimmer, it is more than I have had in months! But is it enough?

Yes, there are no concessions, yes there are some moderate improvements from many members, but there is no reason this ratification vote should be an overwhelming yes. it will pass, but in my dream world it would be a slight yes so we can ratify it for the year, but show we are still not where we want NEED to be!

To consider both sides I have added links to two blog posts which explain why they are voting yes or no..... I think all BCTF members need to consider the big picture before voting.

- Why I'm Voting Yes

- Why Im Voting No and her follow up More reasons for a no vote.

I am not saying vote yes or vote no... just consider the whole issue and make a decision.... I am confident this will be ratified, probably easily.... but in a few short months we start again... and while this is indeed a step in the right direction, it is a little step... but we need to start somewhere... I just hope after this we can keep going in the right direction...

Improvements for Teachers Teaching On Call in new agreement

This agreement has some significant improvements for Teachers Teaching On Call.

The first is a big one. Improvements to union leaves, including leaves for TTOCs.

TOCs who are released for union leave will not have this considered as a break in service for purposes of on-scale pay.

As most TTOCs know, youa re paid a base daily rate each day you work. If you work three consecutive days you then get paid "on scale" until a break in service/work. Unfortunately, in the past, if you worked your consecutive days but one of those days was doing union business, not in the classroom, it would break your "consecutive days" and move you back to your base daily rate.

Now, you can stay on-scale pay, as union leaves or work is NOT an interuption - very exciting, especially for TTOCsx who are active in their union!

The other, less publicized change is that TTOCs will now, officially and universally, be called TTOCs (Teachers-Teaching-On-Call)

Currently, Collective Agreement language varies from local to local. Some are TOCs (Teachers-On-Call) or EOCs (Employees-On-Call) or the old-school "substitutes".

The reason for the name "Teachers-Teaching-On-Call" was to put the focus on the fact that TTOCs are indeed, qualified, trained and able teachers.

The other improvements will benefit most teachersin B.C.

There are other improvements to benefits, leaves, and the concessions surrounding "suitability" and "seniority" are off the table.

It does not address class size and compisition or salary but it does agree to discuss the split of issues (Post & Fill and Layoff & Recall moved to local bargaining) in return for some agreement on Professional Growth and Evaluation language. We will see how this goes in the Fall.

Additionally, in 8 months BCTF and BCPSEA will begin to negotiate once more. This agreement is until June 2013. It is NOT a legislated contract, and there are no concessions, so this is good news for everyone.

To read more about the pros/cons and reasons for coting yes/no to ratify the agreement read here.

Not Only in Wisconsin....

Sadly,' this is not only in Wisconsin' as a colleague pointed out when I re-posted this on facebook.

I recall last year when Scott Walker was governor and tried to destroy unions, strip bargaining rights and eventually was recalled after a major march of public workers to the legislature.  Sounds oddly familiar doesn't it?

It seems a trend lately that governments do not wish to fund puclic sectors and prioritize tax money to other areas, claiming 'net zero' for anything else they do not deem important. It is an obvious move to privatize public sectors to make more money and to have more control over the monies.

I still do not understand how the rich can get richer and the rest of us suffer. Change needs to happen. We have allowed little by little the erosion of our rights, and now government threatens to take them all away in one massive scoop.

Here in B.C. we are in a "cooling off period" which has allowed the government to introduce more bills and laws while forcing us to sit back and "just cool off"

This summer, bargaining will re-open and while we are in mediation currently with the (not so qualified or experienced) Mr. Jago, one wonders what September will look like for our students?

So no, not only in Wisconsin can these things happen... and that worries me. I love my job, I am passionate about education, but the looming unpredictability of public education scares me and I believe in speaking out and taking action to ensure our students are protected and don't lose out in the future because of major losses today.

Staffroom Confidential writes:

We do not need to become partners in backwards reform movements, we need to be principled critics to attacks on union rights and public services. Rather than stating, for example, that yes, perhaps union members should pay some of their health insurance benefits but not too much, we should be arguing that these benefits are part of an overall compensation package that was negotiated and to claw back is equivalent to a pay cut. We need to point out that pensions are simply deferred salary that has been earned, and to claw back pension benefits is to steal that deferred income. We need to remind the public that seniority rights are to protect against discrimination, nepotism and favoritism.

We also need a principled public defense of public services in the public interest. "Reform" has become a euphemism for privatization and it is important to call a spade a spade. Every so-called reform of public services being pushed right now really aims to reduce public spending, curtain service delivery and quality, and to increase the private delivery and control of public services. Think charter schools, for example.

The lesson from Wisconsin is that we need to reform our organizations to ensure that we speak out for what is truly in the public interest, not simply try to lesson the damage. The slogans should not be "These cuts are too deep" but rather "Tax the rich".

Read more here

LRB Ruling on Extra Curriculars

Teachers win significant legal victory on extra-curricular activities

The Labour Relations Board today has affirmed that BC teachers do indeed have the right to withdraw their participation in voluntary extra-curricular activities.

In a ruling issued today, LRB Vice-Chair Ritu Mahil found that “the Union has not declared or authorized an unlawful strike by directing its members to refrain from participating in activities which occur outside of class time/instructional hours and are truly voluntary and extra-curricular.”

BCTF President Susan Lambert welcomed the decision saying: “This is a significant legal victory for teachers because it clarifies the distinction between voluntary and non-voluntary work, and it reaffirms that the countless hours that teachers devote to extra-curricular activities with students truly are voluntary. We’ve always known that, but it’s excellent to have it confirmed by the Labour Relations Board.”

Lambert added, however, that the decision will offer cold comfort to teachers, who feel disrespected by the needlessly provocative actions of the BC Public School Employers’ Association.

“Public education in BC has become over-reliant on the goodwill of teachers and, despite a decade of underfunding and attacks on our rights, we have kept on digging deeper and giving more in order to hold the system together,” Lambert said. “Now the employer has taken us to the LRB in an attempt to compel goodwill and force volunteerism. It’s as if they are intentionally trying to shred the relationship.”

Instead of engaging in such damaging legal battles, Lambert called on the BCPSEA and government to work with the BCTF to reach a fair compromise and resolve the outstanding issues in the labour dispute.

Mahil also found that the BC Teachers’ Federation has not engaged in an unlawful strike by directing its members to minimally participate in meetings with school administrators. However, she did find that the BCTF must direct members to participate in meetings and activities which are part of their work duties even though they occur outside of instructional hours. The BCTF will promptly inform its members of the ruling.

For the full text of the LRB decision, go to: http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/LRB/LRB63467-12.pdf

Death of generosity

Death of generosity Vancouver Province - Letter to the Editor Ernie Gorrie May 23, 2012 In arguments at the B.C. Labour Relations Board, B.C. Public School Employers Association lawyer Delayne Sartison claimed that if a teacher agreed to a volunteer position after hours "it's part of their work." Employers may regret it if the LRB upholds that claim. Telethons, fundraising runs and other events generate goodwill for sponsoring businesses who rely on their employees volunteering. Imagine if employees believed that such volunteering would constitute "work," which they could not subsequently decline. The well of volunteers could quickly dry up. Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/business/Death+generosity/6664401/story.html#ixzz1viK3NKak

I Remember When....

The BTA Blog
Jennifer Heighton
May 21, 2012

I remember when:

• The counsellor had enough time to come into our rooms and lead lessons on anti-bullying or class meetings or whatever issue needed addressing as a group, plus enough time to see kids individually.
• We had a school nurse, even for one day per week.
• We had a teacher’s assistant to help with photocopying, preparing for art projects (cutting 100 stocking shapes from fabric!), making booklets, laminating…the list goes on.
• We had clean classrooms on days that the custodian was absent, because replacement custodians were sent in.
• There was enough learning support time to get regular support for grey area kids too.
• If you had three designated kids in intermediate, your maximum class size would be 27 (30 minus three), so you could end up with 25 (to allow room for new kids). And this did happen – seriously.
• We did not have a TOC shortage problem.
• Cost-of-TOC for discretionary days was about $180 (prior to 2005), not $312 that it is today.
• Librarians could work at one school, instead of having to take on two or more schools for full-time work.
• There was a gifted program at each school where a teacher would provide enrichment to gifted students, once or twice per week.
• Paperwork for learning support (ex. IEPs) did not require a time-consuming, crash-prone program like BCeSIS. Instead, hand-printed or simple word-processing would do fine.
• Teachers were not as stressed, because the needs of their classes were not as great, since many kids were getting the extra emotional or academic help they needed. Maybe it is not our ‘demographic’ changing. Maybe what we are seeing today is the result of ten years of cuts?

To view the rest of the blog posting, click here.

When did volunteering become mandatory?

Victoria Times Colonist - Letter to the Editor
Shannon Toronitz
May 11, 2011

First teachers are legislated to volunteer their time. Next, doctors will be mandated to lead support groups after their surgical shifts. Then police will be mandated to do extra investigations off duty. Soon it will be bus drivers mandated to do extra runs after their shift because they love driving so much.

What about our B.C. Liberal members voluntarily leading community meetings to enlighten our province about fair, democratic and responsible governance?

Or how about allowing Canadian citizens to choose how, where and when they want to volunteer their time irrespective of what job they do? Does that need to be legislated by the Liberals, too?

[Source]

And so it continues.... Voluntary vs Mandatory

It seems BCPSEA (employer) feels teacher's withdrawing their voluntary activities is illegal. They have filed their conplaint with the LRB who will likely rule Friday.

I don't understand how teacher's volunteer choices outside of school hours can be viewed as "illegal" but I am interested to see how this plays out.

I have a lot of opinions on extra-curricular and this whole situation, but first, let me share with you the information in the media:


Teacher withdrawal from after-hours work is illegal, employers say

A protest that has resulted in teachers withdrawing from all after-hours activities in B.C. public schools amounts to an illegal strike, the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association (BCPSEA) alleges.

On Wednesday, it filed an application to the B.C. Labour Relations Board (LRB) seeking an order that would end the B.C. Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) protest and require teachers to resume all such activities.

The crux of the issue appears to be the definition of extracurricular. The BCPSEA says it is not trying to force individual teachers to coach sports teams, for example, but does not accept the union’s broad definition of what constitutes voluntary activities.

“The BCTF has directed its members to withdraw a very broad range of duties that teachers typically perform as part of their teaching job, based upon the fact that those duties are typically performed either before or after the school bell rings,” the association says in a statement. Those activities include parent-teacher interviews, student tutorials, writing reports and talking to principals.

“The BCTF’s call for service withdrawal captures both duties that are clearly and expressly required of all teachers and duties that are performed by some teachers at those teachers’ option.

“In our view, the BCTF’s direction to its members to engage in a concerted refusal to perform these duties constitutes an illegal strike in violation of the Labour Relations Code and the Act,” the association states.

Read More

My fear is that voluntary activities become mandatory. Thus, forcing teacher's to take on some form of the 'obligated' volunteer time. This seems to defeat the purpose of any volunteer activities. Teacher's often take on areas they are passionate about, be it sports, drama, clubs, or other events. If there is a need in the school, teacher's interested or connected to that area may volunteer, but by making voluntary activities "part of the work day" it takes away the passion and the point... "I am doing this extra because it is important to my students, important to me, important to our school community"

The Globe & Mail writes:

The British Columbia Teachers’ Federation maintains teachers are withdrawing from what they consider voluntary activities – such as coaching sports teams – and that the withdrawal was the only tactic teachers had left to protest against what the union characterizes as punitive legislation.

This is the only action teacher's can legally take to voice their concern with the current government's attack on public education! It is to raise awareness and take action against the threats being imposed against public education!

The activities are extra's and voluntary. This is not stopping MATH class or skipping lessons - this is stopping out of school hour activities, such as overnight camping!
Since when did teacher's taking students camping become the norm? When I was in school, my teacher's didn't give up their evenings to take me camping - that is what Girl Guides or my parents were for!

Our "wrap-up" activities were within the school day, a school picnic in the park, a field trip to the waterslides, and so on.

When did the expectation change? Why now do we expect so much more from our teacher's spare time? I would encourage anyone to come into a classroom for a day, observe, or help run the class for the day and then after school there is the marking, preparation for the next day, photocopying, and possibly some coaching or meetings afterschool. Planning and taking a class camping seems like a far stretch from the "regular teacher duties"

I have heard of some schools where teacher's who run lunch time intramurals get a different block for their lunch (which they still often spend planning or marking). I have seen schools where teacher's who plan Sports Day or awards ceremonies and assemblies are given additional preperation time to do so, instead of using their own time at home to plan. PACs stepping in to plan activities with teachers is another strategy I have seen to ensure programs still run at schools, despite teacher's decision to stop voluntary activities.

It can be done! It is not the end of these extra's, it is a shift in how they are approached!

I don't disagree with teacher's doing extra-curriculars, I am a teacher who enjoys doing extra's with my students and like most teacher's who do extra curriculars, we don't want to stop forever, but right now, given the threats from this government and the corner we have been backed into, this is the only thing we have control over - our own voluntary time! And if this is the only way to deliver the message - it is what we must do.

Are Teacher's and Report Cards an Essential Service?

CBC News Reported:Saskatchewan essential services law struck down.

A Saskatchewan law limiting the ability of public sector workers to go on strike has been ruled unconstitutional by a Queen's Bench judge, but the provincial government says it is still committed to having essential services legislation

The essential services is an interesting concept. If teacher's are an "essential service" why are we not paid and respected as other "essential services"?

My first thought is, how are teacher's an essential sercvice?

To me an essential service is life or death and to my knowledge no one has died from not going to school for a few days. Furthermore, in the current stage of Job Action, teacher's in BC are still teaching. The only major change is no official report cards, however, teacher's are reporting in various other methods, most of which are far more comprehensive and efficient than the official report cards.

As a parent, I am updated on my daughter's progress through notes in her daily agenda book and in-person meetings when neccessary with the teacher.

As a teacher on call, I have been in a number of schools and grade levels and seen the various methods teachers are reporting on their students progress to parents.

Classroom newsletters, notes in planners, emails home, phone calls home, student self-evaluations with teacher remarks, and so on.

In fact, I have loved seeing the various methods of assessment and communication teacher's are using instead of report cards and have to say, I think they are far more comprehensive and informative.

In December, The Coquitlam NOW featured two of my friends and colleagues, Sandra Daviss (Grade 4/5) and Stephanie Duncan (high school)discussing assessment & reporting methods used in their classes.

So are report cards really neccessary as long as the message is getting home?

I think in highschool formal reporting of actual grades is important at the end of term as it is needed to get into post-secondary institutes, however, the various methods of reporting I have seen teacher's use have been far more effective than official report cards.

Why couldn't (even in high school) teacher's continue to report in these various methods. Year-End "grades" may be neccessary for reasons mentioned above, but otherwise what is the significance of a letter grade or a number?

Is a report card essential?

Are teacher's an essential service?

David Komljenovic, BCTF Member-at-large, wrote on facebook:

"Saskatchewan ruled a month ago that the essential services law in that provice was unconstitutional because it interfered in the collective bargaining process to the extent that public sector employees did not have any significant pressure to apply to the table.

The situation with teachers in BC is not very different. After the phase 1 in 2001, teachers were legislated back after the Labour Relations Board ruled that a one day strike on January 28th was legal. In 2005, the plan was to start phase 1 and, should an agreement not be concluded, rotating strikes would start in the middle of October. The government intervened and prevented a strike from occurring. This year (2011/12), teachers were engaged in phase 1 since September. If there is a successful vote on a legal strike, there would be a good argument that interference by the government is significant enough that essential services is unconstitutional for teachers in BC.

A "yes" vote on escalating actions would provide a recourse through the courts as government interference before a strike can be enacted would be consistent with what the Saskatchewan courts found to be unconstitutional."

On Tuesday & Wednesday Teacher's will vote if they are in favour of escalating actions should the government legislate us back to work....

I don't think the government should legislate us back, especially now....

1. Both parties have agreed to mediation
2. What would they legislate us back to? Writing report cards? We ARE teaching we ARE working!
3. If mediation doesn't help, there are still other actions that could be taken.
4. Collective Bargaining is the way to go, BCTF wanted local bargaining on some issues from day one, and they were turned down... if local issues had been taken to the local table from the start, at least SOME issues could be dealt with already locally. Both parties need to bargain in good faith, and sadly one party is clearly not!