SOURCE
Tuesday, 27 May 2014
Letter: Here’s one teacher who earned every dime
SOURCE
Thursday, 22 May 2014
A typical classroom - Class Size & Composition DOES matter!

Yellow - my ESL students who receive 45 minute of extra support per week.
Blue - Students in my room who are at least 2 years behind in 1 or more subject ares. They receive no extra support.
Pink - students with challenging behaviours who disrupt the classroom regularly. They receive no extra support.
Orange - These are students who have been tested (or hopefully will be soon) and have a designated learning disability. They receive 1 hour a day extra support.
Green - These are my fully capable students who are meeting grade level and able to work fairly independently. They have stable home lives and are getting their basic needs met.
Red - These are my students who are facing hard things. Divorcing parents, deaths of close family members, poverty. These 'things' are impacting their learning.
This again is a fairly typical classroom these days. Please - class size and composition DO matter!!!! It is not all about getting a raise.
Thursday, 13 February 2014
More on Christy Clark and the Liberals plan to pressure teachers into strike
Clark facing crisis after NDP revelations about talks with teachers
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/clark-facing-crisis-after-ndp-revelations-about-talks-with-teachers/article16845904/
Government negotiator admits Liberals tried to pressure teachers into strike
Les Leyne: Snippets of testimony in teacher case are bad for Liberals
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/columnists/les-leyne-snippets-of-testimony-in-teacher-case-are-bad-for-liberals-1.847953#sthash.CZxZSpk8.gbpl
B.C. Liberals' lead negotiator admitted plan was to provoke a full-scale strike, keep children home from school
http://bcndpcaucus.ca/en/bc_liberals_lead_negotiator_admitted_plan_was_to_provoke_a_fullscale_strike_keep_children_home_from_school
The testimony from a top government official appears to contradict Education Minister Peter Fassbender and Premier Christy Clark
NDP grills B.C. Liberals on teacher strategy
http://globalnews.ca/news/1146339/ndp-grills-b-c-liberals-on-teacher-strategy/Thursday, 27 June 2013
#DearPeter @MLAFassbender - what teachers think of a ten year contract....
Yesterday the question of topic on BC Almanac was is a 10 year deal for teachers fair and reasonable? My answer was how can it be given that teachers cannot trust this government. Here is why we can't trust this government:
1. Contracts and working conditions have been imposed on us by legislation for the last 12 years. The courts have found this to be unconstitutional, yet teachers are still waiting for their rights to be restored.
2. The threat of fines, legislation and "accept this or else" attitudes from the government are not democratic collective bargaining. It is legislative thuggery.
3. Austerity really means wage-cuts. It's about families you say, but we are parents too. Inflation raises the cost of living year after year. Wage increases should be somewhat mindful of the rate of inflation.
This government says trust us... we have changed. Minister Fassbender, how many times can you assume us to be fools? You wish teachers to bury the hatchet sir, but what you really mean to do is to bury it in our backs yet again.
Read more teachers' letters to Minister of Education, Peter Fassbender here: https://www.facebook.com/update_security_info.php?wizard=1#!/groups/226536574108231/?hc_location=stream
Also search #DearPeter on twitter.
Sunday, 2 June 2013
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
Monday, 27 May 2013
Globe & Mail: Why ten year contract did not work in Alberta
Canadian Press
July 5, 2004
Sunday, 26 May 2013
Alberta Teachers' Association: Why Ten? Editorial on the proposed ten year contract for teachers...
Donna Swiniarski
Volume 39 - 2004-05
Saturday, 25 May 2013
Peace in B.C. schools requires deal with K-12 support staff as well as teachers
Janet Steffenhagen
May 25, 2013
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?
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.
Thursday, 28 June 2012
Why I am Voting.... The yes/no debate....
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 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...
Wednesday, 27 June 2012
Improvements for Teachers Teaching On Call in new agreement
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.
Thursday, 26 April 2012
Why this fight is important
First published on BCTF Portal March 11, 2012
Bruce McCloy - Teacher in New Westminster
Here is why I see this current fight as very important. This is not about class size, class composition, a wage increase or extra help for special needs students. While these are all very important they are dwarfed by a greater threat; the changing of our current educational system to one that caters less to equity and developing a good person to one that is squarely focused on market based principles and catering to an ever greedy corporate elite. Teachers and government are on a crash course, fighting over, as Wendy Poole outlines http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/vol11/poole, the vision and purpose of K-12 public education and the meaning of professionalism.
Government is focused on a neo-liberal view of education, “conceptualiz[ing] education as a commodity to be bought by customers (students and parents) and sold by suppliers (schools and others). From a market perspective, schools are training grounds for future workers and consumers, as well a multi-billion dollar industry offering opportunities for profit. Efficiency, accountability for student outcomes (usually measured by standardized test scores and other measures like graduation rates), choice for parents (e.g., charter schools, vouchers, within-district school choice), privatization (e.g., public funding for private schools, user-pay fees, contracting with private firms to operate public schools, private-public partnerships for school construction, school-business partnerships), and attacks on teachers unions are hallmarks of neo-liberalism in education”. (see attached paper if you would like to read more). This fight is about breaking the union in order to bring in a system that caters to only a few, and leaves the many others simply to be good workers. If we truly cared about students, and creating a better society, we would be modelling our system after Finland, rather than chasing the USA, UK and Australia downwards. The end result of this current action by the BC government is to cut costs, break the union and make a statement to the voters that the current ruling Liberals deserve their vote in May 2013. It has nothing to do with students. For the differences in focus of the Finland system in comparison with the USA, UK and Australian systems review the attached paper, Neo-Liberalism in British Columbia Education and Teachers’ Union Resistance and the video found at http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3441913.htm
Current OECD rankings have Canada slipping slightly behind Australia in reading (#8 compared to #7), still behind Finland at #4 but well ahead of the USA at #11 and the UK at #18. Rankings in Math and Science have Canada far ahead of the USA, Australia and UK systems that the government are focused on reaching down to and still behind the ranking of Finland, a country that teachers are working to catch. Finland is ranked #2 in math, Canada #8, with Australia at #15, the UK at #21 and the USA being far behind at #32. There are similar findings in Science with Finland at #2, Canada at #6, Australia at #12, the UK at #21 and the USA at #30. The quality of our education does not matter to the current Liberal government; containing costs, and creating preferable market conditions do.
Some sobering thoughts when contemplating this possible scenario.
- While increasing funding for schools from a 2002-2003 total of $3.782 billion to a projected 2012-2013 total of $4.725 billion (making true governments claim that per-student funding has increased) the actual costs to districts have far outstripped this increase. Most telling is the decrease in priority of education as a part of the provincial budget falling from 26% in 2002 – 2003 to a 15% in 2011 – 2012. In 2002 – 2003 the total allocation envelope for education was $3.7 billion. This accounted for 26% of the total provincial budget. In 2012 – 2013 the projected total allocation envelope for education is $4.7 billion accounting for 15% of the total provincial budget. If the 2002 – 2003 % of total provincial budget allocation held true today the total allocation of funds to education from the provincial budget for 2012 – 2013 would be $8.1 billion providing for a further allocation of $3.1 billion on top of the $4.7 billion currently being provided. The amount due to school districts for next year over and above what is being given is almost equal to the total amount provided to school districts in the 2002 – 2003 year. It is not a situation of lack of funds, rather a change in priority for the government
- Board funds have long been frozen, all but 6 districts are currently in Funding Protection (meaning that they are working in a bankrupt state). Board funds have been frozen for a further 3 years, leaving them with an accumulated $100 million shortfall this year alone. The “easy cuts” to budgets have long been done leaving an impossible situation. The overwhelming major cost to districts is teacher salaries, something that districts have been unable to change due to strict rules in the collective agreements. Until now. Changes in post and fill rules, class composition and numbers, evaluations and discipline procedures will make it easier for boards to lower their salary costs by making life difficult for more expensive teachers to the point they will quit, removing more expensive teachers and filling their positions with cheaper less experienced teachers or with even cheaper non teachers. The boards will sell the public on these changes b y offering perks that will have most forget the importance of teacher quality.
- The current government advertising focused on teacher salary and benefits (the BCTF is demanding a 15 per cent wage hike and other benefits that would cost $2 billion and raise taxes for BC families...) is allowing the government to keep attention away from the main changes they wish to see through the BC Education Plan. This education plan provides the government with the route to the neo-liberal result that they wish to see, a result that will have us emulating the OECD rankings of the USA, UK and Australia in a very short time, leaving far behind the rankings we currently have and our hopes for reaching those of Finland. This is because the government is not focused on providing an equitable education system. Or even focused on educating at a high level. Rather, it is focused on creating a system that follows their neo-liberal beliefs. The BC Education Plan is a guise (as is the current troubles on the labour front) to instituting these ideals:
- While requests for feedback to the BC Education Plan is currently seen as a priority for government, the plan is all but written awaiting an appropriate time to roll out. Current feedback will never be considered but provides the perception that it has been
- BC Education Plan calls for personalized learning that will amount to students staying at home to work on their computers learning from an on-line master teacher. Cheaper non-teachers will be available for students to submit assignments and pick up others, while tutoring (on-line and in person) will be available if necessary. This change over has already begun. The government is admitting that 700 special needs teachers that have been lost to the system have been replaced with 2100 new teaching assistants ... but no more teachers. The $165 million Learning Improvement Fund will hire more teacher assistants ... but no more teachers.
- Contract changes are necessary to enable this change to occur in our current system – changing hours of work, working conditions (class sizes can reach the hundreds) and making it easier to deal with teachers that disagree with the direction
- Money will be saved on school buildings as only a few will be needed as regional meeting places – while the others can be sold as they are no longer required to service children
- Standardized assessment will become easier as the teaching from the on-line Master teachers will be the same.
- Large corporations will find a ready market for technology. A quick look at those involved in developing the new BC Education Program indicate past and present members of the guiding committee including 20 members who belong to the corporate business community or with strong ties to this community and zero involved in public education in BC.
- Creating a system dependent on technology will provide a ready market for both hardware and software manufacturers as well as internet providers. On line needs will increase, allowing a market for sellers of data plans
- Control of teacher Professional Development and new evaluation and “one-strike you are out” dismissal procedures will allow government to control what teachers learn and what they will teach in the classroom. Government and corporate propaganda will be required to be taught, even if ethically unsettling, or a teacher will face dismissal.
- Control of curriculum and standardization of what is taught will allow government to lessen the time many students stay in school, providing an opportunity for students to leave at the end of grade 10 (where 3 of our government exit exams currently are placed). Students will be able to leave early for the workforce providing cheap (and undereducated) labour to be available during the week – something that is currently not readily available for most companies. Seeing that these workers were encouraged to leave school at grade 10 they will later find that they do not have the required education to change occupations, therefore making them more likely to stay in lower paying jobs within the company that they currently work for.
- With the education of children left in the hands of busy parents, and at home often with little guidance (especially in the secondary school years) it is more likely that they lag behind and have less motivation to finish beyond grade 10. As well, earning money at an early age could be a great benefit to the family income as well as provide a greater source of disposable income at an earlier age – resulting in more purchasing power at a younger age.
- Only those being educated in private schools (still in a traditional mode of providing education) or those with incredible self-discipline will have the skills to enter university – predominately leaving the rich to claim the higher level jobs and the less rich or less motivated to take up a new lower class working class.
- With a larger number of workers available and a dismantling of trade union power, the minimum wage can once again be lowered, rights eroded allowing for more flexibility and higher profits for business owners. As well, the numbers of the consumer class will increase, also allowing for further profits for corporations.
We see a similar strategy with the government – lob up the whole confrontation of contract negotiations, and, while teachers are busy looking at these, hit them hard with the educational changes you as a government actually want to implement. While current contract negotiations are very important and need to be dealt with quickly by teachers throughout the province, we need to be talking about and informing the public of the far greater threat that looms and is poised to hit in the very near future. It is one that will find us sadly leaving any possibility of reaching the equitable system found in Finland (and along with it the high OECD rankings), leaving any possibility of maintaining our current standing in the world (as stated in the OECD rankings), and fervently chasing the lower scores of the USA, UK and Australia. All in the name of creating a new culture of uneducated workers and consumers for a quickly growing corporate elite.