Michael Hardner Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 The poll, conducted from August 24 to 29, also notes that Canadians appear to favour removing teachers' ability to strike. More than seven in 10 of those polled believe teachers should be considered an essential service and should not have the right to strike. Yes, but making them an essential service gives them more power in front of an arbitrator. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Teachers: "We'll do that but don't put it in the contract so we can withhold that service if we're cranky." It's like extracurricular activities. If teachers can't be compelled to participate then parents or other volunteers should be allowed to replace them. Exactly. That's why it's called a negotiation. How likely would this scenario be: Employers: "We want to take away all of your strategic ability to get what you want." Employees: "Ok, boss" Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Fletch 27 Posted November 13, 2012 Author Report Posted November 13, 2012 Yes, but making them an essential service gives them more power in front of an arbitrator. This is by FAR not an accurate statement... MANY times in Arbitration the Unions do NOT get what they want (Air Canada v Unions)? With more than 70% of Canadians in favor, an Arbitrator would NOT allow the Unions to muscle about.... Quote
cybercoma Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 This is by FAR not an accurate statement... MANY times in Arbitration the Unions do NOT get what they want (Air Canada v Unions)? With more than 70% of Canadians in favor, an Arbitrator would NOT allow the Unions to muscle about.... Arbitrators don't give a crap about politics and populism. Quote
Fletch 27 Posted November 13, 2012 Author Report Posted November 13, 2012 Arbitrators don't give a crap about politics and populism. Sure seems they know an injustice when they see em! ou think they are all pro-union? You think they gloss over the fact that 74% of Ontarians want this injustice and misscariage of power to stop? Um yea..... Quote
cybercoma Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Sure seems they know an injustice when they see em! ou think they are all pro-union? No. I expect an arbitrator isn't pro-union or pro-employer. You know... since they're a third party arbitrator. You think they gloss over the fact that 74% of Ontarians want this injustice and misscariage of power to stop? Um yea..... That's almost exactly what I'm saying. I'm not saying the gloss over it though. I'm saying it's irrelevant to arbitration, so they don't even consider it. Quote
Fletch 27 Posted November 13, 2012 Author Report Posted November 13, 2012 Ohh OK.... I wonder if the Arbitrator is paid extra for after hours... Quote
cybercoma Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Ohh OK.... I wonder if the Arbitrator is paid extra for after hours... It probably depends on the arbitrator's contract and how he/she is paid, as with anything else. Quote
Fletch 27 Posted November 13, 2012 Author Report Posted November 13, 2012 Well, Minus the teachers of coarse... Under "Work to rule"... Breaking contracts to gain a better on you know..... Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 This is by FAR not an accurate statement... MANY times in Arbitration the Unions do NOT get what they want (Air Canada v Unions)? With more than 70% of Canadians in favor, an Arbitrator would NOT allow the Unions to muscle about.... You`re not understanding me. First of all, in negotiations neither side gets `what they want` - but they settle for an agreement. The fact that one side doesn`t have the right to strike indeed has been seen as given an advantage to workers in the case of the TTC - as discussed on this blog: http://www.yorku.ca/ddoorey/lawblog/?p=2640 ("That argument rests on the assumption that the interest arbitration process will continue to function in roughly the manner that it has, and that under this model, workers are well-served.") Secondly, arbitrators aren't subjected to political pressure as Cyber points out - they're charged with negotiating an agreement. They're not politicians, and they're not elected. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
cybercoma Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Well, Minus the teachers of coarse... Under "Work to rule"... Breaking contracts to gain a better on you know..... Breaking contracts through work-to-rule? Fletch, do you know what work-to-rule is? Quote
Fletch 27 Posted November 13, 2012 Author Report Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) Michael, your citing a "blog"... You have chastized many on here for doing just that.... This Law-Firm counters your "blog".... And Canadian history in Arbitration (I will cite Air Canada again) seems fair http://www.fiddlerlaw.com/why-arbitration-is-bad-for-employees.php Edited November 13, 2012 by Fletch 27 Quote
Topaz Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 I hear Ottawa schools are on the hit list and some schools will have to close because of security, so I'm wondering if the feds will get involved when their kids aren't in school? Will they connect this with the economy and have to get involved? Quote
cybercoma Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Feds have no jurisdiction over education. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 Michael, your citing a "blog"... You have chastized many on here for doing just that.... Fair enough - but I'm not citing it as evidence, rather as an explanation. The 'source' of the explanation is John O'Grady: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/john-o-grady/15/114/3a4 This Law-Firm counters your "blog".... And Canadian history in Arbitration (I will cite Air Canada again) seems fair I don`t get it. This is out of context: your lawyer is talking generally about employment law... in Texas... not arbitration in the case we`re looking at. Here`s his office: Law Office of G. Scott Fiddler, P.C. 9601 Jones Road, Suite 250 Houston, Texas, 77065 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Big Guy Posted November 13, 2012 Report Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) In contract negotiations in THIS round... The Government can KEEP current pay-plans/compensation plans (Keep pay flat for 1 year with an agreed upon increase of say 1.5% next year ,maybe even 2,,, WITH the agreement that teachers will be Graded 2 times per year with possible repercussions should the teacher perform poorly.. : The problem is how does one evaluate “good teaching”? The whole question of “quality” in teaching is subjective so then how does one evaluate it? To be fair, the process would have to be objective. What objective criteria could you then use? A while ago somebody decided to rate hospitals on the rate at which people died while in the hospital. Pretty soon some hospitals were not accepting terminal cases or becoming far more selective on who they would accept from nursing homes. I really do not know how one could objectively rate teacher performance. There are so many variables when you are dealing with the performance of young people that I question if one could ever come up with an objective criteria. Edited November 13, 2012 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Fletch 27 Posted November 14, 2012 Author Report Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) This would be very straight forward Big Guy.. I would propose that as all teachers are provided a work-load or coarse load, they should be able to complete a test based on the coarse load. . This should be provincially managed and not regional. If they can not meet 90 percent, they get a demerit point or more.. 2). Participation. If they do not participate in extra-curricular activities for students to an agreed upon rate.. A demerit point system is applied 3). attendance. This should be monitored and based on the provincial average across the private sector 4). Parental score-card. This could be submitted back with every students report card. Is the teacher performing well, or "needs improvement"? 5). Students graded on a REGIONAL average... If a group of students perform poorly based on that average, the teacher is warned and accumulates demerits. If things do not improve, they are fired. I think that covers all of the talking points? It's objective, TANGIBLE and quantative... It will weed out the poor performers and strengthen the good performers. It's a win/win. I don't mind funding education as long as it's GOOD and ENSURED! Again, these are real world quantifiable results that would be rewarded and paid for... The union simply needs to agree on PERFORMANCE based members and DROP these draconian tactics....... Unreasonable? Seems achievable to me... And real world. Edited November 14, 2012 by Fletch 27 Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 I don't like the fact that teacher's can withhold something very important to the education system because it's not in the contract. It should be. It's like they sat down at the bargaining table and management said "we'd like you to patrol the halls between classes" Teachers: "We'll do that but don't put it in the contract so we can withhold that service if we're cranky." It's like extracurricular activities. If teachers can't be compelled to participate then parents or other volunteers should be allowed to replace them. Do you volunteer after hours for your job? In addition to regular work? I agree on the extra curricular point. Parents should be allowed to provide them with proper background clearance and behaviour management training paid at their own expense. Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
MiddleClassCentrist Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 This would be very straight forward Big Guy.. I would propose that as all teachers are provided a work-load or coarse load, they should be able to complete a test based on the coarse load. . This should be provincially managed and not regional. If they can not meet 90 percent, they get a demerit point or more.. 2). Participation. If they do not participate in extra-curricular activities for students to an agreed upon rate.. A demerit point system is applied 3). attendance. This should be monitored and based on the provincial average across the private sector 4). Parental score-card. This could be submitted back with every students report card. Is the teacher performing well, or "needs improvement"? 5). Students graded on a REGIONAL average... If a group of students perform poorly based on that average, the teacher is warned and accumulates demerits. If things do not improve, they are fired. I think that covers all of the talking points? It's objective, TANGIBLE and quantative... It will weed out the poor performers and strengthen the good performers. It's a win/win. I don't mind funding education as long as it's GOOD and ENSURED! Again, these are real world quantifiable results that would be rewarded and paid for... The union simply needs to agree on PERFORMANCE based members and DROP these draconian tactics....... Unreasonable? Seems achievable to me... And real world. The practical application of your system does not work. Coaching is not part of teaching. Let's just remove it from school and leave it to community like they do elsewhere in the world. People have strange expectations of North American teachers... At least coaches in the states can make big money for doing it. Students vary from one year to another. Should a teacher be punished because they have the more challenging class? Are you really arguing that? The more challenging class with behavioural students brings more sick days, more stress and lower grades because the students aren't high achieving. Parents like teachers that their child likes. Children like teachers who make things easy on them. A child does not recognize the difference between a challenging class meant to drive learning, and an easy class meant to drive grades higher. Students often mistake the easier class for better teacher. "I just understood this more last year." yeah. Because last year the teacher never gave any complex problem solving questions. Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
Fletch 27 Posted November 14, 2012 Author Report Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) You can protect and continue to foster you hatred for children only so long.... Protect the unions and fear change.... It's an evolving world... Heads up... The above is 100 percent doable... Minus your excuses "coaching" IS part of teaching! It's called mentoring btw.... Edited November 14, 2012 by Fletch 27 Quote
cybercoma Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 You can protect and continue to foster you hatred for children only so long.... Quote
Big Guy Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 This would be very straight forward Big Guy.. I would propose that as all teachers are provided a work-load or coarse load, they should be able to complete a test based on the coarse load. . This should be provincially managed and not regional. If they can not meet 90 percent, they get a demerit point or more.. How do you evalutate if a "course load" has been done or completed or taught or disseminated or presented or learned or ... ? What criteria would differentiate between a 60% and a 90%? There are thousands of variables that can and do effect the make up of the group of students in front of any teacher at any given time. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Fletch 27 Posted November 14, 2012 Author Report Posted November 14, 2012 Simple again... If a standardized course-load is not completed.. Then why? And how poorly was the instruction? Again, if the teacher can not pass a test by 90 percent... A demerit is awarded.. No variables... Quote
jacee Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 Simple again... If a standardized course-load is not completed.. Then why? And how poorly was the instruction? Again, if the teacher can not pass a test by 90 percent... A demerit is awarded.. No variables... It isn't simple at all. Quote
Big Guy Posted November 14, 2012 Report Posted November 14, 2012 Simple again... If a standardized course-load is not completed.. Then why? And how poorly was the instruction? Again, if the teacher can not pass a test by 90 percent... A demerit is awarded.. No variables... How does one objectively evaluate that a course load "has been completed" or not? What would your test test? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.