BC Teachers Getting Screwed...Again

[Michael Hardner]

Thank you for posting the video there Plink. Boy oh boy, when you watch from around 3:30 on the video to the end, well you sure get me good. He says exactly what I quoted and you cannot even argue that it is contextually skewed.

But enough about that.

Nice dodge.

THIS is a misquote:

"it is not because we care about children and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. It is because we believe that we are the union that can most effectively represent teachers and can protect their rights and advance their interests as employees."

And the context was completely wrong. He wasn't saying this was the ideology of the union - ie. not caring about children - but explaining why the union was effective and necessary.

I liked your posts up until that point - very analytical and fact-based. I think that a complex topic like education needs somebody arguing from the point of view of management, resource limitations, budgets and so forth.

But if you're going to misrepresent facts, and then double-down when caught out, then I'm not going to take you seriously. Very disappointing.

[GostHacked]

Some companies do better than others. The totals number of jobs in this country is increasing. Over a million net new jobs in this country during that time, most of them paying more than the ones they replaced.

Some companies are doing better. Costco seems to be always doing good, regardless of the fact that they do not advertise at all. Interesting tactic, saving all that money and still bringing customers through the door.

A company doing better is not indicative of how it goes about staffing. The company I worked for is making record profits, while laying off thousands. And the ones that are replacing those are making less money because they are now contractors and not full time or part time employees. This is rampant in the IT portion of the company. Outsource, outsource, outsource.

The company was Loblaw, and the one they bought was Shoppers Drug Mart. Over 4 billion was the buyout, plus shares and they freed up a billion in cash flow. You can only do this if you are already top of the food chain.

Off topic, so I will leave it at that.

[Pct2017]

But if you're going to misrepresent facts, and then double-down when caught out, then I'm not going to take you seriously. Very disappointing.

Ah, you are just hurting because I called you out on citing the largest source of unverified information the world has even witnessed. Namely Wikipedia. I am sure that we will get along again sometime in the near future.

[Michael Hardner]

Ah, you are just hurting because I called you out on citing the largest source of unverified information the world has even witnessed. Namely Wikipedia. I am sure that we will get along again sometime in the near future.

We get along fine. At least the Wikipedia article I quoted wasn't called out as being false. If you did that, then I would thank you for educating me instead of doubling down on the original falsehood.

Moving on.

[socialist]

Thank you for posting the video there Plink. Boy oh boy, when you watch from around 3:30 on the video to the end, well you sure get me good. He says exactly what I quoted and you cannot even argue that it is contextually skewed.

But enough about that. Back to the dispute between the most reviled public union in BC and the government which just recently received a strong mandate to manage all public affairs. Pretty aggressive move by the employer this week. They have told the union that seeing show you are not currently under contract, then you can pay for all of the bennies that your membership has come to enjoy. Here is the bill for June, and that will be five million dollars please. Don't want to pay it? OK, but no medical or dental for your whiny members. As I said, it is aggressive, but very cunning. The individual teacher is not impacted, but it puts a ton of pressure squarely on the union's shoulders to get back to bargaining seriously.

I proved how you take things out of context to prove your simple agenda. Critical thinkers aren't fooled. Critical thinking is one of the big Cs of 21st century learning. The regurgitation of knowledge facts will be useless for future jobs. Critical thinking where one can call BS on quotes taken out of context is what we need to teach students. Nice try PCT. Better luck next time.

http://www.edudemic.com/7-ways-to-transform-education-by-2030/

[Bryan]

And the context was completely wrong. He wasn't saying this was the ideology of the union - ie. not caring about children - but explaining why the union was effective and necessary.

You can dodge and weave all you want, but he very clearly stated (in the quote that you posted) that children are not what they care about, that they do not have a vision for public education, and that advancing the interests of the teachers are what they are concerned about.

It absolutely is what he said.

[socialist]

You can dodge and weave all you want, but he very clearly stated (in the quote that you posted) that children are not what they care about, that they do not have a vision for public education, and that advancing the interests of the teachers are what they are concerned about.

It absolutely is what he said.

You need to understand the assault on education by neo-liebrals. Take a look at this graphic to see what is happening in BC. I'm glad t hear that parents and the public in BC are fed up with the neo-liberals in that province and their underfunding of public eduction.

[Bryan]

Those are a nice small step in the right direction.

[Michael Hardner]

You can dodge and weave all you want, but he very clearly stated (in the quote that you posted) that children are not what they care about, that they do not have a vision for public education, and that advancing the interests of the teachers are what they are concerned about.

It absolutely is what he said.

Did you watch the video ?

[Bryan]

Did you watch the video ?

I did. It was a disgusting piece of left-wing propaganda. It sums up the entire problem with teachers unions perfectly, they are only in it for themselves, the actual education not their primary concern.

[bleeding heart]

What exactly was the "propaganda," assuming that words have meanings that can be found out and discussed?

[Michael Hardner]

I did. It was a disgusting piece of left-wing propaganda. It sums up the entire problem with teachers unions perfectly, they are only in it for themselves, the actual education not their primary concern.

Ok, so maybe I should rewatch the video and transcribe exactly what is said, and post it with what Pct quoted, and what you said he said ?

Should I do that ?

[cybercoma]

Ok, so maybe I should rewatch the video and transcribe exactly what is said, and post it with what Pct quoted, and what you said he said ?

Should I do that ?

Yes you should. Don't transcribe the whole video, but the parts that important to the argument here.

[Michael Hardner]

Yes you should. Don't transcribe the whole video, but the parts that important to the argument here.

Well, I will only take the time and effort to do so if the people who are making the claim will continue to follow the thread. If it turns out that their interpretation is unreasonable, they will have the opportunity to join the inner circle of sublime posters who concede when they're wrong. I enjoy my membership in that club immensely, myself, as it allows me to learn and edify myself.

[Pct2017]

You need to understand the assault on education by neo-liebrals. Take a look at this graphic to see what is happening in BC. I'm glad t hear that parents and the public in BC are fed up with the neo-liberals in that province and their underfunding of public eduction.

Ah yes, one of the BCTF's favourite tactics. To take this piece of information at face value, it would appear simply terrible. But, alas, you can never, ever take anything from the most reviled public sector union in BC at face value. They chose to omit two slightly important details in this table. First, and quite frankly of lesser value, is the fact that in 2001, the numbers of teachers and others in the education system in BC were at historic highs. Glen Clark had commenced his burn it to the ground campaign because he was very aware that his party was in ruins (they would elect two members to the Ledg in the next election). So, anytime the BCTF references this timeframe, it is obviously highly advantageous to them. It would be a very different looking table if they referenced 1998 versus today.

But that is minor compared to the real whopper. Why of why do they always forget to mention "Did you know that there are 72.000 fewer students today than there were in 2001"? They always forget that minor detail in their cries of injustice.

[Michael Hardner]

But that is minor compared to the real whopper. Why of why do they always forget to mention "Did you know that there are 72.000 fewer students today than there were in 2001"? They always forget that minor detail in their cries of injustice.

See - this is an example of a fact-based response, that helps those of us following the dialogue to learn about the situation.

[socialist]

PCT only listens to what the neo-libs say. Here are some facts. Many of you should really try to understand what is happening in BC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ9UgWC1jMw#t=25

[Michael Hardner]

The thing is, Socialist, he came back with a fact that trounces the assertion that you posted above - just as you trounced his misquote of the American teacher's federation leader.

Either one of you could improve by incorporating some more truth into your arguments. The pro-teacher argument should be able to continue, even given the numbers of students in the system taken into account. The pro-restraint argument should be able to continue without misquoting the American.

[socialist]

Ah yes, one of the BCTF's favourite tactics. To take this piece of information at face value, it would appear simply terrible. But, alas, you can never, ever take anything from the most reviled public sector union in BC at face value. They chose to omit two slightly important details in this table. First, and quite frankly of lesser value, is the fact that in 2001, the numbers of teachers and others in the education system in BC were at historic highs. Glen Clark had commenced his burn it to the ground campaign because he was very aware that his party was in ruins (they would elect two members to the Ledg in the next election). So, anytime the BCTF references this timeframe, it is obviously highly advantageous to them. It would be a very different looking table if they referenced 1998 versus today.

But that is minor compared to the real whopper. Why of why do they always forget to mention "Did you know that there are 72.000 fewer students today than there were in 2001"? They always forget that minor detail in their cries of injustice.

This is deceiving. Yes, enrollment may be down but the number of needy students is increasing. The number of students in the system who suffer from poverty because of neo-liberal policies is increasing. It's the teachers who have to deal with an increasing number of IEPs. A class of 12 today is equivalent to a class of 28 in the 70s which is what PCT bases his knowledge of public education.

The number of strugling learners nowadays has skyrocketed which is resulting in a need for smaller classes and more teachers. yet the neo-libs don't want to implement common sense. The BCTF is arguing for smaller class sizes because it helps kids the most. Yes, the BCTF looks after its members, but they also care a lot about kids, all kids, not just the affluent.

[socialist]

The thing is, Socialist, he came back with a fact that trounces the assertion that you posted above - just as you trounced his misquote of the American teacher's federation leader.

Either one of you could improve by incorporating some more truth into your arguments. The pro-teacher argument should be able to continue, even given the numbers of students in the system taken into account. The pro-restraint argument should be able to continue without misquoting the American.

Chanin was not the leader of the ATF. He was leader of the NEA. Facts are important.

[Scotty]

Critical thinkers aren't fooled. Critical thinking is one of the big Cs of 21st century learning. The regurgitation of knowledge facts will be useless for future jobs.

It's very hard to employ critical thinking without having a solid base of knowledge. It is the teaching of fundamentals in core subjects which is dropping Canadian students behind in the world. Canada's literacy rate is unimpressive, and reading scores among 15 year olds have been dropping, year by year. Reading scores in BC are among the lowest in Canada. You can't engage in critical thinking very well if you can't read very well.

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=81

BC Teacher salaries are already too high.

Provincial data show that between 2001-02 and 2012-13, total compensation for teachers increased by 45.5 per cent to $88,695 from $60,695 (including benefits and employee pension contributions). Over that same period, B.C.’s inflation rate rose by 19.1 per cent.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/on-wages-bc-teachers-are-pushing-a-tough-sell/article17185144/

Saying they're getting screwed because teachers in other jurisdictions are even MORE overpaid is not much of an enticing argument for hard-pressed taxpayers.

Edited May 3, 2014 by Scotty

[Bryan]

Ok, so maybe I should rewatch the video and transcribe exactly what is said, and post it with what Pct quoted, and what you said he said ?

Should I do that ?

Go for it. I heard what he said. You can contort logic all you want to defend the unions, but you'll just be doing the same thing that he did in the video.

[Pct2017]

This is deceiving. Yes, enrollment may be down but the number of needy students is increasing. The number of students in the system who suffer from poverty because of neo-liberal policies is increasing. It's the teachers who have to deal with an increasing number of IEPs. A class of 12 today is equivalent to a class of 28 in the 70s which is what PCT bases his knowledge of public education.

The number of strugling learners nowadays has skyrocketed which is resulting in a need for smaller classes and more teachers. yet the neo-libs don't want to implement common sense. The BCTF is arguing for smaller class sizes because it helps kids the most. Yes, the BCTF looks after its members, but they also care a lot about kids, all kids, not just the affluent.

Wow, where to start. The most obvious and laughable statement to take to task is the assertion that a class of 28 back in the day is now equivalent to 12 today. Talk about pandering to the hard of thinking! The sole difference between the time frames referenced is the integration of mentally handicapped kids into mainstream schools. The rest of the argument about more kids with learning issues is bunk. There were just as many back then, but instead of them having acronym labels, they were just called turds. Now they are turds with a pile of letters in their file.

Then there is the mantra that teachers love so dearly: just hire more of us and everything will be perfect. Well, let's test that. First, can we all agree that French Immersion classes are touted as desirable because they are smaller than their English counterparts? So, it would seem obvious that those students will crush their English class counterparts, right? Well, hang on. In reading skills, the French Immersion kids get killed by the English kids. But that makes sense you say. They are learning an entirely new language. But the French kids will prevail in science and math, right? Again the contrary is true. And it is not even that it is a statistically insignificant difference.

So, how do you explain that kids in smaller classes achieve lower results? I cannot, but as a taxpayer, I am very unwilling to see a pile more teachers hired just for the sake of increasing union dues and making life easier for teachers. I am a results oriented person and the results in this case do not justify the expense.

[bleeding heart]

And what excellent result accrues from deeming children who don't learn well or quickly as "turds"?

[Michael Hardner]

Go for it. I heard what he said. You can contort logic all you want to defend the unions, but you'll just, be doing the same thing that he did in the video.

The quote:

"And that brings me to my final and most important point which is why, at least in my opinion, NEA and its affilliates are such effective advocates. Despite what some among us would like to believe it is NOT because of our creative ideas, it is NOT because of the merit of our postions, it is NOT because we care about children and it is NOT because we have a vision of a great public school for every child.

NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power. And we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of millions of dollars in dues each year, because they believe that we are the unions that can most effectively represent them; the unions that can protect their rghts and advance their interests as education employees."

Pct has said "He says exactly what I quoted and you cannot even argue that it is contextually skewed."

Then quoted this:

"Then there was Bob Chanin, who was the outgoing General Counsel of the National Education Association who stated in reference to what the ideology of the NEA was: "it is not because we care about children and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. It is because we believe that we are the union that can most effectively represent teachers and can protect their rights and advance their interests as employees." Look up the video of this speech and you will see the room erupt in a standing ovation when he states this."

Completely false. In no way is the quote stated 'in reference to what the ideology of the NEA was'. He specifically refers to why it's effective. The rest of the quote was also chopped up to make it sound evil.

Bryan said " he very clearly stated that children are not what they care about, that they do not have a vision for public education, and that advancing the interests of the teachers are what they are concerned about."

So, Bryan, you can read the full quote and see he didn't say that at all.

Let's see if Bryan and Pct thank me for my 15 minutes' work transcribing this by saying "Oh, I didn't realize that quote was out of context. I'll continue to make my arguments against government waste without misquoting this man. Thankis, Michael"