BC Teachers Getting Screwed...Again

[Pct2017]

Yes, because the neo-liberals have screwed the teachers of BC in a royal way. Read the court decision for understandin. why did the courts side with the BCTF against the neo-libs? You are ignorant on this situation and it is blatantly obvious.

Ok, using your own words, no cartoons or citing loopy left wing websites, please explain to the class just what it was that Madame Justice Griffin stated in the court case. Remember, no cheating, just give us your understanding of the verdict and how it affects the current round of negotiations.

You must be specific. No generalities. If you fail at this, you will be banished from using the term neo-liberal for one year.

Time starts now.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Pct2017

[socialist]

Ok, using your own words, no cartoons or citing loopy left wing websites, please explain to the class just what it was that Madame Justice Griffin stated in the court case. Remember, no cheating, just give us your understanding of the verdict and how it affects the current round of negotiations.

You must be specific. No generalities. If you fail at this, you will be banished from using the term neo-liberal for one year.

Time starts now.

Justice Susan Griffin ruled that the government’s decision to remove class size and school staffing levels from the collective agreement in 2002 was unconstitutional. The BCTF negotiated for these things and the government took them away. The BCTF finally said enough, and is now educating the public about the assault against public education by the current government.

Edited May 21, 2014 by socialist

[Pct2017]

Justice Susan Griffin ruled that the government’s decision to remove class size and school staffing levels from the collective agreement in 2002 was unconstitutional. The BCTF negotiated for these things and the government took them away. The BCTF finally said enough, and is now educating the public about the assault against public education by the current government.

Well, I am going to give you a C- for you very limited effort. Your last line about the BCTF "finally" educating the public cost you a full grade. Now, let me educate you.

Bill 22 or the Education Improvement Act did indeed impose class size and composition limits and removed these elements from the negotiations with the BCTF which were ongoing at the time. That is what Madame Griffin ruled was unconstitutional. However, section 27.7 put an expiry date on these provisions. It stated that after June 30, 2013, the BCTF could negotiate on class size and composition in it's collective agreement. So, this massive victory that the BCTF loves to tout was actually a verdict that addressed the time period between the enactment of the Bill and June 30, 2013 or roughly 15 months.

So, in other words, her ruling has no bearing whatsoever on the current round of negotiations. Class size and composition was always going to be included in this round of negotiations.

To be very honest, I have no idea of why the government decided to appeal the ruling. It was really a lame duck ruling and the two million fine was the best spent two million in the history of the province. We saved upwards of half a billion per year for over a decade for the price of a two million fine.

[Pct2017]

Something that seems to be getting passed over in the discussion about our whiney BC teachers is the fact that the BCTF has to be somewhat mindful of the support it can garner from it's own membership if it moves into the very dangerous waters of a full strike, particularly in June.

Going back to March, the union took a strike vote. It received 89% support, so that would indicate overwhelming support, right. Well, not really. What that strike ballot would have said is something along the lines of do you give your union the mandate to call limited job action if necessary as deemed by the union executive. So, a no vote would basically neuter the union in negotiations with the employer. Yet, 3,250 teachers did just that. And another 11,700 chose not to vote at all. Now, those two groups combined were still in the minority compared to those who voted yes. But it is still a significant amount of members who either outright tried to kneecap their own union or chose to step aside for whatever reason.

The next vote that they have to take is much more sensitive. It will be along the lines of do you give your union the mandate to call a full strike. That is a much more difficult question to answer yes to.

On the other side, the government is exactly one year into a four year majority mandate. They have the approval of the population to manage the provincial affairs in a fiscally responsible manner. They do not have to pussyfoot around nearly as much as the BCTF is going to have to. I think that the union has blundered terribly by escalating to rotating strikes. They really are putting a lot of blind faith in the membership's commitment to follow them down this most dangerous of paths, namely a full strike.

[socialist]

Something that seems to be getting passed over in the discussion about our whiney BC teachers is the fact that the BCTF has to be somewhat mindful of the support it can garner from it's own membership if it moves into the very dangerous waters of a full strike, particularly in June.

Going back to March, the union took a strike vote. It received 89% support, so that would indicate overwhelming support, right. Well, not really. What that strike ballot would have said is something along the lines of do you give your union the mandate to call limited job action if necessary as deemed by the union executive. So, a no vote would basically neuter the union in negotiations with the employer. Yet, 3,250 teachers did just that. And another 11,700 chose not to vote at all. Now, those two groups combined were still in the minority compared to those who voted yes. But it is still a significant amount of members who either outright tried to kneecap their own union or chose to step aside for whatever reason.

The next vote that they have to take is much more sensitive. It will be along the lines of do you give your union the mandate to call a full strike. That is a much more difficult question to answer yes to.

On the other side, the government is exactly one year into a four year majority mandate. They have the approval of the population to manage the provincial affairs in a fiscally responsible manner. They do not have to pussyfoot around nearly as much as the BCTF is going to have to. I think that the union has blundered terribly by escalating to rotating strikes. They really are putting a lot of blind faith in the membership's commitment to follow them down this most dangerous of paths, namely a full strike.

You really don't understand. Jim Iker is doing an excellent job gaining public support. Yes, the public voted for this government, but had the public known the neo-liberals were planning an assault on public education, Adrian Dix would be the premier.

BC teachers I talk to don't care about salary. They are fighting for class size and composition. Parents and the public understand this and that is why the BCTF is doing the right thing in this instance.

PCT, I suggest you go to twitter and read #bced to become informed. You don't need an account and YOU would learn a great deal.

[socialist]

I couldn't have said it any better. More proof the public is on side with the BCTF against the neo-liberals who are attacking public education.

http://castlegarsource.com/news/oped-defense-our-teachers-31415#.U31RkPldUuf

http://www.bcpsea.bc.ca/documents/teacher%20bargaining/Bargaining%20Bulletin/00-MM-Letter%20to%20BCTF%20Jim%20Iker%20May%2021,%202014.pdf

Edited May 22, 2014 by socialist

[overthere]

The teachers better have their backyard bunkers sotcked with food and water.

When parents start to be affected by their children staying home from school becaiuse of greedy teachers, the pitchforks will come out.

It's a decent start. But when you are among the lowest paid teachers in Canada, 16% over 4 years may not be enough. The neo-libs are also avoiding the class size issue.

Oh yeah, that tired old meme that gets dragged out every time a public service union gets into a negotiating buntoss. Somewhere somebody makes more money than me, so I deserve more too, just because.

I'd like to see the BC govt determine what the actual value is for the work, then pay accordingly. Of course, they'd have to consider if there are any unemployed teachers out there anywhere in Canada they could hire who could help keep labour costs down.

[socialist]

The teachers better have their backyard bunkers sotcked with food and water.

When parents start to be affected by their children staying home from school becaiuse of greedy teachers, the pitchforks will come out.

Oh yeah, that tired old meme that gets dragged out every time a public service union gets into a negotiating buntoss. Somewhere somebody makes more money than me, so I deserve more too, just because.

I'd like to see the BC govt determine what the actual value is for the work, then pay accordingly. Of course, they'd have to consider if there are any unemployed teachers out there anywhere in Canada they could hire who could help keep labour costs down.

I think the public understands the situation. Parents what better conditions and want the cuts to end. They will understand the rotating strikes.

[Shady]

Public education is essential, and therefore should be deemed an essential service. They shouldn't be allowed to strike in most cases.

[socialist]

Public education is essential, and therefore should be deemed an essential service. They shouldn't be allowed to strike in most cases.

They should when they are getting screwed by a neo liberal government.

[Big Guy]

Public education is essential, and therefore should be deemed an essential service. They shouldn't be allowed to strike in most cases.

That is an argument that has been used in most of the labor confrontations between teachers and boards in all provinces. When you deny the right to strike then you have to provide and adhere to another means of settling a dispute. In areas where this solution was applied, the subsequent binding arbitration was considered slanted towards the teacher unions. In Ontario, now the parameters and process of binding arbitration is being reviewed to include the ability of the public to pay. Not sure how this is working out.

[overthere]

I think the public understands the situation. Parents what better conditions and want the cuts to end. They will understand the rotating strikes.

Oh, I think parents understand the situation: their kids are going to get screwed out of an education by greedy teachers.

Don't assume your usual blackmail will work this time.

[socialist]

Oh, I think parents understand the situation: their kids are going to get screwed out of an education by greedy teachers.

Don't assume your usual blackmail will work this time.

Parents know that the neo-liberal policies of the current government is what is hurting public ed. BC education is underfunded while tax dollars are going to fund private schools. So much you choose not to understand.

[WestCoastRunner]

Parents know that the neo-liberal policies of the current government is what is hurting public ed. BC education is underfunded while tax dollars are going to fund private schools. So much you choose not to understand.

Socialist, you keep spouting off about neo-liberals. Can't you just be real and talk about the real issues with this fight between the government and the teachers in BC. I am very concerned about it but your 'neo liberal' labels really doesn't add to the conversation. Can you add some substance other than 'neo liberals hurting public education'. Come up with something more substantial to add to your argument.

I do business with the elementary schools in the lower mainland and I do sympathize with the teachers. They are not greedy and they are concerned for the welfare of their students. This is their life and what they get up everyday for. Much like anyone else in their chosen profession. It is not all about money.

[WestCoastRunner]

For anyone that doesn't know the latest developments in the BC Teachers/Govt impasse, and I'm not sure why socialist hasn't enlightened everyone since he seems to be so impassioned about it:

• the bc govt has imposed a partial lockout and full scale lockouts effective end of june\
• rotating strikes will begin monday on behalf of the teachers
• the government is offering a 7.25 per cent wage increase over six years, while the province has said the teachers want 15.9 per cent over four years.

• The employers' association has announced a partial lockout, including a 10 per cent pay cut if teachers follow through with their plans to walk off the job.

• The lockout will also force high school teachers to stay home for three days and elementary teachers to be off work for one day.

[TimG]

I do business with the elementary schools in the lower mainland and I do sympathize with the teachers. They are not greedy and they are concerned for the welfare of their students. This is their life and what they get up everyday for. Much like anyone else in their chosen profession. It is not all about money.

Of course it is ALL about money. If the teachers reduced their wage demands I am sure the government would relent on class size and composition. The disagreement is because the teachers want rich wage increases on top of class size demands and the government simply does not have the money. There will be no resolution until the teachers accept that reality. Edited May 24, 2014 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

It is getting ugly, no doubt about it.

The Education Minister Peter Fassbender offered the 'carrot' of a reduced contract term — six years instead of the 10 years government had been demanding. He also offered teachers a pro-rated $1,200 signing bonus if an agreement were to be reached before the end of the school year.

It has been a very long time since negotiations have been reduced to this level.

[TimG]

It has been a very long time since negotiations have been reduced to this level.

Well the government knows it is not going to be negotiated because the teachers expectations have no connection to reality. I think they are trying to bring it to a head over the summer to minimize disruptions to students. We will likely see back to work legislation in the fall.

[socialist]

Well the government knows it is not going to be negotiated because the teachers expectations have no connection to reality. I think they are trying to bring it to a head over the summer to minimize disruptions to students. We will likely see back to work legislation in the fall.

Tim, with the public close to 80% in favo of the BCTF and teachers, the government knows they misplayed this. Watch and see.

[TimG]

Tim, with the public close to 80% in favo of the BCTF and teachers, the government knows they misplayed this. Watch and see.

That would be the same public that just re-elected the Liberals after rejecting the HST because it was perceived as a tax increase? The government knows people are not willing to pay the taxes required to fund the teachers demands and given a choice between tax increases and back to work legislation I am pretty sure the public will support the government.

[socialist]

That would be the same public that just re-elected the Liberals after rejecting the HST because it was perceived as a tax increase? The government knows people are not willing to pay the taxes required to fund the teachers demands and given a choice between tax increases and back to work legislation I am pretty sure the public will support the government.

The liberals won before the public found out they would assault public education. Things would be different if an election was held today.

[Pct2017]

Socialist, you keep spouting off about neo-liberals. Can't you just be real and talk about the real issues with this fight between the government and the teachers in BC. I am very concerned about it but your 'neo liberal' labels really doesn't add to the conversation. Can you add some substance other than 'neo liberals hurting public education'. Come up with something more substantial to add to your argument.

WCR,

You and I obviously have very differing views on the BCTF and the teachers who enable that union. But putting our differences aside for a minute, I have to take this opportunity to thank you profusely for achieving the near impossible. You have been able to get our young "teacher" friend Socialist to go two posts without using the phrase neo-liberal.

Thank you.

PCT2017

[socialist]

WCR,

You and I obviously have very differing views on the BCTF and the teachers who enable that union. But putting our differences aside for a minute, I have to take this opportunity to thank you profusely for achieving the near impossible. You have been able to get our young "teacher" friend Socialist to go two posts without using the phrase neo-liberal.

Thank you.

PCT2017

Hey PCT, how does it feel to be wrong? Parents are supporting the BCTF. Don't believe me? Go to twitter and read #bced. You don't need an account. I'm sue you won't because you want to resist reality. BCTF gaining support. Have a nice day!!!!

Edited May 24, 2014 by socialist

[socialist]

WCR,

You and I obviously have very differing views on the BCTF and the teachers who enable that union. But putting our differences aside for a minute, I have to take this opportunity to thank you profusely for achieving the near impossible. You have been able to get our young "teacher" friend Socialist to go two posts without using the phrase neo-liberal.

Thank you.

PCT2017

This teacher explains things perfectly.

http://m.pentictonherald.ca/opinion/article_074a43f0-e235-11e3-8906-0017a43b2370.html?mode=jqm#.U4AMVGl1nyB.twitter

[Pct2017]

This teacher explains things perfectly.

http://m.pentictonherald.ca/opinion/article_074a43f0-e235-11e3-8906-0017a43b2370.html?mode=jqm#.U4AMVGl1nyB.twitter

So, pretty minor point here, but when you choose to quote what someone else said, you are really meant to respond to that particular thought. Seems like a pretty simple idea, but.....