As of midnight yesterday, there was no overall resolution to dozens of contracts between elementary and secondary teachers working in public school boards,
Personally, I'm left scratching my head as to how anyone gets to a resolution in this mess.
The unions are slowly painting themselves into a corner where their actions will only further alienate the public support they will need in order to minimize the impact of this battle on their members. If this province heads into an election in 2013 without some sort of resolution and job action continues, despite all their bravado the unions won't gain enough support to elect a government friendly to their demands.
Even if the contentious portions of Bill 115 are repealed, the government's fiscal goals haven't changed. It will still want to contain the massive liability of banked sick days and retirement gratuities for those school boards that offered them up to this point. It will still seek to eliminate the two-day-a-month sick day provisions and replace it with an amount closer to what people actually take, backed up by a short-term disability program.
It will still also seek to move towards provincial bargaining -- which, frankly, should have happened back in 1998 when the current district school boards were created and educational funding consolidated at the provincial level.
The government doesn't get off scot-free either.
By poisoning bargaining right from the start, it did make it quite clear it wasn't willing to budge on its goals. It joined the unions in the war of rhetoric, making it easy to get distracted. This wasn't about wages. It's about long-tail liabilities and controlling the sector. Yet, to this day, the government line remains about teachers not wanting to take a pay cut, which is beyond false.
Caught in the middle, as always, are students. Being used as pawns, being abused as those impacted by any job action.
Bargaining would be the defining matter in education for the past 12 months, but that's not to suggest there weren't others. Here are a few to provide some fodder for reflection and discussion:
- Accommodation: This one does not go away. In 2012, another high-profile attempt -- this time in Peterborough -- to derail the decision made by a local school board. Another failure to understand that ministry reviews and judicial reviews are not appeals and cannot reverse a decision made by a group of local trustees. The rebound in declining enrolment is just getting underway in many districts. Many will point to this rebound as justification for maintaining the status quo-- but to do so is ignorant of what any good demographer will tell you. This rebound (which will take another eight to 10 years to begin hitting secondary schools) will be longer and smaller than previous baby booms. Which means it won't make up for the existing vacancies in our schools that will need to be rationalized sooner than this increase will start hitting high schools. This won't go away in 2013 either-- keep an eye on brewing situations in Kingston, London and maybe even, finally, in Toronto.
- GSAs: Long forgotten by now due to the labour unrest, this was a defining issue for the first quarter of the year. One of the only bills that received Royal assent before the summer break, Bill 13 was supposed to fix all bullying in our schools. Or something like that, I now mutter facetiously. The government started the year battling some faith-based groups and parents who objected to having gay straight alliances become a mandatory part of schools. Lost in the bigger discussion over what these support groups should be called was whether the name alone makes any real differences in school cultures and how they deal with harassment.
- See ya later, education premier: In a move that surprised many at the time, Dalton announced in October he will step down as party leader and premier once the Ontario Liberal Party elects a new leader in late January. So comes to an end a nine-year stretch where, for the most part, the government was quite friendly to the sector-- increasing funding by billions as student enrolments dropped by about six per cent. The legacy's being defined by his last few months, but as I argued when the announcement was made, McGuinty's legacy is larger than that. I would think in time, his term will be compared to that of Bill Davis.
In the meantime, this tiny little blog approaches 100,000 page views as it enters its fourth year in March. Thanks to those who've stopped by and particularly to those who have been longtime readers.
Posts
16 comments:
I often think as I hear reporters repeat the teachers union mantra " its not about money" - that they need to take another look.
This union/prov gov't negotiation is all about money. It isn't quite as obvious as the world of contracts provides "educationeze" to redefine money. When is a raise not a raise? When it is a grid jump.
Contracts include step up clauses - a grid. So each year a salary is apportioned to a teachers academic and experience credentials.
In essence no increase still means a jump on the grid. So for example the past 4 years reflected approx. 12 % of increases but teachers at the lower end of the grid also bumped up the salary grid at the same time - add an extra 3 % a year ( lower end of grid in particular ).
So not giving teachers a grid bump would indeed be a zero increase. Simply saying there will not be an across the board increase is only half the story and half the money.
The second issue that no one seems to call a spade, is the removal of the right to strike. It appears to be the long term goal of Ont. government to make education elem/sec an essential service. If I was a teacher this would be my key concern, not the grid.
So when I look at this from the vantage of my newspaper, I can't help thinking that I would love reporters to call this as it is.
It is about money, and it is about cutting back on union power to upset the economy and of course peoples lives, while balancing the budget.
Teachers as a whole, earn far more than those with similar educational background - one must filter in the the two months summer, Christmas, March break holidays in making comparisons and of course the pension deposit by the school boards. The removal of the clauses tied to sick day banking - are long in coming and are appropriate.
I have to agree with the previous commentor, the way I see any Ont Gov going is to rein in Education costs, First, all day Kindergarten, this should be totally run by ECE, the make less but do the same job,and, some are better at it.2nd, Library Techinicians should be looking after school libraries, not teachers. 3rd Children must attend school when the reach the age of 7yrs old, therefore teachers should become and essential service. 4th, Sick days restricted to same as in private sector. If you take the salary of a teacher in the public system today, 184 days of teaching, divided by yearly salary to calculate the hourly rate, even a starting teacher makes for more than majority of private sector.
Anons:
Both of you raise valid points.
It is about the money, but it's not about the salary, per se. Rhetoric out the ying-yang on how everyone agreed to a wage freeze. The OECTA MOU takes it, but also takes unpaid days to allow for grid movement. One supposes, having crunched the numbers, that tradeoff is relatively neutral. If the players at all levels had continued to bargain, Bill 115 actually allows for changes to the MOU pieces as long as the overall expenditure fits within the 'fiscal framework.' Meaning, to me, feel free to find other ways to slice up the pie we've baked for you, but the pie isn't getting bigger and there's not another one to give you.
The money rhetoric is further stirred up when part of the unions' vehemence is that the bill and MOU implement a fiscal framework the government was very clear on. So if they want to maintain grids, sick day banks, payouts, whatever, they have to find the funds within the wage and benefit envelope. Some simply don't like the money not being on the table to begin with.
As to the bargaining elements, Bill 115 mandated bargaining. Deadline passed. Let's see what Thursday's presser from Broten adds. It's not illegal to strike under the Bill and those rights have not been removed based on my read and various interpretations I've read (TVO's the Agenda had a stellar one). The bill simply allows the minister to end job action (perhaps before it starts) without needing the approval of back-to-work legislation. I'll concede that's a backhanded way to essentially designate the ed sector as essential.
Hugo
"it is about money, and it is about cutting back on union power to upset the economy and of course peoples lives, while balancing the budget.”
Bull. It’s about collective bargaining, charter freedoms and stopping a government from singling out a group as a scapegoat for its political failures. And, while we’re at it, the Union is the teachers and vice versa – drop the banal right-wing rhetoric that some nefarious, 1930s style Union is running the show because it’s patently false. Teachers run the union, teachers make the decisions and teachers carry out the actions.
And if it was about "money", what then did ETFO lose a day's pay for a strike? Oops...objective fact to deal with.
“teachers as a whole, earn far more than those with similar educational background - one must filter in the the two months summer, Christmas, March break holidays in making comparisons and of course the pension deposit by the school boards. The removal of the clauses tied to sick day banking - are long in coming and are appropriate.”
More dreck. Find me those with similar skill sets and identical university educations and then we’ll talk. Teachers don’t earn more than nurses, firefighters, police, engineers, and countless members of the government bureaucracy. They all have two university degrees? Nope. Here’s the rub – most can’t do the job that these people do and even more can’t meet the basic qualifications. Now, for the intellectually insecure and wannabe intelligentsia this will undoubtedly bring about a chorus of whining, vitriolic platitudes and incessant argumentative fallacies, but the reality is that it simply isn’t a profession that caters to the lowest common denominator. Now that ‘s calling a spade a spade.
Here's an idea, Hugo. Instead of prattling on and on about sick days in your little twitter account, why not get off your ass and actually teach? You think that an elementary school environment is the same as the one in your newspaper offices? Brilliant. Let's see you practice what you preach and control a grade 3 class while constantly infected with their viruses and illnesses.
"Many people work due to a sense of duty"? AND THEY END UP INFECTING OTHERS!!! And teachers should infect kids? Damn.
Hugo Miseducation Twitter Alert
“But extras always sacrificed and it hurts kids”
Can the histrionics. It “inconveniences” kids when perks are no longer volunteered. That’s all. Get some perspective. Lose the teacher-bashing nonsense and you go down to the local high school and put in your 10-15 hours a week and help coach a team. Cue the excuses.
At the end of the day, teachers are paid and obligated to TEACH kids by delivering the curriculum and that’s it. It’s too bad that the culture of entitlement wants free work as well, but those days, as the Czar of Education has promulgated, are over.
“allow qualified volunteers to be involved in a more meaningful way to fill in the gaps”
They tried this during the Harris regime. Failed. Miserably. But, hey, I say let’s try it again, right Hugo?
Clearly a thorn in the paw has been encountered.
There are currently an excess of teachers within the market, unfortunately the market is ruled by a monopoly (yes private schools exist but rep a small fraction of the student places within the prov).
What we need is to loosen up the education system and provide charter schools in Ontario. In Quebec, you can take a student's prov. funding and apply it against a private school.
I really like the idea of getting rid of the monopoly of teachers, keeping only the best teachers, paying them for achievement and removing school boards from the equation.
With the introduction of the two year BEd, less teachers will be produced and the ones graduating and they will have a more robust degree to enter the work force with. As the senior teachers retire, the replacement teacher is replaced with one with enhanced qualifications and at a more market friendly price.
I have no problem paying current rates but we need to subtract of the extended holidays and then the annual pay would be realistic.
The growth market in elem/sec education is over and this allows for the government to bring the education budget back into line.
Anon 1
I have a real problem with the growing wage gap between public employees and private. The average person working for the private sector has consistently seen wage and benefit losses. We are the people who pay for public sector wages which continues to grow at astonishing rates. We just can't afford you anymore. It is time to be realistic and start reigning in runaway costs.
Anon 03 January, 2013 14:46 and Anon 03 January, 2013 18:22:
Yowzers. I would agree with the thorn/paw analogy of the subsequent anonymous commenter.
The foibles of Twitter too-- 140 characters leads to judgments being made far too quickly on one's character. Search the pages of this blog and you'll find a respect for teaching and teachers (though not often some of their unions' decisions) that is quite deep.
And, FYI, as someone with over 10 years experience in this craft, I've been in more classrooms than I can remember covering education issues and observing teachers and support staff do their jobs-- both the paid and voluntary portions. My body of work demonstrates this, if you'd bothered to look at it. I've also volunteered in schools in a former life, worked nine years in residential camping dealing with children and youth of all ages in all capacities. Not to mention I remain an active instructor-- teaching children and youth of all ages swimming, first aid and lifesaving skills and still pull part-time shifts at the local YMCA. All things you could have put together if you'd actually spent some time in this space instead of rushing to critique me and my background.
Which leads me to question the strength of your original positions-- if they were really so strong, stick to the topic at hand instead of getting into my character.
Hugo
Wow...hit a little to close to the mark, huh? I commented on your position points, your lack of relevant education and your clear teacher-bashing agenda. Get some thicker skin.
Oh, and "volunteering" in a classroom or at a camp isn't the same thing - evidently your disdain (or envy) for teachers falls back on comparing "hanging out" in a classroom and Band Camp as analogous. They're not.
It's always interesting to see the people who deem themselves "education reporters" actually have ZERO qualification in education and haven't actually participated in curriculum development or delivery.
Again, let's see you get the degrees and walk the walk or practice what you preach and volunteer at a school (no, the YMCA doesn't count as you've been railing against teacher withdrawal of extracurriculars). Seems this is long on empty musings and short on practical experience.
Cue the teacher-bashing.
Anon 8 Jan. 6:47
If you think this is teacher bashing, I shudder to see what you think of the posts, columns and other commentary from writers out there who really do hate teachers.
Once again, before making rash judgments on my background and experience you may actually want to spend some time reading through this space. It's a wee bit obstinate to claim I understand nothing of a teacher's background and experiences and then belittle my background and experiences.
Oh, and you may actually want to read what I've written too. Never "railed" against teacher withdrawal of extracurriculars. Simply asked whether the gaps when teachers choose to withdraw cannot be filled by qualified volunteers.
Hugo
“If you think this is teacher bashing, I shudder to see what you think of the posts, columns and other commentary from writers out there who really do hate teachers.”
Oh…I think they’re misinformed, anti-Unionist, right-wing neocon ideologues. Rarely have I seen a balanced account of the issue nor have I seen the proper facts reported (how many times have “journalists” or “bloggers” incorrectly claimed this about a wage freeze or that the unions are somehow rogue agents bent on ignoring their poor constituents?)
“
Once again, before making rash judgments on my background and experience you may actually want to spend some time reading through this space. It's a wee bit obstinate to claim I understand nothing of a teacher's background and experiences and then belittle my background and experiences.”
You don’t have university in the education in the field. You haven’t actually developed or delivered curriculum. You have little to no actual experience in the fields of elementary or secondary education. It’s not “obstinate” musings, its objective fact. You, and many others in your “field” simply create your own titles with very little substance to warrant it.
“Oh, and you may actually want to read what I've written too. Never "railed" against teacher withdrawal of extracurriculars. Simply asked whether the gaps when teachers choose to withdraw cannot be filled by qualified volunteers.”
Bull. What about this, “What a brilliant way of controlling these activities so they can be cancelled during a labor dispute, only hurting the very students everyone keeps saying they care so much about.”? That’s objective? That’s a fair and balanced approach to a rather contentious labor dispute? Your agenda comes shining through in the condescending and antagonistic tone. This is an empty polemic, nothing more.
I heard a rumour that in the midst of all the confusion, the gov't quietly gave themselves a raise while "hammering the teachers"?
Hugo Miseducation Alert
"Love this part of extracurriculars. They're voluntary, we insist. We die on that hill to keep 'em voluntary. But chrissakes, don't do 'em!"
But didn't you earlier write, "Never "railed" against teacher withdrawal of extracurriculars."?
Hmmm...Hugo got caught again with spewing his uniformed rhetoric - although not only is it infantile anti-teacher dreck, it's a perfect example of his "railing" against teacher withdrawal of extracurriculars.
Caught again.
Anon 15 Jan. 17:11
Up to that point, no, I wouldn't characterize what I'd written as railing. You did.
Uninformed?
Sorry, I must have missed the part where ETFO, in its letter ordering members NOT to do ECs, still told members it's actually voluntary and their choice.
Please, if you can do so without your own name-calling and rhetoric explain how any part of that tweet was incorrect.
Again, as stated in the other post-- I'm asking for a solution that allows qualified, screened volunteers from the community to step in and lead ECs when teachers choose to withdraw from them. Or, in this case, are ORDERED to withdraw. There is absolutely nothing proprietary about ECs and outside of a school setting many, many qualified and screened volunteers lead these activities.
If you're going to pick insults out of the air to lob my way, be precise. I'm not anti-teacher. I'm often anti teachers' union.
I'm done responding to comments with baseless name-calling that lack any substance. They've been an interesting diversion. If what I tweet and write bothers you so, Twitter has an unfollow button and you should stick to reading blogs that only align with your own opinions.
Hugo
Again I guess I hit pretty close to the mark, but let’s have some fun with your rationalizations.
“Sorry, I must have missed the part where ETFO, in its letter ordering members NOT to do ECs, still told members it's actually voluntary and their choice. “
And? Who makes up ETFO? THE TEACHERS! This isn’t the union unilaterally calling the shots, it’s operating on its membership’s instructions. I guess you missed all those votes, huh? Or is that ignored them? I’ll go with the latter.
“Please, if you can do so without your own name-calling and rhetoric explain how any part of that tweet was incorrect.”
Where was the name-calling? And when you decry others for allegedly using names and then accuse them of “rhetoric” it smacks of hypocrisy. Get some thicker skin.
And how was your “tweet” incorrect? Well…it’s the tone. Teachers volunteer their time, so in the face of extraordinarily Draconian legislation aimed solely at them and their profession, the union – the teachers – is asking its membership to take a pause on activities not related to curriculum delivery. What you fail to understand is that unions must be able to defend their members and taking away EXTRAS is a means for them to display their frustration.
“Again, as stated in the other post-- I'm asking for a solution that allows qualified, screened volunteers from the community to step in and lead ECs when teachers choose to withdraw from them. Or, in this case, are ORDERED to withdraw. There is absolutely nothing proprietary about ECs and outside of a school setting many, many qualified and screened volunteers lead these activities.”
And? Who’s objecting to this? You demonstrate that OSSTF or ETFO have in any means objectively hindered volunteers. They don’t control the Education Act or School Boards, so where’s the problem? In fact, according to a London Free Press article today, there’s been scarcely any volunteering from parents. Evidently, the incessant whining outstrips the actual volunteering.
“If you're going to pick insults out of the air to lob my way, be precise. I'm not anti-teacher. I'm often anti teachers' union.”
I was being precise and on target. You merely have nothing to call my criticisms into actual question.
Since teachers are the union, then you by extension are anti-teacher. Drop whatever antiquated and uneducated notions you possess regarding unions as the OSSTF and ETFO largely operate at the privilege and direction of their members. Hence, you’re anti-teacher. Maybe find a different blog topic or at the very least, be open about your bias.
“I'm done responding to comments with baseless name-calling that lack any substance. They've been an interesting diversion. If what I tweet and write bothers you so, Twitter has an unfollow button and you should stick to reading blogs that only align with your own opinions.”
Translation – you got caught with misinformed, biased, agenda-pushing dreck and when confronted, you ran away. Fine – pepper your retreat with whatever argumentative fallacies, victimization or rationalizations that you want, but the truth is clear. You don’t like teachers, their union or their activities in the face of unconstitutional legislation that was solely directed at the profession for political reasons. You’ll forever be on the wrong side of history when this finally plays out.
C&B
Post a Comment