OT: teachers
01-10-2013, 10:45 AM
#1
Race Car
Thread Starter
OT: teachers
I know a lot of people in Ontario are really pissed off at teachers right now, especially with the very short notice of tomorrow's strike day/protest day. I want to set a few things straight.
I'm married to a teacher, a card-carrying ETFO member. So these issues are not only important to me, but I get a bit more info than what may be portrayed in the media. And right off the bat, it's not the media's fault. The union is holding their cards close to their chest, which, in my opinion, is bad news.
First off, wages: the wage freeze was never up for discussion. As soon as contract negotiations began last summer, the teachers accepted a wage freeze. They knew it would be necessary, with the deficit the provincial government was facing. There was never an argument about that. However, as far as I know, the union has never stated that publicly.
The other big issue, sick days: a contentious issue, yes, but one that's already been solved. Teachers with banked sick days will get a payout for their banked sick days, and will no longer be able to bank them. I don't know what the payout rate is, but I understand it's quite fair. That issue has been put to bed. In the end, it's my opinion (note I said opinion) that not allowing banking sick days will actually cost more, because teachers will now take all 10 sick days allotted to them, and will rely more heavily on STD benefits, rather than taking maybe 5 or so sick days a year and allowing them to accrue. Furthermore, a substitute teacher must be paid for all 10 days. Upon retirement, sick days are paid out at (I believe) 50%. So it's cheaper to pay out 20 days per year at 50% than 10 days at 100%, plus the cost of the substitute teacher, not to mention additional pressure on STD benefits.
In the end, this is really about rights, and standing up for them. If you haven't read bill 115, have a look at section 14:
Anyone who gives a hoot about the Charter, democracy, human rights, etc. should be really concerned about this section. I'm disgusted that such a law could actually be passed in Ontario. Truly, this sounds like something from China, or Soviet-era Russia.
Teachers teach their kids every day to stand up for what's right, which isn't always what's easy or popular. Right now they're putting their money where their mouths are.
A rumour went around back in December after the first wave of single-day strikes that Broten did nothing to stop them because her legal advisors told her the current court challenge of bill 115 would almost certainly strike the legislation down, and there would be hell to pay if she took action and declared the strikes illegal, based on legislation that was later struck down as being unconstitutional. Again, this was just a rumour - nothing to back it up, and it doesn't explain why they're seeking an order today to declare tomorrow's day of protest illegal.
Here's something ironic: section 14 of bill 115 prevents the bill being challenged by the Ontario Labour Relations Board. However that's the board the government is going in front of today to have tomorrow's protest declared illegal. So does the government recognize the Board's authority or not? You can't have it both ways.
So here's the rub: the union has really, in my view, failed miserably at convincing the public at large of these issues. They're "negotiating" the same way unions have always negotiated: withholding certain information, rhetorical and inflammatory statements in the media, and telling their membership what's best for them, rather than listening to what their membership wants.
Many teachers would rather be at work tomorrow. They face a possible $2000 fine from the government and even possible jail time for illegal strike action (though it's very unlikely that anyone will actually be charged, much less go to jail). On the other hand, the union fines their members $500 for failing to show up for labour protests, strikes, etc. That fine WILL be levied if a union member doesn't sign in, as I understand it. So the teachers are being held hostage by their union.
Back in June, the provincial government handed the union a contract and said "here, take it or leave it". The union left it. In my opinion, there should be a clause in the CBA that states such action immediately triggers binding arbitration. The two sides should have been sequestered with an arbitor for as long as it took to get a deal worked out.
In the end, the teachers are caught in between a bull-headed minister and an antiquated union. The wage freeze was accepted, the change to sick days was unpopular, but settled. But the teachers won't roll over and have their rights trampled on, and for that we should be proud.
My wife and I actually discussed the possibility of her going to jail tomorrow. It's extremely unlikely to happen, but it's the first time that discussion has ever come up in our household! She's willing to go through with that, if that's what's necessary. But she's rather just be in the classroom, teaching her grade 3s.
I'm married to a teacher, a card-carrying ETFO member. So these issues are not only important to me, but I get a bit more info than what may be portrayed in the media. And right off the bat, it's not the media's fault. The union is holding their cards close to their chest, which, in my opinion, is bad news.
First off, wages: the wage freeze was never up for discussion. As soon as contract negotiations began last summer, the teachers accepted a wage freeze. They knew it would be necessary, with the deficit the provincial government was facing. There was never an argument about that. However, as far as I know, the union has never stated that publicly.
The other big issue, sick days: a contentious issue, yes, but one that's already been solved. Teachers with banked sick days will get a payout for their banked sick days, and will no longer be able to bank them. I don't know what the payout rate is, but I understand it's quite fair. That issue has been put to bed. In the end, it's my opinion (note I said opinion) that not allowing banking sick days will actually cost more, because teachers will now take all 10 sick days allotted to them, and will rely more heavily on STD benefits, rather than taking maybe 5 or so sick days a year and allowing them to accrue. Furthermore, a substitute teacher must be paid for all 10 days. Upon retirement, sick days are paid out at (I believe) 50%. So it's cheaper to pay out 20 days per year at 50% than 10 days at 100%, plus the cost of the substitute teacher, not to mention additional pressure on STD benefits.
In the end, this is really about rights, and standing up for them. If you haven't read bill 115, have a look at section 14:
14. (1) The Ontario Labour Relations Board shall not inquire into or make a decision on whether a provision of this Act, a regulation or an order made under subsection 9 (2) is constitutionally valid or is in conflict with the Human Rights Code.
Limit on jurisdiction of arbitrators
(2) An arbitrator or arbitration board shall not inquire into or make a decision on whether a provision of this Act, a regulation or an order made under subsection 9 (2) is constitutionally valid or is in conflict with the Human Rights Code.
Limit on jurisdiction of arbitrators
(2) An arbitrator or arbitration board shall not inquire into or make a decision on whether a provision of this Act, a regulation or an order made under subsection 9 (2) is constitutionally valid or is in conflict with the Human Rights Code.
Teachers teach their kids every day to stand up for what's right, which isn't always what's easy or popular. Right now they're putting their money where their mouths are.
A rumour went around back in December after the first wave of single-day strikes that Broten did nothing to stop them because her legal advisors told her the current court challenge of bill 115 would almost certainly strike the legislation down, and there would be hell to pay if she took action and declared the strikes illegal, based on legislation that was later struck down as being unconstitutional. Again, this was just a rumour - nothing to back it up, and it doesn't explain why they're seeking an order today to declare tomorrow's day of protest illegal.
Here's something ironic: section 14 of bill 115 prevents the bill being challenged by the Ontario Labour Relations Board. However that's the board the government is going in front of today to have tomorrow's protest declared illegal. So does the government recognize the Board's authority or not? You can't have it both ways.
So here's the rub: the union has really, in my view, failed miserably at convincing the public at large of these issues. They're "negotiating" the same way unions have always negotiated: withholding certain information, rhetorical and inflammatory statements in the media, and telling their membership what's best for them, rather than listening to what their membership wants.
Many teachers would rather be at work tomorrow. They face a possible $2000 fine from the government and even possible jail time for illegal strike action (though it's very unlikely that anyone will actually be charged, much less go to jail). On the other hand, the union fines their members $500 for failing to show up for labour protests, strikes, etc. That fine WILL be levied if a union member doesn't sign in, as I understand it. So the teachers are being held hostage by their union.
Back in June, the provincial government handed the union a contract and said "here, take it or leave it". The union left it. In my opinion, there should be a clause in the CBA that states such action immediately triggers binding arbitration. The two sides should have been sequestered with an arbitor for as long as it took to get a deal worked out.
In the end, the teachers are caught in between a bull-headed minister and an antiquated union. The wage freeze was accepted, the change to sick days was unpopular, but settled. But the teachers won't roll over and have their rights trampled on, and for that we should be proud.
My wife and I actually discussed the possibility of her going to jail tomorrow. It's extremely unlikely to happen, but it's the first time that discussion has ever come up in our household! She's willing to go through with that, if that's what's necessary. But she's rather just be in the classroom, teaching her grade 3s.
01-10-2013, 11:31 AM
#3
Three Wheelin'
I think unions are an atiquated institution from a by-gone era.
They may have some relevance in dangerous industries, where evil companies will risk the welfare of their workers to turn a profit, but for the most part they are a blight on the landscape.
They no longer work for the benefit of their membership. It's now about one-up--man-ship, politcal wrangling, essenstially a dick measuring contest. It's shameful as the teachers bear the brunt of the bad publicity because they are the front line.
They may have some relevance in dangerous industries, where evil companies will risk the welfare of their workers to turn a profit, but for the most part they are a blight on the landscape.
They no longer work for the benefit of their membership. It's now about one-up--man-ship, politcal wrangling, essenstially a dick measuring contest. It's shameful as the teachers bear the brunt of the bad publicity because they are the front line.
01-10-2013, 11:57 AM
#4
Drifting
By going on strike in Friday, the teachers are going to be perceived as no longer caring for their students.
I lost sympathy for the teachers a while ago.
I lost sympathy for the teachers a while ago.
01-10-2013, 12:06 PM
#5
Race Car
Thread Starter
That's exactly the problem. If they don't want to strike, they get fined. Despite what most people think, the vast majority of teachers do 't make $90k. (Starting salary is in the low 30s). $500 represents between 3 and 6 days' pay, depending on pay rank.
The teachers (some teachers) feel bullied by their union, and, in my opinion, have been left to take the brunt of the negative PR.
Based on information readily available, I don't really blame people for being angry at teachers. The point I'm trying to make is that the real anger should be directed towards the government and, to a lesser extent, the union.
The teachers (some teachers) feel bullied by their union, and, in my opinion, have been left to take the brunt of the negative PR.
Based on information readily available, I don't really blame people for being angry at teachers. The point I'm trying to make is that the real anger should be directed towards the government and, to a lesser extent, the union.
01-10-2013, 12:29 PM
#6
It's the unions who are going on strike not the teachers.
My mom is a teacher (and a damn good one at that) and hates the fact that she is forced to go on strike - but like Christien pointed out, gets fined if she doesn't (she actually refused at first to strike until they made this clear.... go mom!). Just shows you a) how much power the unions have and b) how absolutely stupid the whole idea of the union is. They aren't supporting the teachers, they're supporting themselves. The union doesn't give a **** about the teachers. GRR it's maddening.
The government isn't the problem, the unions are. Get rid of the $**%* unions.
Teachers AND students would all be better off without the power-hungry grip of the unions. The only people who benefit from the union are the union themselves. Scumbags.
*taking a deep breath now...*
My mom is a teacher (and a damn good one at that) and hates the fact that she is forced to go on strike - but like Christien pointed out, gets fined if she doesn't (she actually refused at first to strike until they made this clear.... go mom!). Just shows you a) how much power the unions have and b) how absolutely stupid the whole idea of the union is. They aren't supporting the teachers, they're supporting themselves. The union doesn't give a **** about the teachers. GRR it's maddening.
The government isn't the problem, the unions are. Get rid of the $**%* unions.
Teachers AND students would all be better off without the power-hungry grip of the unions. The only people who benefit from the union are the union themselves. Scumbags.
*taking a deep breath now...*
01-10-2013, 01:04 PM
#7
Thanks, Christien. These situations always seem more like union posturing to me than real rights issues, but I hadn't read that section of the bill.
Teachers mostly silently endure a lot of denigration from government and the workin' man, and take a lot of $hit from a$$hole parents while trying to do something pretty noble in my mind, for very low pay.
I can remember a particularly stinging FOX News cycle in the US about the Wisconsin teacher legislation where the pundits kept incredulously shouting that it was a 'part-time job'. Teacher bashing will always exist, I guess. To teachers' immense credit, they're pretty stoic about it.
Teachers mostly silently endure a lot of denigration from government and the workin' man, and take a lot of $hit from a$$hole parents while trying to do something pretty noble in my mind, for very low pay.
I can remember a particularly stinging FOX News cycle in the US about the Wisconsin teacher legislation where the pundits kept incredulously shouting that it was a 'part-time job'. Teacher bashing will always exist, I guess. To teachers' immense credit, they're pretty stoic about it.
Trending Topics
01-10-2013, 01:08 PM
#8
Rennlist Member
Next year I will continue to pay my taxes and put my kids into private school. I am a proponent of the public school system, but the union is not adding value. This should have been fought in the Supreme Court via a Charter challenge, not on the backs of the students
01-10-2013, 01:19 PM
#9
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to say but the teachers union is the main reason why Dalton is in office today. We all are going to pay dearly for the gas plant(s) cancellations and frankly I don't want to pay more taxes. Teachers need to suck it up and live with their mistake. That's what they teach their students I hope.
01-10-2013, 01:39 PM
#10
Burning Brakes
That's exactly the problem. If they don't want to strike, they get fined. Despite what most people think, the vast majority of teachers do 't make $90k. (Starting salary is in the low 30s). $500 represents between 3 and 6 days' pay, depending on pay rank.
The teachers (some teachers) feel bullied by their union, and, in my opinion, have been left to take the brunt of the negative PR.
Based on information readily available, I don't really blame people for being angry at teachers. The point I'm trying to make is that the real anger should be directed towards the government and, to a lesser extent, the union.
The teachers (some teachers) feel bullied by their union, and, in my opinion, have been left to take the brunt of the negative PR.
Based on information readily available, I don't really blame people for being angry at teachers. The point I'm trying to make is that the real anger should be directed towards the government and, to a lesser extent, the union.
IMO teacher should not have the right to strike and if they withhold extra curricular support (as it should be considered part of their job description) they should be disciplined up to and including termination. If they want to get back the respect they once had the should disband the union and form a professional association - deliver value for money and they would get fair consideration by the government. Coming from BC we see the worst in what a unionized teaching work force can become!!
01-10-2013, 02:09 PM
#11
Race Car
Nothing personal but who pays for the daycare while teachers are on "protest".
I don't blame all the teachers but I do blame the unions.
Unions behave like it's still the 1920's.
Blaming the government is one thing, but who voted them in when the cheque was dangled in front of their faces?
In the real world, if people don't like their jobs or the working conditions, they look else ware.
How many find a single job for life?
I don't blame all the teachers but I do blame the unions.
Unions behave like it's still the 1920's.
Blaming the government is one thing, but who voted them in when the cheque was dangled in front of their faces?
In the real world, if people don't like their jobs or the working conditions, they look else ware.
How many find a single job for life?
01-10-2013, 03:40 PM
#12
Race Car
Thread Starter
Fine then decertify - if teachers are a profession they shouldn't be in a union!! Public sector unions get no sympathy from me - they have received/negotiated (held public ransom) pay and benefits far and away more generous than the private sector for like work.
IMO teacher should not have the right to strike and if they withhold extra curricular support (as it should be considered part of their job description) they should be disciplined up to and including termination. If they want to get back the respect they once had the should disband the union and form a professional association - deliver value for money and they would get fair consideration by the government. Coming from BC we see the worst in what a unionized teaching work force can become!!
IMO teacher should not have the right to strike and if they withhold extra curricular support (as it should be considered part of their job description) they should be disciplined up to and including termination. If they want to get back the respect they once had the should disband the union and form a professional association - deliver value for money and they would get fair consideration by the government. Coming from BC we see the worst in what a unionized teaching work force can become!!
However they aren't paid for extracurricular, so it's absolutely their right to withhold those services. They're paid to be in school for 6 hours and 20 minutes per day, plus whatever time is required to get marking and planning done that doesn't get done during prep periods, which is, on average, 30-60 minutes per day. So working from 6 hours and 50 minutes per day, 194 teaching days in the year (as mandated in the education act), is about 1325 hours per year. At $40k/year that's $30.18 per hour, gross. That's not at all out of line for 5 years post-secondary education and 5 years on the job. At $60k/year it's $45.28/hour, and that would take maybe 10 years on the job.
Compare that to an OPP officer who, after 3 years on the job, is making $75k. At 8 hours/day, 5 days/week, 48 weeks/year, that's about $40/hour.
If you want quality work, you have to pay the cost. I don't think those wages are out of line for the work we expect these people to do.
01-10-2013, 04:00 PM
#13
Burning Brakes
A professional association rather than a union would be wonderful.
However they aren't paid for extracurricular, so it's absolutely their right to withhold those services. They're paid to be in school for 6 hours and 20 minutes per day, plus whatever time is required to get marking and planning done that doesn't get done during prep periods, which is, on average, 30-60 minutes per day. So working from 6 hours and 50 minutes per day, 194 teaching days in the year (as mandated in the education act), is about 1325 hours per year. At $40k/year that's $30.18 per hour, gross. That's not at all out of line for 5 years post-secondary education and 5 years on the job. At $60k/year it's $45.28/hour, and that would take maybe 10 years on the job.
Compare that to an OPP officer who, after 3 years on the job, is making $75k. At 8 hours/day, 5 days/week, 48 weeks/year, that's about $40/hour.
If you want quality work, you have to pay the cost. I don't think those wages are out of line for the work we expect these people to do.
However they aren't paid for extracurricular, so it's absolutely their right to withhold those services. They're paid to be in school for 6 hours and 20 minutes per day, plus whatever time is required to get marking and planning done that doesn't get done during prep periods, which is, on average, 30-60 minutes per day. So working from 6 hours and 50 minutes per day, 194 teaching days in the year (as mandated in the education act), is about 1325 hours per year. At $40k/year that's $30.18 per hour, gross. That's not at all out of line for 5 years post-secondary education and 5 years on the job. At $60k/year it's $45.28/hour, and that would take maybe 10 years on the job.
Compare that to an OPP officer who, after 3 years on the job, is making $75k. At 8 hours/day, 5 days/week, 48 weeks/year, that's about $40/hour.
If you want quality work, you have to pay the cost. I don't think those wages are out of line for the work we expect these people to do.
01-10-2013, 04:23 PM
#15
Race Car
Thread Starter
My employees after vacation and stats work approx 1850 hours a year. Don't sell me on this both my parents were teachers (and Principal) in Ont so I saw it first hand how much time they had off (and my Dad coached constantly) - LOL - when growing up I thought everyone's parents had the summer off. Currently teachers are very much under worked for their remuneration package IMO, aside from the fact that they are not generally at the high end of post secondary student spectrum IMO - I've never seen a really bright guy say - oh I think I'll be a teacher!!