Category Archives: Labor

British Columbia: Teachers poised to strike

The British Columbia Teachers Federation—armed with an overwhelming mandate from its 42,000 members—announced plans last week for escalating job actions, culminating in an full-scale walk out by October 24.

Starting today (Sept 28) teachers will begin a modest job action aimed at inconveniencing administrators, by refusing to supervise students outside of class, except voluntary extra-curriculars, attend management meetings or complete report cards.

If there is no progress in contract talks by October 11, the teachers union will launch rotating strikes around the province, which will be followed by a full strike on October 24.

Because the Liberal government of BC has declared education an essential service, the BC Labour Relations Board will rule on what level of teaching would have to be maintained during a strike. The BCTF has not indicated if it will or will not abide by the rulings made the Labour Board.

Below are links to a number of articles from the national and local press, was well as the BCTF regarding the job actions/strikes:

The Province: Teachers take action today (Sept 28)

Why teachers are primed to strike (Sept 28)

BCTF: Teachers take a stand to restore services (Sept 28)

BCTF: BC Premier Gordon Campbell blames schools boards (Sept 28)

BCTF: A message to parents from your children’s teachers

Video message from BCTF president Jinny Sims (Sept 27)

Vancouver Sun: BCTF needs a lesson in marketplace competition (Sept 27)

Globe and Mail: B.C. teachers poised to strike (Sept 24)

Teachers vote 88.4% for strike (Sept 24)Teachers take action today
They refuse to supervise kids, write reports

Elaine O’Connor, with a file by Ian Bailey
The Province

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

B.C. teachers begin job action today by withdrawing administrative and supervisory duties.

It’s not supposed to impact students, but that’s not the case in some districts.

In districts with adequate non-union and board staff, schools are calling on principals, vice-principals and district staff to supervise students before and after school, and during recess and lunch.

But smaller districts are already overhauling their school day due to job action. Students in Fort Nelson schools, for example, will see recess eliminated, lunch hour shortened and the school day cut because the district doesn’t have the extra staff to take on supervisory duties.

“We’re a small district,” said Diana Samchuck, superintendent for the five-school, 1,177-student district.

“The fear is someone will be out on duty who is not used to doing student supervision and they’ll be thinking of their primary job task and not see something and we’ll have an accident on our hands.”

In Kelowna, the district has cancelled recess, so all students will be dismissed 15 minutes early.

In the first stage of B.C.-wide job action, teachers are refusing to supervise students outside of class, except voluntary extra-curriculars, attend management meetings or complete report cards.

Vancouver’s University Hill principal Jill Philipchuck said she, her vice-principal, and a district staffer will watch the 525 students over lunch. But it’s staff relations, not extra work, that are her big concern.

“Because teachers are not attending meetings, it makes it difficult to work as a team and to work collaboratively,” she said. “We may need to make a lot more unilateral decisions.”

The B.C. Teachers Federation continues to talk with the employer. BCTF reps met with Associate Deputy Minister of Labour Rick Connolly again yesterday to try to find common ground.

But Premier Gordon Campbell hinted that legislating teachers back to work might be the only solution.

“Legislation is always an option, and unfortunately for us in British Columbia it’s always been required since province-wide bargaining was brought in. We were hopeful the BCTF, the union and the employers would be able to come to a resolution. So far they haven’t been able to,” Campbell told The Province.

B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils past-president Terry Watson said parents are nervous.

“The first round includes items not supposed to affect students in classrooms, but they do affect who is supervising the kids. That’s a change parents are anxious about.”

Surrey’s Christina Woodworth has a six-year-old at James Ardiel Elementary and a 12-year-old at Como Lake Middle School in Coquitlam. She’s frustrated by the lack of information about school plans and concerned about interim supervision.

“You’ve got 300 kids on a school ground. They may not be able to recognize the different dangers that are out there,” she said.

eoconnor@png.canwest.com
=============================================================
From TheTyee.ca
Why Teachers Are Primed to Strike

Link Address: http://www.thetyee.ca/Views/2005/09/26/Teachersstrike
Published: 2005-09-26 23:00:00
By John Malcolmson

TheTyee.ca

Campbell government’s freeze strategy ignores widening salary gap.

BC teachers have conducted a province-wide strike vote and given their leaders a mandate to initiate job action. Planned strike action is aimed at pressuring the employer and the government to negotiate a new collective agreement. Teachers have worked without a contract since the last one expired in June of 2004.

Labour disputes tend to be messy situations. In the course of collective bargaining and the run-up to a strike situation, many issues get thrown into the mix. Within the current context, however, two “big picture” issues come to the fore.

Big issue #1: Salaries

First is the question of salary. Teachers expect to receive a “reasonable” increase in the new agreement. The employer, backed by government, is determined to hold the line on any hike for teachers. This would freeze teachers’ salaries for all of this past year and at least an additional year.

It is useful to look at the salary increase issue in the context of recent negotiation experiences and outcomes. The last collective agreement ran three years before ending in June of 2004. BC’s newly-elected liberal government imposed that agreement after contract negotiations became deadlocked. In it, teachers got 2.5 percent increases in each of three years. Consumer prices in Vancouver and BC rose at virtually the same rate over that period so real salary levels stayed near-constant.

If one goes back farther in time, a different picture emerges. A Category 5 Vancouver teacher earning the maximum salary saw her earnings grow just under 10 percent between June of 1998 and June of 2004. Prices over that period increased at a faster rate and have climbed another 1.5 percent in the past school year. What this means is that earnings lag inflation by about four percent over the last seven years. This is a significant but not enormous drop. However, what galls teachers is the fact that a salary freeze would be imposed at a time when economic growth, rising energy prices and increased federal transfers have pushed BC’s public accounts far into the black. And current forecasts have the province’s finances staying out of deficit territory over the full term of a new collective agreement.

So, if government can afford to reduce corporate taxes and put more cash in the pockets of big business, why is it loathe to pay teachers a “reasonable” salary increase? If it can put more money into roads, buildings and infrastructure, why not into supporting those who makes our public services work?

An aging teacher staff

These questions acquire a different urgency when looked at in light of the ongoing ageing of BC’s teacher population. At the start of 2003/04, almost two-thirds of our teachers were over age 45 and a full 43 percent of BC teachers were aged 50 plus. The latter group is within five years of possible retirement. Given recent layoffs of younger teachers having less seniority, that percentage is almost surely higher today.

BC’s post-secondary system does not graduate anywhere near the volume of education students to offset this impending attrition. Years of compressed funding at colleges and universities have left these institutions ill-prepared to meet the challenge of supplying enough teacher replacements to address staffing needs for the near-future.

The advancing retirement bulge means that we will have to attract and retain new BC grads here as well as compete nationally and beyond for more bodies if we are to replenish teachers’ ranks. Historically, this has been the approach BC has taken to address this need. A sizeable chunk of BC’s teachers were educated elsewhere in Canada and many internationally. They migrated here to start or continue their teaching careers.

This “strategy” may have worked in the past. However, today’s teachers are aging everywhere in Canada. School authorities and provincial ministries across the country all face a need to replace the high volume of educators expected to exit the system in the coming decade. It is a classic situation where demand will increase at a rate outstripping available supply. The winners in this kind of market scenario will be those offering, guess what — superior salaries, good pensions (which are tied to salaries) and decent career working conditions.

It is for reasons like this that the BCTF is working to focus attention on the yawning teacher salary gap between cities like Vancouver and urban centers in provinces like Alberta and Ontario. A just-published report by staff researcher Colleen Hawkey and titled “Inter-city Teacher Salary Comparisons, 2005-07” provides some startling comparisons with what teachers earn in other parts of the country.

For example, a new Category 5 teacher in Vancouver this September actually earns $329 more than her counterpart in Toronto, but after 10 years on the job, will trail the annual Toronto salary by almost $10,000. The same Vancouver teacher lags her starting colleague in Edmonton by more than $5,600, a gap which doubles in size over the next decade of movement up the experience grid.

These gaps are calculated for the current year only. They will grow in size if a salary freeze is imposed in BC. This is because teachers’ salaries are not frozen in these other jurisdictions.

If a new Alberta teacher can earn thousands more starting out in Edmonton, why make the trek to BC? Or, if a young teacher is struggling to pay the bills here in this province, why wouldn’t she take a long and hard look at a Toronto or Ottawa career that promises $300,000 more in lifetime earnings and a better pension to boot? There are surely good reasons these folks might come to or remain in BC, but we would do well remembering that nice scenery and Lotusland winters will only go so far.

Big Issue #2: Working and learning conditions

The second “big picture” issue referenced at the start concerns working conditions. In crucial respects, this is the real story of the current contract stand-off. BC has seen a wholesale deterioration in school working conditions since the last imposed settlement stripped out class size and staffing provisions.

In the past four years, salary and other cost increases have forced our school system to cannibalize itself. Since negotiating working conditions was made ultra vires and in the face of ongoing budget restrictions, class sizes have increased and thousands of teachers have been let go. Schools have become more difficult places to work and, for students, more difficult places to get an education.

This year, the province pumped an additional $150 million into school operating budgets. Judging from its strategy at the bargaining table, the Ministries of Finance, Education and Treasury Board are eager not to let much of this increase find its way into the pockets of teachers or other staff.

Back to freeze mode

School budgets are projected to re-enter freeze mode next year and remain there into 2007/08. This much was re-affirmed last week in Carole Taylor’s budget. Her speech to the legislature mentioned the word “education” only once, in the context of plans to build new relationships with First Nations.

Accompanying budget documents confirm that last spring’s forecast of a two-year school funding freeze remains the Liberal party line.

What better way to lock the freeze down than to put the clamps on a teacher salary bill which currently accounts for more than a half of all public school spending? And what better tool to free up money for other priorities, including corporate tax cuts, than to engineer a multi-year respite from rising cost pressure on the school salary front? Many parents and other members of the public may not relish the prospect of a school shutdown this fall. However, we would all do well to remember that, as messy as labour negotiations are, they provide a vital forum for raising and resolving issues necessary for our schools to adapt for the future. By short-circuiting this process, a legislated settlement blocks such adaptation. Given the issues at stake, we will all lose with that outcome.

John Malcolmson is a consulting sociologist doing research and evaluation in the fields of public education and education finance, literacy, labour relations, justice issues and social policy. He publishes the digital newsletter Finance Watch, where a version of this appeared. To subscribe, email financewatch@shaw.ca
=============================================================
Wednesday » September 28 » 2005

BCTF needs a lesson in marketplace competition

Michael Campbell
Vancouver Sun

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

You know things are a bit whacky in the ongoing teachers’ labour dispute when the lawyer for the BCTF argues in front of the Labour Relations Board that there is no evidence to suggest that lengthy disruptions or lockouts do long-term damage to education. Lawyer Diane MacDonald is quoted as telling the B.C. Labour Relations Board: “We have had job actions in the past that have been up to three months’ duration without significant impact on the student body.”

Given that my wife and many dear friends are teachers, I think it’s a safe bet to say that if I argued the same thing at home I’d get into a little hot water. Can you imagine how popular I’d be if I said to my wife: ‘Why don’t you phone in sick for a couple of weeks. After all, it won’t make any difference to the kids’ education.’ Not to get into too many personal details, but the response wouldn’t be pretty.

We find ourselves in this bizarre world where a BCTF lawyer is arguing that the federation’s own members aren’t necessary for significant periods of time when it comes to students’ education, while the Ministry of Education argues that they are. Talk about role reversal.

Given that this is the calibre of discussion, maybe I shouldn’t be surprised when I hear the BCTF argue that teachers’ wages must be competitive with Alberta. Even if the BCTF’s demand for a salary increase of 15 per cent over three years is accepted, it will put teachers with 12 years experience earning $73,298, which is about $4,700 less than their counterparts in Edmonton.

I appreciate that salaries do not make up the entire teacher compensation package — which also includes sick days, other forms of paid leave, employer pension contributions, paid vacation, dental and medical benefits. But the point is that, in this one area, the BCTF believes that being competitive is important. As BCTF head Jinny Sims says: “We certainly hope that the employer will consider the need to offer competitive salaries to attract bright graduates and to keep experienced classroom teachers in B.C.”

The B.C. Business Council couldn’t have said it better. The difference is that, for the BCTF, the importance of being competitive with other jurisdictions stops with teachers’ salaries, and certainly doesn’t extend to issues like tax rates, especially for business.

And this brain cramp is not unique to the BCTF. It seems to be a regular feature in the world view of many major unions.

Canada’s largest private-sector union, the Canadian Auto Workers, argues that special tax breaks in the form of subsidies are needed for big U.S. auto manufacturers in order to encourage investment in Canadian plants. Yet they strongly oppose corporate tax reductions in other sectors. We also have the NDP opposed to lowering business taxes, yet supporting special tax breaks for major American and Canadian film companies. Organized labour supports special tax breaks for labour-sponsored mutual funds, while opposing business tax reductions in other areas.

The intellectual inconsistency is breathtaking. The appreciation for the need to be competitive in terms of wages, tax rates and regulatory environment should not be confined to few self-serving areas. All Canadians will benefit when a broader policy approach toward competitiveness is adopted that extends past the concerns of a few special interests in business or labour.

Michael Campbell’s Money Talks radio show can be heard on CKNW 980 on Saturdays from 8:30 a.m. to 10 a.m.

© The Vancouver Sun 2005

Copyright © 2005 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest Global Communications Corp. All rights reserved.

=============================================================
B.C. teachers poised to strike
Union announces escalating job action; province vows to prevent class disruptions
By ROD MICKLEBURGH
Saturday, September 24, 2005 Page S1

VANCOUVER — Armed with an overwhelming strike mandate, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation unveiled plans yesterday for escalating job action by the province’s 42,000 public school teachers, culminating in an all-out walkout by Oct. 24.

The Liberal government immediately vowed to prevent any disruption of school classrooms, setting the stage for yet another bitter showdown between the long-standing adversaries.

The wide gulf between the two sides was underscored later in the day when, for the first time in the long dispute, the BCTF disclosed its salary demands.

The union is seeking annual wage increases of 4, 5 and 6 per cent over three years, a direct challenge to the government’s two-year, mandated wage freeze for all public-sector employees.

“Teachers need and deserve a reasonable salary increase,” said a BCTF bargaining bulletin, arguing that pay hikes are justified by cost-of-living increases and a widening wage gap between B.C. teachers and their counterparts in Alberta and Ontario.

Further inflaming the pending confrontation is the teachers’ determination to roll back Liberal legislation banning them from negotiating class sizes. The union won that right from the previous NDP government in return for giving up a wage increase.

Education Minister Shirley Bond said the government is committed to keep the schools running, despite the strike plans.

“Education is absolutely essential . . . and we will consider all of our options to make sure that students stay in the classroom,” Ms. Bond declared yesterday, less than an hour after BCTF president Jinny Sims announced the union’s vote and strike strategy.

She charged that the teachers union has stalled attempts to negotiate a new collective agreement so it can be in a position to strike this fall.

“I am continually disappointed by the practices that are being engaged in by the teachers,” said Ms. Bond, noting that a government-appointed fact-finder is meeting with union and school trustee negotiators.

The teachers’ strike vote was 88.4-per-cent in favour, with about 80 per cent of the union membership taking part.

“This is a historic day for teachers,” Ms. Sims said.

“We have voted yes to restore student learning conditions to where they were in 2002.

“Since then, they have deteriorated incredibly, and our bargaining rights were legislated away. . . .We know that students have always benefited when teachers take a stand.”

Starting Tuesday, teachers intend to begin modest job action aimed at inconveniencing administrators.

That would include refusing mandated supervision outside regular classroom hours and not submitting student attendance information.

If there is no progress by Oct. 11, the teachers union will launch rotating strikes around the province, followed by a full strike on Oct. 24.

Complicating the situation, however, is how far the teachers can legally withdraw their services.

Education is included under the province’s essential services legislation, so it is up to the B.C. Labour Relations Board to rule on what level of teaching would have to be maintained during a strike.

Ms. Sims was coy on whether the union would comply with LRB restrictions.

“The membership will make that decision,” she said. “The labour board has not yet made any rulings. This is our action plan and we will proceed accordingly.”

Also at the teachers news conference was Leann Buteau, a Vancouver high-school teacher working with special-needs students and the mother of a young daughter with learning disabilities.

Ms. Buteau said she voted to back strike action to improve conditions for students with learning problems. She said her high school has 50 students with difficulties, but funds for only five psycho-educational assessments a year.

Hugh Finlayson, CEO of the B.C. Public School Employers Association, said government intervention may be the only way to solve the bargaining impasse with the BCTF.

“If a dispute is intractable, if mediation doesn’t work, then you have to take action. As it sits right now, this is an intractable dispute.”
============================================================
Teachers vote 88.4% for strike
Parents brace for escalating measures

Janet Steffenhagen; With a file from Jennifer Chen
Vancouver Sun

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Teachers are seeking a 15-per-cent wage increase over three years and will begin job action in public schools next week that will affect administrators but not students, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation announced Friday.

But that limited action will escalate to rotating strikes starting Oct. 11 and a full-scale, province-wide walkout Oct. 24 if there is not significant progress at the bargaining table in the meantime, BCTF president Jinny Sims told a news conference.

She wouldn’t say where the rotating strikes would begin but promised to give parents 72-hours notice.

“It’s a historic day for teachers in British Columbia,” Sims said, noting that 80 per cent of the union’s 42,000 members participated in a strike vote this week and 88 per cent them — 27,990 — were in favour of job action. “I am proud of our members today — of their courage and their commitment.”

The BCTF said in a news release that it is seeking wage increases of four per cent in 2004 (its last contract expired in June of that year), five per cent in 2005 and six per cent in 2006.

The government has declared that teachers, like other public servants, will get nothing in 2004 or 2005.

Sims said that during the first phase of teachers’ job action, classroom instruction will continue but teachers won’t supervise students outside of class, attend meetings with management, send attendance reports to the office or communicate with principals and vice-principals. Extra-curricular activities will not be affected, Sims said.

The union originally announced that phase one job action would start Tuesday. But it took the plan to the B.C. Labour Relations Board for approval Friday night, and it was not clear when the board would grant approval, possibly delaying the start of job action until Wednesday

Education Minister Shirley Bond, responding to the union’s announcement, said her government intends to keep students in class, but she would not say whether that means there will be a back-to-work order.

“I remain committed, as does this government, to saying education is absolutely essential . . . and we’re going to make sure that students stay in classrooms.”

Sims said teachers have three goals in negotiations: the restoration of learning conditions that were in place in 2002, a “reasonable” wage increase and the return of full bargaining rights, which were curtailed in 2001 when the Liberals passed a law declaring education an essential service.

That law prohibits a withdrawal of services that would seriously disrupt the education program. The Labour Relations Board has been holding hearings — which are expected to resume Monday — to determine what level of job action is permitted before instructional services is seriously disrupted.

Sims hotly rejected a suggestion from the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association, which bargains for the province’s 60 school boards, that union requests for contract improvements and a pay hike would boost education spending by 35 per cent a year.

“That’s a totally bogus figure,” she said. “It’s a fabrication.”

The 35 per cent figure cited by the employer includes not only the three-year, 15-per-cent wage increase put forward by teachers, but also other proposals currently on the negotiation table, such as an early retirement incentive package.

Sims said earlier that an improvement in classroom conditions is the top priority, with 98 per cent of respondents to a recent union survey indicating they want learning conditions enshrined in their contract as they were in early 2002. That included class-size limits, restrictions on the number of special-needs students in any one class and a requirement that schools have a certain number of specialty teachers — such as librarians, counsellors and ESL teachers — based on student numbers.

Leann Buteau, a teacher at Gladstone secondary in Vancouver, said she voted for a strike after seeing 38 students in a History 12 class, including six with severe learning disabilities. The class has desks for 26 students and textbooks for 24. As well, there are 50 students waiting for psycho-education assessments, but only five can be assessed each year, she said.

“It was time for me to stand up and speak out for all of our students’ learning conditions. That’s why I voted yes.”

Although teachers are ready to strike, Sims said they are also prepared to bargain at any time. She described the appointment of deputy labour minister Rick Connolly as a fact-finder as “a ray of hope.” He has been asked to meet the parties, determine if a negotiated settlement is possible and report to government by Sept. 30.

Bond said she was disappointed the union did not wait for Connolly to finish his work or the labour relations board to issue its ruling on essential services before announcing strike plans.

Many parents picking up their children at Lord Roberts elementary Friday supported the teachers’ proposed strike.

The teachers’ call for higher salaries and improved conditions in schools seems fair, said Zoran Jermilov, standing with his 10-year-old daughter and six-year-old son. “For example, this school has only one telephone for the whole school,” he said.

jsteffenhagen@png.canwest.com

ACTION PLAN

If there is no major progress in bargaining, BCTF president Jinny Sims, pictured above, promised these measures Friday:

FROM This Tuesday No out-of-class student supervision. No meetings with management. No attendance reports. No communication with principals.

Tuesday Oct. 11 Rotating strikes

Monday Oct. 24 Full-scale, province-wide walkout.

WHAT IT WOULD COST

According to figures provided by the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association, the total salary paid out to the province’s 33,314 full-time and part-time teachers in 2004/05 equaled $1.977 billion.

p A four per cent increase to that total would add $79 million, bringing the teacher’s payroll to $2.056 billion in the first year of the contract.

p A five per cent increase would cost a further $103 million, for a total payroll of $2.158 billion in the second year of the contract.

p A six per cent increase would cost a further $130 million, for a total payroll of $2.288 billion in the third year of the contract.

Ran with fact box “Action Plan” and “What It Would Cost”,which has been appended to the end of the story. Also See:Editorial, Letters, C6

© The Vancouver Sun 2005

Vancouver Sun: Teachers make gains in the classroom

Teachers make gains in the classroom
Although teachers have failed to get class sizes put back into their contracts, they’ve finally convinced almost everyone, including the government, that action is needed to help special needs students

Janet Steffenhagen
Vancouver Sun

September 24, 2005

B.C. teachers won a major victory in their battle for improved classroom conditions before they voted this week in favour of strike action to press their contract demands.

After years of talking, they have finally convinced almost everyone — including government — that something needs to be done about the challenges many face in teaching large classes with growing numbers of students who have special needs affecting learning and behaviour.

But their union has made zero progress in persuading its education partners or the Liberal government that the answer lies in a return to the situation that existed in 2002, when teacher contracts set the rules around class size and composition

That leaves the B.C. Teachers’ Federation, on the verge of a strike that could shut schools around the province next month, with no significant support for what it says is its number one bargaining priority.

The union insists it won’t sign a collective agreement unless it receives a written guarantee from the government that student learning conditions will be restored to 2002 levels.

Its members, who say they can’t provide quality education when they are balancing so many demands with little support, want those guarantees to be part of a new collective agreement.

They look back to 2002, when their contracts included class size caps, limits on the number of special-needs students in any one class and strict requirements and formulas to ensure every school had a certain number of specialty teachers, such as ESL teachers, special-education teachers, counsellors and librarians.

“Our working conditions and our students’ learning conditions have deteriorated incredibly since that time,” union president Jinny Sims said Friday in announcing plans for an October strike.

Not everyone accepts that.

Groups representing school trustees, principals and vice-principals and parent advisory councils acknowledge that class size, class composition and special-needs education need attention — especially in the Lower Mainland — but over all, they say the education system is better than it’s ever been.

They are sounding more positive than they have for several years because of an infusion this year of $150 million into the education system — money that government urged boards to spend on class size, special needs, school resources and libraries in recognition of concerns raised by teachers.

But the over-riding message from these groups is that decisions about student learning must be made at the local level, not at the bargaining table.

“School boards believe that the best decisions are made locally,” said Penny Tees, president of the B.C. School Trustees Association. “Schools and districts need to be responsive to their local communities.”

Both she and Tom Hierck, president of the B.C. Principals’ and Vice-Principals’ Association, say schools have never been better and they aren’t hankering for 2002.

“I think we’re doing a pretty fine job,” Hierck said. “Have we got it perfect yet? No, there’s always room for improvement. But fixed language generated either from Victoria or from union headquarters in Vancouver isn’t the recipe for success.”

School board chairs Linda McPhail of Richmond and Shawn Wilson of Surrey said they, too, think education has improved since 2002. Wilson said one reason is technology.

“Through the effective use of technology, teachers are addressing a number of important learning enhancements, including but not limited to, the gender gap, diverse learning styles, peer sharing and editing, safe and responsible interaction with students around the world and the ethical use of modern communications technology,” he said in an e-mail.

McPhail said districts have to set their own priorities because their challenges are different. For example, ESL is a major concern in Richmond, where two-thirds of the students have received or are receiving ESL assistance. Each month, Richmond receives 100 new ESL students, McPhail said.

While ESL is a shared concern in the Lower Mainland, it wouldn’t be a major issue in rural and remote districts.

Teachers argue that they know more about learning conditions in the classroom than principals or parents. And many insist the only way they can be sure their concerns are addressed in all B.C. schools is through strong contract language.

Without that language, there is a danger that promises and good intentions can be forgotten. “Principals will work around it, as they’re doing now,” said Surrey teacher Peter Bonell. “They will say one thing but mean another.”

Bonell also worries that some teachers, especially younger ones, might be afraid to speak out if learning conditions are decided through local discussions rather than through collective agreements.

“It’s happening now in the schools. A young teacher comes in, they’re worried about keeping their job and getting a permanent position. They will not kick up a fuss.”

But even the NDP has abandoned its call for the restoration of learning conditions in the teachers’ contract. Education critic John Horgan said it’s time to look for other ways to help teachers with their workload, because the government isn’t likely to budge.

Horgan backs the teachers when they talk about deteriorating classroom conditions, saying the government’s decision to relax the rules about class size and class composition is bound to lead to poorer outcomes. While students might continue to get high marks on tests, they won’t learn critical thinking skills from teachers who feel overwhelmed, he said.

“I support local autonomy for school boards, absolutely. I believe that people in communities have a better understanding of what those community needs are,” he said. “But at the same time, government has a responsibility and an obligation . . . to respond when their edicts are clearly not working on the ground.”

Education Minister Shirley Bond said she is taking action.

This year, for the first time since class-size caps were removed from the contract, the ministry will monitor class sizes in all grades in B.C. to ensure boards obey the rules that were placed in the B.C. School Act in 2002.

“I’m going to be asking school districts to report to us about their class size issues,” she said. “I want to make sure that boards are respecting the legislation . . . and if there are issues with larger class sizes in specific districts, we believe we should hold school districts accountable for that.”

Teachers should be consulted about class size and composition but not during bargaining, she said. “Parents and this government have said clearly that deciding class sizes is not simply up to the BCTF and the employer.

“Parents have a stake in that discussion [and] need to be participants. But if you [make] class size a negotiating issue, it leaves out those people who have a role to play.”

She said school planning councils, which include principals, teachers, parents and — in some cases — students, should have a key role in deciding class size and composition. Kim Howland, president of the B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils, said her members want those decisions to be made locally.

The B.C. School Act sets maximum class size numbers for primary grades, but requires only that school districts not exceed an average of 30 students in Grade 4-12 classes.

The BCTF says that “flexibility” has allowed schools to put far too many students in certain classes — especially science, English and social studies.

But Hierck said averaging allows schools to offer more opportunities than they were able to do in 2002.

For example, he said, a small school can now offer Physics 12 to a handful of students because a neighbouring school has more than 30 students in core academic courses.

Those trade-offs aren’t always recognized by those who complain about larger classes, he added.

To make those trade-offs more transparent and to ensure parents are supportive, Hierck suggested the ministry should change the law to require individual schools to meet class size averages rather than having district-wide averages. Horgan agreed that might be an improvement.

Cathie Camlie of the Learning Disabilities Association of B.C. said classroom conditions haven’t improved since 2002 for students with learning challenges, but nor were they good in 2002. S

he said the lack of attention to special-needs children in public schools is leading to the “privatization of special education,” with parents who can afford it hiring special tutors to help their children.

Her main complaint about Liberal changes to education is the de-targeting of special-education funds.

When school boards no longer received money targeted for special needs, many stopped identifying those children, she said. “That was especially true for gifted kids,” she said. “It virtually wiped out the identification of gifted kids.”

But her organization’s chief concern is the lack of training for teachers in dealing with special needs. “If anyone wants to do one thing to help kids with exceptionalities it’s teacher training,” she said, noting that a BCTF study several years ago found 40 per cent of teachers in Coquitlam and Nanaimo felt they were ill-prepared to deal with special-needs children.

Rita Irwin, associate dean of teacher education at the University of B.C., said her big regret about changes between 2002 and 2005 is the loss of art education.

“If you talk about the quality of schools when it comes to the arts, it’s definitely gone down,” she said.

“But if you’re talking to the average parent who is really concerned about numeracy and literacy, then the students are probably getting a pretty comparable [experience].”

Paul Shaker, the education dean at Simon Fraser University, who has worked in four countries and five American states, said he’s encouraged by the quality of B.C. schools. But he said there is room for improvement, especially in areas such as fine arts, special needs and ESL that tend to be cut when resources are tight.

“I don’t think the system is saturated with money by any means. Obviously there’s enough money in the system to do a very good job because a very good job is being done. But a better job could be done.”

jsteffenhagen@png.canwest.com

© The Vancouver Sun 2005

Teachers’ salaries and affect on students

Q & A: Teachers’ salaries and their affect on students”

“Teachers Have It Easy: The Big Sacrifices and Small Salaries of America’s Teachers” is the provocative title of a new book that attempts to address such issues as teacher salaries and what effect their pay has on students.

The book includes firsthand accounts of teachers’ efforts to make ends meet, arguments why a substantial raise for teachers is necessary and case studies of schools around the nation that have undertaken salary reform.

Published by the New Press, the book is co-written by Dave Eggers, author of “A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius,” journalist and teacher Daniel Moulthrop, and Nínive Clements Calegari, founding executive director of 826 Valencia, a nonprofit writing center in San Francisco’s Mission District.

Calegari discussed teachers and their work in two telephone interviews last week.

Keep the “labor” in Labor Day

TimeTableoftheLowellMills488.jpgMickey Z has a nice piece in MRZine remembering the “Lowell Mills Girls” and the movement for a ten-hour workday. Be sure to check the links.

“In vain do I try to soar in fancy and imagination above the dull reality around me but beyond the roof of the factory I cannot rise.” — anonymous Lowell Mill worker, 1826

Lowell, Massachusetts was named after the wealthy Lowell family. They owned numerous textile mills, which attracted the unmarried daughters of New England farmers. These young girls worked in the mills and lived in supervised dormitories. On average, a Lowell Mill Girl worked for three years before leaving to marry. Living and working together often forged a camaraderie that would later find an unexpected outlet.

What had the potential to become a relatively agreeable system for all involved was predictably exploited for mill owners’ gain. The young workers toiled under poor conditions for long hours only to return to dormitories that offered strict dress codes, lousy meals, and were ruled by matrons with an iron fist.In response, the Lowell mill workers — some as young as eleven — did something revolutionary: the tight-knit group of girls and women organized a union. They marched and demonstrated against a 15 percent cut in their wages and for better conditions . . . including the institution of a ten-hour workday. They started newspapers. They proclaimed: “Union is power.” They went on
strike.

As the movement spread through other Massachusetts mill towns, some 500 workers united to form the Lowell Female Labor Reform Association (LFLRA) in 1844 . . . the first organization of American working women to bargain collectively for better conditions and higher pay. Sarah Bagley was named the LFLRA’s first president and she promptly led a petition-drive that forced the Massachusetts legislature to investigate conditions in the mills. Bagley not only fought to improve physical conditions, she argued that the female workers “lacked sufficient time to improve their minds,” something
she considered “essential for laborers in a republic.”

As with many revolutionary notions, the LFLRA met much opposition in their efforts. Despite their inability to secure the specific changes they demanded, the Lowell Mill Girls laid a foundation for female involvement and leadership in the soon-to-explode American labor movement and they continue to inspire those who stand against injustice today.

Mickey Z. is the author of several books including the soon-to-be-released There Is No Good War: The Myths of World War II (Vox Pop) and 50 American Revolutions You’re Not Supposed to Know: Reclaiming American Patriotism (Disinformation Books). This essay was excerpted from 50 American Revolutions You’re Not Supposed to Know. He can be found on the Web at .
Comment | Trackback

Petras: “The AFL-CIO and the Iraq war”

In his essay The AFL-CIO and the Iraq War, published by Rebelion.org he argues the Iraq War resolution approved at the AFL-CIO’s latest convention, apart from an ambiguous phrase thrown in to pacify a few dissidents, remained true to its history of supporting imperial wars and tyranny while continuing to lose members and loyalties in the US for its efforts.

[James Petras has worked with the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement for the last eleven years in addition to his work with the unemployed workers’ movement in Argentina. He is coauthor, with Henry Veltmeyer, of Globalization Unmasked: Imperialism in the 21st Century (Zed Books, 2001), which won the 2002 Kenny Prize in Marxist & Labour/Left Studies. He is also author of a collection of short stories, Andando por el mundo (Altamira Publishing Group, 2001).]The AFL-CIO and the Iraq war
James Petras
Rebeli

Busting the minimum wage myth

Ellen Dannin’s two part article in MRZine on the minumum wage is a great example of how RWTT use dubious “research” to back policies that hurt the many to help the few.
What right-wing think tanks say about the minimum wage

Anyone interested in politics should at least occasionally read what Right-Wing Think Tanks (RWTTs) are proposing, for what they advocate shows up as Administration policies. Reading the RWTTs enables us to identify and respond to the same ideas that eventually trickle out of the mouths of Administration spokespeople.

Right-Wing Think Tanks want to eliminate the minimum wage. RWTTs arguments against the minium wage often mention studies and their findings, but rarely provide sufficient information to track down and assess them. Below are some of the most common arguments made by RWTTs.

Challenging right-wing think tank’s “economics-lite”

When arguments turn to economics, most of us (a) flee, (b) fall asleep, or (c) give up and figure it’s just too hard to understand.

But you can stand your ground, even if you have never taken an economics course. What it takes is being curious and willing to ask questions and challenge claims. It also helps to know that most of the pundits of Right-Wing Think Tanks (RWTTs) who fall back on economic claims base them on economics-lite. They use a few facile and sterile ideas and stretch them to fit all situations. These ideas are mere theories (in the pejorative sense of the word), and, unlike scientific theories, they have no evidence to support them. Indeed, when put to the test, these ideas tend to be falsified. That is, the evidence does not support them (more on that below). When your common sense tells you that they seem to be over-simplifying, you are probably right, er, correct.