Ontario teachers’ unions out of touch with reality?
Posted by Sandy on May 12th, 2008
As Ottawa Citizen journalist Randall Denley wrote on the weekend, “the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario has established bargaining positions that are badly out of sync with the province’s faltering economy.” While I suspect these positions are perhaps over the top because they expect to get only part of what they ask for, it really does show that the union is out of touch with reality.
Ontario is suffering economically. Many people are out of work because of the decline of various manufacturing sectors. There are threats that we might even become a “have not” province within the next couple of years. Yet, according to Denley’s column, here are some examples of what the teachers’ unions are apparently asking for:
- a five-per-cent salary increase in each year of a two-year deal;
- higher starting pay for teachers and one year less to get to top salary;
- class-size reductions and caps in all grades;
- 10 days a year for report cards and assessment;
- a near-doubling of preparation time;
- actual teaching and supervision time to decline to 1,125 minutes a week from 1,500;
- full benefit costs to be covered by school boards; and
- principals and vice-principals to be prevented from teaching.
Now, recall, during the last two Ontario election campaigns, Dalton McGuinty said he was the “Education Premier” because he brought peace to the Ontario education system. Given these expectations of “entitlement,” I question at what cost to the taxpayer and the economy McGuinty is getting that so-called peace. Is he getting peace, for example, by simply giving the teachers’ unions everything they ask for?
Well, Ontarians need to pay attention to what Denley says is written on the elementary teachers’ website:
“Your local collective agreement is a treasure chest full of rights, entitlements and protection against arbitrary treatment.”
You will note there is nothing there about their “responsibilities.” Instead, what is there is a comparison between the number of hours elementary school teachers actually teach compared to high school teachers — meaning that is where the battle lines have been drawn. Connected to that issue is also the fact that per pupil grants are more for high school students. For example, according to this press release (see final sentence) the elementary unions are going to want parity.
As a retired educator who benefitted from collective agreements of the past, I can only shake my head. I was more than happy with a prep period of 20 minutes a day during the time French was being taught to my students. Now, it almost looks like ETFO is trying to have more time out of the classroom than in. And, teachers wonder why there is so much animosity towards them? When is enough ever enough?
The teachers’ union really does need to get a grip on reality!
H/T to a regular reader. Comments are on moderation.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:27 am
If we’re looking for leadership from a government to stand up to the teacher unions we don’t have it currently in Ontario at the moment.
Look for boards to ramp up more press releases and cry deficit if the gov’t bargains provincially and settles on more that boards can afford. It’s already started in my area with the Bluewater DSB last week crying deficit. We need to get in line and thank the education premier.
As I’ve written about this before on this blog, the math simply doesn’t add up.
Fewer students shouldn’t be costing us more in teachers, management, special needs, programs. In fact, it should be costing us less.
At what point will we look to the government to turn its attention to scaling back bureaucrats instead of forcing schools and boards into deficit?
May 12th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Sadly “Enough” will never be enough Sandy. I shudder to think what these next rounds of negotiations will bring. The government pretty much gave away the farm last time. What’s next?
More money, certainly, parity with other unions, more and more prep time, job security, benefits, less testing…
Recession?
This is a word that does not compute with the public sector.
Where do they think the money comes from anyway?
A couple of recessions back way in the early ’80s and again in the ’90s, when many of us had to walk away from our homes and jobs because there were no jobs to pay the mortgage, I heard a teach acquaintace say, “Recession, what recession? I never noticed.” Needless to say after I brought my jaw back up. I thought someday the chickens will come home to roost for them. Well with Rae-days they did.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
“1,125 minutes a week from 1,500″
Sheesh. Why don’t they express it in seconds, so the gullible can be even more impressed by how much actual face time students get.
1,500 minutes is 25 hours, or 5 per day. 1,125 is 18.75 hours, or 3 and 3/4 hours per day. And this is in elementary schools. Are they proposing that (a) the school day be shortened or (b) something else happen during the time they’re not, er, available? I guess that’s someone else’s problem.
“Is he getting peace, for example, by simply giving the teachers’ unions everything they ask for?”
Yes, but that’s only part of the cost. The rest comes in 10-15 years when the kids are trying to get into university, in university, or looking for a job. But McGuinty won’t have to answer for what happens then.