So is this a case of a judge going well beyond their role in interpreting the law or a case of the government being so focused on their agenda that they completely disregard the law? Perhaps somewhere in the middle? One would certainly think and hope that the Province would utilize the various lawyers they have on staff to guide them on whether what they are doing is offside. Who knows if this was done or what transpired there.

Based on the wording of the article (I haven’t read the decision so I’m not sure if the article is embellishing things), it would appear that the judge was quite direct in her ruling. This usually doesn’t happen in cases where there is allot of grey area.

I think that governments all too often forget that they too are bound by certain laws of the land. Just because you are in power and have the ability to introduce laws, does not mean that they will be upheld. We’ve seen this here and with stuff like mandatory minimum sentences.

Ideology doesn’t always trump the law. It would be so much less expensive and more productive for the country if governments recognized that.

We hear that a 10 year deal isn’t good for the teachers. Why not? Is it because they love to inconvenience the public every 3 years or so with labour negotiations? There are few whinier unions than the teachers.

Cousins seems to like the phrase (our students). Perhaps the Government and general public should start to use the phrase (our Teachers)

So what does the ruling actually accomplish. My understanding is that the Teachers will now be able to negotiate class size, however that doesn’t mean that the Government would have to agree with their position.

So negotiate, go on strike if necessary, and come up with an agreement, and get back to work.

Just to clarify a few issues: the ruling not only states that class size and composition can be negotiated, it also states that the original law eliminating the terms was never valid. That means that the grievances filed over class size and composition have to be examined in that light. That’s over 100,000 grievances.

However, one other matter that tends to be glossed over by the media is that in the past set of negotiations, the government made their terms so awful so as to provoke a strike by teachers. Those complaining that the failure of negotiations are the fault of the teachers need to examine that decision. Remember, the government deliberately attempted to sabotage the negations in order to provoke a strike. Even Vaughn Palmer (no friend to the BCTF) admitted that Jago was hired last year to crush the teachers, and Jago reprimanded the government for going too far.

So remember that, as you attack teachers, that the government has passed unconstitutional legislation twice, and tried to force parents all over the province to scramble for daycare or simply miss work in order to pass its unconstitutional legislation. Read the ruling, or even its summary. It is a massive condemnation of the actions of the government.

Johnny belt, to much changes in 10 years. That is why a long term contract is not a good thing. The liberals broke the rules of negotiating., the ripped up the contract. They let class size get out of hand.. Closed schools at the deferment to everyone but their budgets. If the liberals could be trusted this wouldn’t be a issue.. But they can’t be so it is.. Don’t blame the teachers.. Blame the government.

Christie doesn’t like people that stayed, finished and received degrees. :)

Ok, Christy….whatever.

It is too bad neither the government as employer or the teachers as employees can find a method of determining the rate of pay for teachers as individuals within the collective group based on those individuals’ effectiveness as teachers.

To my mind output should be measured and compensated for, not input which deals with quantity rather than quality. I think that is the greatest fault of all or most union agreements.

Conversely in the ideal private, non-unionized environment (and they are by no means all perfect either) there is a much better chance for those who work effectively to be compensated for both the quality and the quantity of their work. A good employee is much more likely to be recognized.

THAT is what is missing at the bargaining table, in my opinion.

I do not think that class sizes are off the bargaining table with post secondary faculties at Colleges and Universities. The notion of prep time, student contact hours, number of course preps, etc. are put into the mix to determine the maximum allowable work load for individual instructors, lecturers, profs., etc.

Can any government be trusted? No matter which side of the political spectrum government is on, they do their thing from that POV. Decisions can be proper from one side but improper from another side.

I am quite frankly not sure whether the judge’s determination that the right to bargain class size is a constitutional right. Is everything we do at work enshrined as a bargaining right under the constitution?

In that case, I would like to introduce right to work legislation which would allow me to be excluded from the bargaining unit. I would like to be able to bargain my own working conditions.

“…… but a 10-year deal? That’s no good for us. We are looking for a fair deal for teachers and supports for our students.”
So if the deal was fair, and had the supports for students, would the teachers be willing to sign a 10 year contract? It would give both the teachers, and the students, as well as the government some much needed stability. Do they like re-negotiating these contracts every few years? While the government clearly provokes the teachers at negotiating time, the teachers union is not blameless here.

LNG will fix everything to worry

The BC liberals must be happy that people think the problems with the education system must be the fault of the workers (teachers) just like the issues in our city must be the fault of the workers! It could not possibly be bad management! Just toss the workers under the bus, that seems to be the norm with all levels of government. Go ahead and fall for it folks its not like you are workers right

” the government … was bent on pressuring the members of the B.C. Teachers Federation into going on strike. In 2011 the court found the Public Education Flexibility and Choice Act, which was introduced in 2002 by then-Education Minister Christy Clark and which stripped the union of some bargaining rights on class size and composition, unconstitutional and unfair.

I provided the quote for you JohnnyBelt.
Do you think that the teachers just might have had a good reason to complain?

“the government has stomped on the charter rights of the province’s teachers”

Not quite as bad as Adrian Dix and his phony document or his lack of a transit pass though.

karrman, you ask “Do you think that the teachers just might have had a good reason to complain?”

One of the biggest problems in any negotiations with our teachers is the BCTF! It doesn’t seem to matter what government is in power. With the BCTF, it’s always more, more, more and it’s always for our children, right??

The BCTF is never and never will be happy, unless and until we reach the magical point where there is a 1 to 1 student to teacher ratio. At that point, maybe, just maybe the BCTF might actually and finally be happy! Just imagine how many more teachers we will have to hire if each class was limited to only 1 child!! The BCTF must be drooling over the anticipated union dues that they would collect for that scenario! But hey, it’s for “our” children, right??

Since when are court decisions based on speculation and conjecture? For the judge to say the employer was pressuring the teachers into a strike position with no facts or evidence to back that statement up is crazy. Were minutes or recordings of the employer meetings part of the evidence presented?
Better not take 14 items into the express lane at Save-on or the clerk will have you in court for tramping on their charter rights
Hart Guy The actual ratio is 1.25 teachers per student when things like extra vacation, early retirement, 10 day bereavement leave etc are taken into account.

This Lib-Con government has a long history of ripping up contracts and attempting, unsuccessfully, to restrict collective bargaining rights.

In the end, the Lib-Cons always end up losing, and us taxpayers always foot the bill.

Anyone remember the court imposed ruling that favored the HEU? The ruling didn’t reverse pay cuts, but ordered payment of $80 million in compensation and retraining, and required negotiations before any further contracting out of health care jobs.

Good old Lib-Cons, they lost twice in court battling the BCTF as well, this latest loss cost us taxpayers $2 million. Not to worry, our government will have another go at the BCTF, which will end up in court where they will lose for a third time straight.

But that’s the Lib-Con government for you… just a bunch of losers! I am predicting a raise in our taxes just to cover this government’s constant court losses and penalties.

Labour System in BC = a BIG UGLY MESS

there are few whinier govt. then what we have had the last 12 years. they want to rule by force they are nothing but a bunch of BULLIES. they LEAVE NO OTHER option than to turn to the court for fair and reasonable bargaining. yes they get 2 months off in summer so what,their salary is deferred over 12 months same pay. look at pgs finest they get 6 months off and if they work speed corridor or babysit a crime scene they get good money in the form of overtime, same for fireman pulp mill,sawmill, any job on a 4×4 or 6×6 shiftyou get paid to work over making90,000 plus to work 6 months and 6 months off so I guess all these whiny posters……SHOULD OF STAYED IN SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!

SHOW ME A 1.25 TEACHER/STUDENT IN ACTUALL REAL CLASSROOM TIME AND I WILL KISS YOUR DOGS ASS ON THE POST OFFICE STEPS. HART GUY YOUR JUST PISSED THAT YOUR LIBS. ARE COSTING YOU NOTHING BUT BIG MONEY,CHOKE ON IT BUILD A BRIDGE LNG WILL BE YOUR SAVIOUR REMEMBER DEBT FREE IN 2015, LETS SEE WE ARE CLOSER TO 100 BILLION IN DEBT THATS RIGHT 100 BILLION THAN WE ARE TO BEING DEBT FREE. FRACK OFF AND GO DRINK SOME FRACKING WATER.

So……when you’re on your meds you post under the name Knowledge 88. When you are off you’re meds you post as CrysBaron. When you are off you’re meds and drinking, you post under the name ” ice “. Got it.

“The BCTF is never and never will be happy, unless and until we reach the magical point where there is a 1 to 1 student to teacher ratio.”

The BCTF’s position on class size may be unreasonable, but that just means that the province has to negotiate for a more reasonable class size. Class size clearly affects teachers’ working conditions and therefore is something they have a right to negotiate about, even if the province is right to not give in to everything they want.

“Since when are court decisions based on speculation and conjecture? For the judge to say the employer was pressuring the teachers into a strike position with no facts or evidence to back that statement up is crazy. Were minutes or recordings of the employer meetings part of the evidence presented?”

====================================

Was it speculation and conjecture or an analysis of events and evidence which led to a reasoned conclusion?

Your post reiterates exactly why we need judges. Part of their job is to make decisions when there are no clear facts or direct evidence. They have to look at an entire situation and determine an outcome even if perfect information does not exist. This happens all the time in the real world.

Of course, this is not to say that judges are infallible . . .

Ewing, you feel the judge’s decision was based on speculation. That is not the case. She based this decision on cabinet documents released to the court where the Liberal cabinet discussed the plan: make the government demands so unreasonable that they would provoke a strike. Again, when you read the decision it is clear: the government acted unconstitually and bargained in bad faith. Think about it: they tried to disrupt the province to fulfill a political objective. The fault for any failings in bargaining lay directly on the government They owe the province a huge apology.

It’s not just this government’s constant court losses to the Unions that bothers me, when they are not busy attacking union rights, they are attacking ours. The overly punitive and restrictive drinking driving laws were an example.

So a few of us thought those laws / rules were unfair and took the government to court, can anyone guess what happened? Yup the Lib-Cons lost… again!

http://www.news1130.com/2011/11/30/bc-supreme-court-judge-strikes-down-some-dui-rules/

It just doesn’t stop there folks, it goes on and on…

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/court-orders-bc-to-pay-logging-firm-175-million/article16144158/

Oh well, it’s not our money…? Wait a minute…?

Hart Guy says…..”One of the biggest problems in any negotiations with our teachers is the BCTF!”

Ya, just imagine if the BCTF was made up of teachers!

Just say no to drugs!

Comment Posted by: middle finger on February 1 2014 12:25 PM
So……when you’re on your meds you post under the name Knowledge 88. When you are off you’re meds you post as CrysBaron. When you are off you’re meds and drinking, you post under the name ” ice “. Got it.
———————————–

There must be an AlexVega in there somewhere too hey?

I suspect that we are just a stone’s throw away from a major change in how we educate our children.

Private instructional schools in various residential areas, with 6 hours of instruction viewed on video screens, with students hooked in, with the ability to ask and answer questions. The curriculum would be preset by the Government, or School Boards, and would be what is taught with little or no variation from the programs.

The rooms would be overseen by tutors who would not be teachers, but enablers. They would see to attendance, and compile the results of tests, etc for forwarding to those parents who could not access the information on line.

For those parents who want to home school they could just plug into the system. The testing on line would determine who passes and who fails. The responsibility for passing would lie with the parents (where it should). For those who fail within the system, we could have a system in place for them to upgrade during the summer.

So there you have it. Schools of the future, and the reason for it, is basically the high cost of doing it the old way.

Railways, Pulpmills,Airports, and other industry have made major changes on how things are done, and its only a matter of time that Governments, Government entities, Schools, etc; will do the same.

Have a nice day.

“Class size clearly affects teachers’ working conditions”

Interestingly, there are numerous studies which show it does not affect a student’s learning condition. THAT is what it is all about.

If a teacher has more children in a class, they can adjust their time by restructuring the marking of homework and by using modern technology to record observations, assessment and so on. I believe there are no specifications of how a teacher goes about managing daily activities. It is left up to individual teachers to judge what needs to be done.

There are some teachers that have larger classes and are better teachers who get better results form students than some teachers who have smaller classes.

We need to get away from cookie cutter solutions to non cookie cutter environments.

Palopu wrote: “The responsibility for passing would lie with the parents (where it should).”

I agree with a new look at how learning takes place. But am wondering where the notion of parents determining whether their children pass or not comes from. That is no different than older children determining whether they will pass or not.

Then again, that is more or less the way University students in some European countries determine what courses to take in order to sit for wholistic/integrated examinations in the field of their choice. It is their choice, not the choice of the University of setting up course groupings just because they are convenient to scheduling faculty workloads and room bookings.

Much less spoon feeding going on there.

That is what we need less of in our entire school system from Kindergarten right through primary, secondary and post secondary education and training.

Independent learning within an educational setting from home to KSA specialty centres should be the mainstay of our education system.

I doubt that will come from unionized deliverers of government developed and mandated packaged training.

While the attached picture may look funny, it is in fact an accurate portrayal of the dismal results for our government concerning court case outcomes!

http://toonclips.com/600/10108.jpg

Sorry People#1, what is wrong in that cartoon is that the student … the learner … is nowhere to be seen. That is the sad part. It is not about the teachers, it is about the students, the learners.

We should look not at teaching but at the ways in which children learn and at how more modern methodology can enhance that learning process. When we determine what it is that is required, then we have to train the teachers to use that new methodology. It is not going to come from teachers.

As they say, they are too close to the trees to see the forest.

http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/editor/102.html

I have not read the court decision, but it seems that the judge has also not taken the learner into consideration. Why should she? That is not her job, is it? She is just sitting in another specialty silo any we know that most such specialty silos do not see the forest of silos either. Like horses, we have inadvertently put blinders on the whole lot.

Ice, how do you figure that people that work a 4 on 4 off or 6 on 6 off shift schedule get 6 months of the year off?

Just in case there are those who think the notions of Palopu and gus are pipe dreams, here is a recent article about high schools in Hamilton Ontario.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/ontario-education-director-eyes-multi-age-classrooms/article15556227

“John Malloy, director of education at Ontario’s Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, has issued a challenge to all the high school principals in his area to rethink the traditional way kids learn. He envisions different grades in one classroom tackling problems such as water shortages and world hunger, earning credits not just in world issues, but also science and geography. Some educators believe that moving away from the traditional age-based approach will keep students more engaged and prepare them better to collaborate on a variety of projects in the workplace.

“Could this radical approach to education be extended to all learners? This fall, a group of education innovators from around the world suggested just that at the Learning 2030 conference at the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Ont. “Traditional concepts of classes, courses, timetables, and grades,” they recommended, should be replaced by “flexible, creative and student-directed forms of learning.””
————————————–

By the way, I understand that “cutting and pasting” from the internet, which represents the notion of learning from others throughout the world, will be one of the key learning tools of the new approach to teaching and learning.

;-)

detoe43 ….

When they are on the job, they are “on the job” 24 hours a day. In other words, their time is restricted to various extents, whereas those who work a few km from home and 5 days a week for 7.5 hours a day other than stat holidays and annual vacation.

It is thus fair, from that POV, to say they work 50% and get off 50%.

However, let us compare that to those who work in the more traditional situation.

In a year with 365 days, there are 8,760 hours.

In that same year, people are entitled to a variety of vacation days plus stat holidays. If we set aside 4 weeks or 20 working days for those, the result is that
there are 1,800 working hours per year.

That means that about 21% of the hours per year are working hours and 79% of hours are personal hours.

So the poor shmuck working shifts like that are worse off than those who are lucky enough to have “regular” jobs.

So, ice is not able to calculate it properly.

Interesting how different points of view can arrive as different results, eh?

;-)

Oh, for a fee I will negotiate the next contract for anyone who is working such shifts now and feels the compensation being received is inadequate….. ;-)

gus states; “Sorry People#1, what is wrong in that cartoon is that the student … the learner … is nowhere to be seen. That is the sad part. It is not about the teachers, it is about the students, the learners.”

So what part of Bill’s; 27, 28 and 22 were all about the students? Forcing the teachers into a strike for political gain has nothing to do with the students as well gus.

This governments pre-occupations with teachers has been a colossal waste of time and taxpayer money!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/how-much-has-b-c-spent-fighting-the-teachers-union-1.2518041

Thanks Gus, I was going to make a similar statement. Having worked these shifts for a number of years I can state that there are downsides to this arrangement, the amount of hours actually worked is one of them (hahaha I use the term “work” loosely). However I would not change for almost anything, 4 off in a row & an extra 2 days when I take a “week” of holidays is a nice perk. It’s not for everybody but works for me.

“So what part of Bill’s; 27, 28 and 22 were all about the students?”

Exactly my point as well, People#1.

“Forcing the teachers into a strike for political gain has nothing to do with the students as well gus.”

Bang on again ……

So tell me, People#1, if the teachers do not give a hoot about the students, who will?

If the foresters do not give a hoot about the forests, who will?

If the doctors do not give a hoot about their patients, who will?

Do you wish me to continue?

Maybe you have the answer.

The BCTF has been trying to fight the election by proxy for their friends -the NDP since the Liberals ran them out. Enough all ready. The good people of the province of British Columbia have spoken. We are sick of the teachers and their BS.

Any critics ever been a teacher?

Sniff, sniff, hmm… I smell something over ripe and a little off-colour… did an ex-politician just join the discussion?

Well BaldEagle, some of us are sick and tired of watching this government get it’s a$$ kicked over and over again in the Supreme courts of BC and Canada!

So being “sick of the teachers and their BS” means paying them out two MILLION dollars? Yeah… that ought to teach them hey?

Seamut …. pleas explain to me why one has to be or have been:

1. a teacher to criticize the education system including all of those who participate – provincial government, school boards, administrators right from deputy ministers down to school principals, teachers and teaching assistants?

2. same for those in the medical system

3. same for those in the resource industries

4. same for those in the environmental industry

5. same for those in the municipal organizations

and so on……..

Most of us are humans who have the capacity to observe what is happening around us throughout our lives.

Maybe you are still a teen or twen and have not figured that out yet or run around with blinders on.

BTW, why seamut sometime and why seamutt other times? Can’t you spell your own handle?

The last 12 yrs have been unpleasant as a teacher. Hard work, poor wages and really disrespectful comments from fat Christy Clark’s liberal henchmen. I dont forget these comments when I go to work. The upside?? My own children are extremely successful and earn 6 figure salaries as doctors.

You still have not answered the question of who is looking out for the students, People#1 …… too tough for you to answer that in a clear and precise way?

You see, this is the problem when a profession is forced to essentially become a bargaining agency …. one never knows which sides of their mouths they are talking.

The below linked case in the Ontario Appeal Court happened a year and a half ago.

Here is part of the summary in the linked article:

“Just weeks after scoring a major victory in their current negotiations, federal lawyers have lost a constitutional challenge of legislation setting maximum wage increases for their previous round of bargaining in a decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal that signals A JUDICIAL TREND OF UPHOLDING LAWS LIMITING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES’ ABILITY TO BARGAIN COLLECTIVELY

“The Court of Appeal upheld the validity of the Expenditure Restraint Act, a piece of legislation that limits wage increases for federal employees between the years 2006 to 2011.

“The decision reflects recent developments in the courts that reinforce the government’s ability to take an aggressive bargaining stance in the face of employee demands for higher wages so long as it’s acting in good faith in negotiations.

“I think the Supreme Court of Canada is going to have to decide if collective bargaining means more than collective begging.”

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=hts&oq=&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLS_enCA546CA546&q=2(d)+of+the+Canadian+Charter+of+Rightsand+Freedoms%2C+which+guarantees+freedom+of+association

In my humble opinion, these kinds of decisions have to go to the Supreme Court of Canada. We have two opposing opinions from lower courts – the one above and the one respecting the BCTF.

Completely agree with your previous comment gus, that is why I wasn’t going to answer it.

While I don’t doubt most teachers do “give a hoot” about the students, the relationship between the “employer” and “employees” in this case has been adversarial and counter-productive.

So who’s responsibility is it to set the example? To initiate and foster a respectful, positive and productive working relationship? I think most of us know that responsibility rests with the “employer”.

Read the decision – it clearly claims that the government has the right during negotiations to set limits on wage increases, etc. However, this is not what the decision in this case is all about. The decision makes two important points. There first is that the government does NOT have a unilateral right to simply strip contracts, as the Liberals did. As well, it states that in the latest round of bargaining, the government bargained in bad faith. It was the aim of the government to promote a strike, and that should outrage the citizens of this province. The ones at the table attempting to actually create a negotiated settlement were the teachers. Remember, too, that when the government was told the laws they passed were unconstitutional, they simply reposed the exact same laws.

Teachers asking for conditions that make it better for students to learn are not about being greedy and wanting an easier job. Teachers want to do a better job, but it is incredibly difficult to do this with the class size AND composition issues so many of us face (not just class size-composition really does count, even though Google tells you it doesn’t). And my desire to have an income that that, at the very least, keeps up to inflation is not greedy. Teaching is not missionary work. I deserve to be paid the going rate for the work I do. And we are number eight in the country for pay.

The BCTF has a long and storied history of fighting with government, whether it is NDP, Liberal, or Socred. Lets stop believing the lefties BS that this is just about the Liberals. The BCTF cares about the kids? Whatever.

Flash, I was in agreement with your post until you got to the part of “pay me the going rate & we’re #8”. Then go where you get paid the best if you don’t like what is currently being offered in B.C. Most professionals have that option,teachers are no different.

People#1, you do remember when NDP premier Harcourt took away a timber harvesting license away from a certain PG company and gave it to some other people? Eventually the province had to pay a couple of hundred million in compensation!

I certainly have to agree with JB, the fighting between every government and the teachers has been going on ever since the inception of the BCTF. It just wouldn’t be a normal year without it.

Flash, I am not as dumb as to post a decision that I have not read.

You and I may have different interpretations of what we read. That is why we have courts and why we have appeal processes because we live in a complex but civil society which recognizes that people have different points of view and thus different opinions and that they must be heard with respect.

So quit getting your knickers in a knot over a simple debate.

The way I see it is that both are decisions which deal with governments putting legislation in place which limits a condition of an employment contract. In one case it is an increase in allowable class size, in the other it is a limit on compensation. There is nothing which prevents the parties to negotiate those conditions as long as the duly passed legislation is met.

Remember, the court in the Ontario case held that s. 2(d) of the Charter “guarantees a process, not a result.” In other words, we cannot legislate the skill of presenting an argument and the skill to comprehend them. Sometimes the learned counsel is not quite that learned at all.

A couple hundred million PrinceGeorge… please state your source!

I wonder who has wasted more millions of dollars in taxpayer’s money fighting their employees the Lib-Cons or the NDP?

Oh, I forgot that sometimes the learned judge is also not that learned at all.

In recognition of that, the Supreme Court of Canada has nine Justices which hear most cases. Five are required for a quorum.

You really have not been around very long have you People#1?

http://people.uleth.ca/~geoffrey.hale/2410_carrierclips.html

There are plenty of links to the victory by Carrier Lumber, but all that I can find is mention of about $150 million to be paid for compensation/punitive damages.

The link is to a compendium of several articles. One of the ones of note is that the case cost the government around half a million.

From the above link

Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun,
Saturday, February 10, 2001

“Reading through the court record, one is led to the inescapable conclusion that the NDP government didn’t believe timber-cutting rights are property rights — never mind that resource companies make investments in the province in exchange for the right to exploit a particular resource.

“On the day that the Carrier story broke this week, Premier Ujjal Dosanjh delivered a speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade and insisted the NDP government is determined to mend fences with the business and investment community.

“The record in the Carrier case suggests precisely the opposite.”

Sorry to disagree with you on the “learned judge not being learned at all” comment gus.

Here are the prerequisite qualifications required to be a judge in Ontario. Higher than the education, knowledge and skill requirements to be a premier in the province of BC. Christy has no recognized college or post secondary degree!

http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/jpaac/qualifications/

Kind of scary that the leader of our provincial government, having the authority to make and pass laws, holds no post secondary degree.

Maybe that’s why this Lib-Con government loses so many of it’s court cases?

Gus mentioned:

“The way I see it is that both are decisions which deal with governments putting legislation in place which limits a condition of an employment contract. In one case it is an increase in allowable class size, in the other it is a limit on compensation. There is nothing which prevents the parties to negotiate those conditions as long as the duly passed legislation is met.”

I think the difference is that the government wasn’t putting limits on allowable class size. They were saying that it was not negotiable at all. That is what made the bills unconstitutional.

The problem as I see it is that in previous contracts the BCTF had given up other bargaining points in order to gain language around class size and composition. When the government ripped up those contracts and then made it non-negotiable, this was unfair considering the BCTF potentially had given up pay raises, benefits, or other areas of bargaining to get class sizes down.

An example is in SD60 (districts have varying language) the 2002 language states shop classes and science labs will not have more than 24 students (likely due to safety concerns). Other classes at the secondary level will not go over 30 and have no more than 2 ministry coded special needs students. These were negotiated items that come with a real $ cost to the employer. Had the teachers accepted shop/lab classes over 24 or other classes with more than 2 coded students , they probably could have taken wages in its place. The government ripped up this language that was negotiated and agreed upon. I will not hide the fact that I am a teacher that started teaching in 2006. I teach upper level math so typically have less ministry coded students in my class, but with that said, approximately half of my classes retroactively have had the contract broken. These are all now classes that can be grieved because the government broke the law.

Talk about talking past each other, so I refute your comment on one subject and you refute mine on another… and round, and around we go!

Looking back on the comments, I though PrinceGeorge and I were engaged in a discussion, I made a point, PrinceGeorge responded, and I responded back, yet it is you who inserted yourself in our debate. Are there any rules of engagement on this discussion board gus?.. Or is this a simple bait and switch situation?

Hmm.. or perhaps you and PrinceGeorge are one in the same?

gus on a 365 day year I work 185 days that leaves 180 days free to do whatever I want so if you say a month is 30 days 30×6 is 180 6 months off we work stats 24/7/365 days a year operation and you are paid well for doing it. next topic maybe middle finger and dragon master should try something hard…….I know we will send them to grade 5 class and have a spelling contest!!! PS DONT BOTHER ASKING THE TEACHER FOR HELP BECAUSE I HAVE A SNEAKY HUNCH YOU WONT GET ANY. OUT OF ALL THESE CRITICS HAVE YOU EVER BEEN INSIDE A CLASSROOM TO SEE WHAT GOES ON, teachers acting as professional baby sitters because some parents don’t care what their kids are up to as long as they are out of their hair for awhile. you interview with the parents and see how screwed up they are and worry about the future for these kids. it all starts at the top from management down no support for the teacher when a little hellion is on the loose, so those who say teachers don’t work or are overpaid which both are a far cry from the truth don’t judge another until you have walked a mile in their moccassins

I have a bunch of points I want to talk to. Instead of writing several posts, I will separate each thought with some periods.

I am getting sick of people saying that the BCTF is a bad entity because they claim the BCTF says “Its all about the kids.” The problem here is that the BCTF has never said that. I challenge you now to go find where that was ever the BCTF’s stance. It is nothing more than urban legend and twisted rhetoric.

The slogan is “Teachers working conditions are students learning conditions.” This is not saying “its all about the kids.” It is simply a factual statement that many anti-union, or at least anti-BCTF people like to twist into something it is not.

…………………………………………………………………..

As for those saying we need a 10 year contract for stability. In the past 10 years, we have lost 14 days to job action. I have students that miss 14 days per semester to playing video games all night and sleeping in. I also have students missing a week at a time to go to mexico the week before spring break starts because flights are cheaper.

……………………………………………………

In the past 12 years since the unconstitutional legislation was put forth, every student in BC has been in classrooms with more students and a composition that makes it tougher to meet the needs of students. The students that entered Kindergarten in 2002 are now graduating 12 years later and have never once had a classroom with size or composition that was protected by those who were willing to fight for it through negotiations, and 12 years of court battles. Every parent of a child that was in school since 2002 should be angered that their child had this stolen from them.

………………………………………………………………..

I’ve also read a lot the past year with many anti-union people saying that unions are outdated and not needed anymore. Justice Griffin’s ruling is a perfect example of why unions are still needed. Individual teachers could never have survived 12 years of lawyer fees. However, together as a union they were able to fight 12 long years to show that the government acted not only unconstitutionally, but also that government documents showed they broke the law by not bargaining in good faith.

People#1, Gus brought up the issue of your illustrious NDP voiding a contract with Carrier and the subsequent cost of this action to the taxpayers. You seem to be more than willing to offer your learned opinion when a situation such as this occurs with the Lib-Cons (your reference, not mine), but so far you seem to be avoiding this issue as it relates to the NDP!

Seriously, you hate the Lib-Cons, we get that, but is it ok to tear up contracts and/or waste taxpayer’s money when it’s the NDP doing it?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you often seem to think that your opinions are the only valid opinions on this site and yet you have no opinion regarding the NDP’s past transgressions??

Your silence is deafening!!

People#1 wrote: “Sorry to disagree with you on the “learned judge not being learned at all” comment gus.”

You do not have to be sorry …. I’m not sorry when I disagree with someone.

Another one of those sayings that people really do not mean. …. “like the learned member opposite” …. LOL … it has the exact opposite meaning of the actual words spoken … but is considered to be a polite way of disagreeing or criticizing an opponent.

People#1 “Are there any rules of engagement on this discussion board gus?.. Or is this a simple bait and switch situation?”

I do not see any rules on engagement. Have you ever been to a party where a couple of people start discussing something and another comes in on the conversation, listens for a while and then inserts him or herself into the conversation.

If you do not want someone else to join in during those kind of discussions, you typically find a quieter place in the corner of a room or go into another room.

This comment section does not have a separate “private” chat component. Like all other sites, such as newspapers, TV networks, etc. people will commonly insert themselves. Some allow the direct response to someone’s comment. This site does not.

So, you are stuck with it. If you do not like it, leave it or complain to the management, suggesting that they might consider providing some additional functionality.

Hart Guy; lets stick to the subject at hand…why should I steer away from a important discussion about our children’s education, and future, to respond to a wood industry story? One subject at a time please!

Please read the news headline and topic being discussed and respond accordingly!

To spell it out for you;(because I know you need it) the subject of this discussion is “Court ruling blows teacher negotiations wide open”. Just because this particular subject is too uncomfortable and embarrassing to comment on, doesn’t mean we should try and switch subjects… right BaldEagle?

People#1, you stated the following earlier in this discussion board:

“This Lib-Con government has a long history of ripping up contracts and attempting, unsuccessfully, to restrict collective bargaining rights.

In the end, the Lib-Cons always end up losing, and us taxpayers always foot the bill.

Anyone remember the court imposed ruling that favored the HEU? The ruling didn’t reverse pay cuts, but ordered payment of $80 million in compensation and retraining, and required negotiations before any further contracting out of health care jobs.

Good old Lib-Cons, they lost twice in court battling the BCTF as well, this latest loss cost us taxpayers $2 million. Not to worry, our government will have another go at the BCTF, which will end up in court where they will lose for a third time straight.

But that’s the Lib-Con government for you… just a bunch of losers! I am predicting a raise in our taxes just to cover this government’s constant court losses and penalties.”

You mentioned the BCTF and then you brought up the HEU. How did the HEU get into this conversation? Oh, I forgot, you brought it up so that’s ok, right? As long as you bring it up, then it’s ok! If someone else brings something up, then it’s not ok?? Kind of a double standard, don’t you think??

Prince George and Gus brought up the issue with the NDP and Carrier Lumber and you seem to want to avoid it? That’s very typical of you, avoiding any issue that contradicts your learned opinion!

I have my own opinions on most issues and I recognize that I am not always right! Perhaps you can answer a simple question? What makes you think that you are always right and so much smarter than the rest of us?? Simple question!!

I’ll be sure to look for your answer tomorrow! Goodnight!

People#1 on February 1 2014 11:58 AM

“This Lib-Con government has a long history of ripping up contracts …….

“In the end, the Lib-Cons always end up losing ……..

“Anyone remember the court imposed ruling that favored the HEU? ……

“But that’s the Lib-Con government for you… just a bunch of losers!…………”

That takes us back just over 12 hours, People#1 …. You switched from the topic at hand “Court Ruling Blows Teacher Negotiations Wide Open” and added to the politicizing of the discussion.

So, take some more B12 or something to tune up your memory cells and quit pretending that you are not part of the gang that is switching from how we can get our children and young folks to learn more effectively and efficiently to which political party is to blame.

Taking the same chit from biology 10 to 11 to 12 and then into junior years in post secondary education does not cut it. We can do better than that.

OOPs, should have refreshed the board before posting mine …. sorry Hart Guy … :-)

Read about Finland’s successful schooling.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8601207.stm

Smooth, I have not read the legislation, so I will have to verify that the legislation actually states that class size was not negotiable. If that is actually what it says, then knowing the decisions from appellate courts prior to that position, I have to question that anyone can be so stupid to use those actual words.

I enjoy researching such things, so I will spend some of my time doing that.

On the matter of class size being a major determining factor in learning environment as opposed to teaching environment, I tend to believe the evidence that is not the case.

In my own experience, likely being a bit older than you, I went through HS with 40 as a maximum class size, not that all of them were that large, but some certainly were. I find that the KSA of students has not improved over the years as class sizes approached 30 or even less. In fact, it has been shown that the marks over the years have inflated over time, the same as our currency.

While I practiced my profession in the earlier years, I ended up teaching in the post secondary environment.

I learned how much time it takes to do all the tasks required to teach (the going rate was between 2 and 3 hours for every hour teaching contact for applied science based 2 year diploma courses).

But, I also learned how little knowledge and preparation students coming straight from HS had in science and math skills and especially practical application of those skills in everyday life.

So, am I biased? Sure, the same as everyone else. We all carry some biases with us and to need to recognize that before we can start to have some reasonable and productive conversations.

Not only that, but those rare occasions that brought the opportunity to speak to HS teachers about what KSA prerequisites students who followed applied science career paths should have, I hit more blank stares than I expected to get. It seemed to me that teachers were more interested in following the curriculum as set for them rather than embellishing it to draw out the curious.

I can think of a grade 7 teacher who did that for me, as well as a trig teacher and a physics teacher.

“Read about Finland’s successful schooling.”

Interestingly Canada has done quite well with the PISA evaluation system for some time.

I am not sure why Finland should be picked out. The inclusion of special students in the same classroom and providing a second teacher specifically for them is also a method used ion Canada.

Notice that Finland is ranked 12 and Canada 13th. The USA is 36th …..

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/dec/03/pisa-results-country-best-reading-maths-science

So, the question which should be asked is what is the PISA ranking an indicator of?

To me there does not appear to be a direct correlation with the economic or social performance of a country. Maybe I or someone else can locate that analysis somewhere, or else we can quickly throw some data on a graph to find any correlation.

@ ice….lets be very clear. My issues are not with teachers, my issue is not with city workers, my issue is not with pulp mill workers……my issue is idiots like you that have no clue.

Your posts bleed entitlement (and bad grammar) and when your caps lock button is stuck, yes, I want to reach through the monitor and slap you.

Have a great night CrysBaron, and count your lucky stars that you make a lot of money doing SFA.

Don’t worry about repeating Hart Guy’s comments in regards to people#1 habit of wondering off topic when it suits it’s fancy. With a skull that thick it takes a few repetitions before it sinks in, has been pointed out to her quite a few times before and has seemingly yet to crack the surface.