^ on a related note:

Shouldn't there be some sort of enforcement on teachers who "retired"?

According to Graeme's post, many of them have retired from full time teaching positions but decided to back fill TOC positions because they don't want to be completely removed from some teaching action. I see such action as a means that prevents new teachers from getting the opportunity to teach and grow their experience.

I am not sure about the pay structure for these individuals, but I would suppose since they have more experience and credentials, their TOC rate is naturally higher as well.

Personally, I would think if you retired - that means you are out of the system and should be available to volunteer to help (not teaching as a TOC).

As a whole I am not too sure if this has a huge impact to the over supply of teachers in BC but there is definitely some.

Interesting thought, but you will never see a day of free work out of anyone today.

Nobody spends 30 years building their career only to retire and come back and work PT for free.

Its funny actually cause I was just perusing and I read this:

Yes maybe you are right the market would reach an equilibrium if we left it alone, but isn't unionizing and striking the exact OPPOSITE of "left to its own accord"?

I'd argue that teachers are trying to force something that the market cannot sustain.

In regards to class sizes and class composition. I would argue the government is trying to force something that the teachers cannot sustain.

There is a limit of how many students a teacher can effectively teach. The government can't just increase the class sizes and change the class composition and assume all is well.

There is a limit to what you can do effectively.

Since I like analogies, I will start an example another one here.

Let's assume you make bread, and you can effectively make 100 quality lofts of one type bread a day.
Now, the boss is asking you to make 120 lofts of bread a day now, but 100 lofts of type A bread and 20 lofts of type B bread.
The boss is willing to give you a 10% raise.

You will either accept this as a good deal,
or say it's possible, but because there is much more preparation and cleanup to make 2 types of bread, you want negotiate for a better wage and/or better equipment/help to help you.
or say it's not possible to do as you have reached your limit.

20 extra lofts in 120 does not sound a lot but it is a 20% increase in output.
On top of that, its not one type of bread anymore, but 2 types.
For that extra 20 lofts, you have to double the preparation and twice the cleaups.
Yet the boss is only giving you 10%, for, what possibly be 30% more work if not more.
What happens if the boss asked you for 100 lofts of bread, but 3 different types of breads? You would definitely include composition in your wage negotiation.

You said it yourself, no one works for free, including yourself.
So let's be reasonable now.

how wild would this be:

mandated maximum class sizes (hasn't it always been around 25-28 students per class? I remember classes being that big in the 80's/90's in the UK for me).
pay raises for all levels of the scale at CPI, that is, a 'cost of living' raise. if you want more money, you will get it as you go up the scale, not just by having the same job (you only should make more money when you become more valuable, i.e. more skilled, more experienced, etc).

the first suggestion is for the kids, the second is for the teachers. how can anyone claim that this is unfair? how can teachers claim to deserve anymore than a CPI increase, as i would equally argue for anyone in a static position (this ignores the moving up the chain which will provide raises, but that's already built in).

this whole situation is offensive! both sides piss me off and lose my support

If it goes full blown strike next week like expected do the Teachers only strike until the scheduled end of the school year and start up again in Sept. or do the pickets continue through the summer?

The teachers should do a full strike in Sept when school starts. This will put more pressure on the gov to act. Is almost summer time anyways so the gov doesn't really care if school is out a week early.

If I was a teacher and have to force to supervise an exam. I wouldn't care if students are cheating or not. As soon as you force someone to do something they only do the min require.

And that's why we should be happy you're not a teacher

Okay.

So your boss is going to shut his doors because his business is on the verge of bankruptcy.

He ABSOLUTELY has to have those extra 20 loaves of bread. No two ways about it.

There are now two options:

-Close his doors
-Give a paycut to his overpaid baker, for which there are hundreds of other bakers waiting to take his position if he declines. And use this extra funds to hire another baker.

I am not asking anyone to work for free. I am asking them to accept that they are overpaid, and to take a paycut in order to allow the government to use those funds to try and solve all these other issues the teachers are saying are far more important to them.

You guys can keep harping on the fact that you don't think they are overpaid, but at the end of the day, if there is a 10 year wait to become a teacher, there is obviously something wrong with the supply and demand curves.

The analogy is overlooking the fact that the boss can easily borrow money / run a deficit to support the operations. It is not ideal, and obviously you have to watch how much debt you are taking on, but as some (many?) of us have said in this thread, if there were ever any public service worth going into a deficit for, public education is it.

I also think that many of us agrees that instead of spending more money on salary increases, the better way to spend it is to use the money to reduce class size and bring our special needs educators back into the game.

That's what the teachers did last time. They didn't take a pay raise but agree to use those money to hire more support workers, limit class size. The gov on the other hand did none of that.

Seeing how the gov doesn't care so why shouldn't the teachers demand the pay raise they should be paid at? They back down last time in order to provide a better learning experience for the students and the gov just rub it all over the teacher's face.

I knew this was going to be pointed out. I guess we should find out why the BCTF took the deal they made and ended up having it rammed so far up their ass?

Maybe the teachers should be more upset at the body of individuals tasked with representing them. This was a negotiation with a contract signed after, how did they get fucked so badly?

As far as I remember the deal made when I was in HS was that class sizes were capped at 30. This was the agreed upon deal. And so far the government has not strayed from that as I understand it.

In fact from what I know class sizes average 25.7 students (this was in the grade 4-7 range). Which is up very nominally from the 23 students the BCTF was demanding a long time ago. Even then this was a demand the government stated was impossible to fund.

I urge you to stop piggy backing the arguments made by Graeme S and point me towards sources that explain the exact agreement where the teachers were not given what they were promised, and I will show you where they fucked up and got nothing in writing.

:ohgodwhy:


BC teachers vote in favour of full-scale strike | News1130

For OUR KIDS they said.


Support OUR KIDS they said.


Goes and cancels classes two weeks before grad, final exams, and other important days that affect OUR KIDS.

It's no coincidence that they've chosen to strike now. It was all part of the plan.

It has nothing to do with the kids.

If the government agreed to give them the raise they want, a deal would be signed immediately. Hell If the government gave them the raise they wanted the teachers would probably agree to having 35 students in every classroom.

We are after all talking about human beings here, the end goal is to make money. 100% of those teachers would not be there if there was no paycheck.

I remember the teacher's union collaborated with all the public sector unions to force the government to give them generous raises/signing bonuses in 2009 using the olympics as a hostage. Similar tactic

you know class sizes are too big when buddy here keeps trying to bake "lofts" of bread :lol


jk. but srsly, it's loaf

My school only charged 4-5k/yr at the time but most students there were middle class (school also accepted students based on hardship so they didn't pay anything). Falcon is right, a lot of parents sacrificed a lot to be able to afford having their kids attend private school. However, I'm sure your sentiment of well heeled parents is more true at the balling private schools like St. Georges/Crofton/Shawnigan Lake/St. Margaret's where yearly tuition is 17-50k+.

They are doing it at their own expense, that's why they only get 50%.

Governments still need to see to it that these students meet certain educational criteria and most of the curriculum even in a religious school is similar to that in a public school. You still prepare for and write the same provincial exams.

It might be a dumb question, what about kids that are in private school? Are they effected in any way?

I would imagine private schools still have some sort of affiliation between BC Ministry of Education, but I don't know? I guess teachers from private schools are paid differently, right?

Wait...who said the max class size needed to be 28??

University class sizes: Smaller isn't always better - The Globe and Mail

If you go to university, it's typical to see a class size of 300 students or more.

What if you put those higher grade kids, say Gr.10 to Gr.12 kids into University style classes...what would be the outcome? :confused:

So does anyone have the figures how much BC teachers make?

*edit*
Just answered my own question: http://www.bcpsea.bc.ca/bc-teachers/...ary-grids.aspx

Gotta say lowest paid teachers in 2010 actually made a decent amount (at least in Richmond at 42k a year)

For the amount of schooling they put in, 42k is pretty low. Let's say the teacher cannot teach during summer for whatever reason. What job can they find for two months? A low end job such as waiter or barista at Starbucks. So in the end they probably come home with less than 50k a year.

Not to mention the curriculum changes every few years, so the teachers have to change their plans and have lots of prep work. Teachers are not only there to teach but support kids after hours when they have troubles, offer guidance, etc. Teachers also have to mark students work and give feedback back to parents, or meet with counselors to discuss a students issue. I feel like many of us may have not been in public schools for a while, so we feel like teachers only teach.

I'm not saying they deserve a huge bonus increase, but I feel like this negotiation is just

^ it's $43k at 2010 rate

Teaching Salaries in BC's Metro Region | Make a Future

ok wait, it's $43k in Vancouver but looks like it's $42k everywhere else

starting salary. STARTING.

that's not a bad wage for a BA, BEd for 10 months of work (and who said they had to find work in summer?)

when i came out of university (with a business degree), i earned $35K and worked like a dog, 12 months of the year, 40-80 hr weeks, many weekends. but as has been previously mentioned, i made this choice for a reason, much as teachers do - it's not like it's a surprise when they sign up, so why are they complaining (the only way they can complain is if wages don't go up with inflation, or if circumstances change).