[tiger_handheld]

http://globalnews.ca/news/1398017/a-look-at-whats-on-the-table-between-the-bcpsea-and-the-bctf/

Did anyone catch the $3000 for extra massages benefit... LOL.. is this like "lets throw random shit and see what sticks?"

[MindBomber]

Maybe Ohki should actually weigh in instead of just failing people all willy nilly. Fucking beta phaggot.

I hate people who don't weigh in with an opinion and then fail others who actually contribute to the discussion.

I failed you because you felt the need to criticize another person for bringing down the value of the discussion for failing without providing any counter argument, and yet chose to bring down the value of the discussion yourself in the process by turning to childish name calling.

I don't see many engineers or accountants, or even general employees working for large office companies who have any problems making a living without striking. They seem to do just fine.

engineers and accountants aren't all employed by a single business, in contrast to teachers who are basically all employed by the government.

you're comparing apples and oranges.

[MG1]

Did anyone catch the $3000 for extra massages benefit... LOL.. is this like "lets throw random shit and see what sticks?"

Wow, buddy, give your head a shake.......... do you hear anything loose in there?

It's called a benefits package. Have you been living under a rock? Look at the benefits package of nurses and other workers in this province. Have you heard of extended health and dental plans?

You need to stop whining. That's all you're doing. You don't like it because you ain't getting it. This is what people in this sector and other sectors bargained for in the past. Get over it.

Now can you get past the petty shit and post something that is constructive?


god bless..............

[iEatClams]

I failed you because you felt the need to criticize another person for bringing down the value of the discussion for failing without providing any counter argument, and yet chose to bring down the value of the discussion yourself in the process by turning to childish name calling.





amen, Meme405: kettle, meet pot.

some of your posts add value to the thread and adds to the debate, but you also have some posts where you resort to childish name calling which detracts from your valid points and damages your credibility/reputation.

[meme405]

amen, Meme405: kettle, meet pot.

some of your posts add value to the thread and adds to the debate, but you also have some posts where you resort to childish name calling which detracts from your valid points and damages your credibility/reputation.

I'm just a dumb fucking tradesperson. I don't integrate into society well...:concentrate:

[iEatClams]

I use to be a union rep at my old job, I got into it because one of my mentors suggested I join to see and understand different viewpoints and in case I'm in management in a unionized environment I can better manage the employees.

I'll try to give my personal take on unions:

I do see the merits and strengths, as well as weaknesses of a union in certain field or industries. And in fact, many individuals would in fact like to join a union if given a choice between non-union and union. Yes there are many individuals that are very ambitious and don't want to be tied down with seniority or set salaries based on collective agreements, but many are willing to sacrifice that for the security and benefits of working in a union.

Unions are very democratic, contrary to popular believe, unions and their actions are made up of their MEMBERS. if the union is going on strike, it's because the union members VOTED to go on strike. The teachers voted unanimously to go on strike. They usually go on strike when it would make have a greater affect on the government, like right now during exam times. What would be the point of striking in the summer? That's why the majority of the Brazilian workers in transit, nurses, police etc are striking right before the world cup event. Unions represent their members. It's very politically motivated.


I find that unions also help promote better working conditions that "lobby" for better work standards, safety standards, and other related legislation that many private companies would probably try to get by or ignore. They also indirectly help non-unionized workers increase their pay and benefits as well.

Like I said before, the major drawback of unions is that unions do try help protect companies for targeting or firing individuals that dont deserve to be targetted.ex some managers just have personal vendetta's against some employees and the unions would protect that employee. I have seen happen before.

But more often than not, they are protecting weaker, under performing employees, and this is where I think unions need to evolve or change to be up to todays standards. They need to find better ways to let go of these people as it's hurting the union's reputation. However, the employers are pretty smart and managers usually have other ways of punishing the unproductive employees. ie. have them do boring paperwork until they quit etc. but this is misuse of resources as they should have been fired in the first place.

Unions also go into the wrong industries or corporations at times that they wont succeed in. - like for example Ikea. Lastly I also think that unions should convert to define contribution plans instead of defined benefit plans. This is costing taxpayers a lot of money. Most unions these days are no longer purely based on seniority, and it's leaning towards promotion by merit + seniority, so they slowly evolving.

To say that unions are unproductive is not true. Sweden has the highest percentage of unionized employees in the world and they are doing relatively well as an economy. Same goes for Germany. I've also met many smart people in unions, former Investment bankers, people with CA's, CFAs, skilled engineers who rather work 40 hours a week and have work life balance than make lots of money.

Imho, the rate of low paying, low benefit jobs is ever increasing, and for the Majority of people, real wages are being reduced due to inflation. The economy is disproportionately producing low paying jobs and things are only going to get worst I think. All this while employers are creating "record profits".

Companies and employers also have access to much more money and can lobby, put advertisements or skew the public's perception of unions.

[Timpo]

ok so they still don't have a solution?

I wonder if this is going to carry on next year.

[meme405]

I use to be a union rep at my old job, I got into it because one of my mentors suggested I join to see and understand different viewpoints and in case I'm in management in a unionized environment I can better manage the employees.

I'll try to give my personal take on unions:

I do see the merits and strengths, as well as weaknesses of a union in certain field or industries. And in fact, many individuals would in fact like to join a union if given a choice between non-union and union. Yes there are many individuals that are very ambitious and don't want to be tied down with seniority or set salaries based on collective agreements, but many are willing to sacrifice that for the security and benefits of working in a union.

Unions are very democratic, contrary to popular believe, unions and their actions are made up of their MEMBERS. if the union is going on strike, it's because the union members VOTED to go on strike. The teachers voted unanimously to go on strike. They usually go on strike when it would make have a greater affect on the government, like right now during exam times. What would be the point of striking in the summer? That's why the majority of the Brazilian workers in transit, nurses, police etc are striking right before the world cup event. Unions represent their members. It's very politically motivated.


I find that unions also help promote better working conditions that "lobby" for better work standards, safety standards, and other related legislation that many private companies would probably try to get by or ignore. They also indirectly help non-unionized workers increase their pay and benefits as well.

Like I said before, the major drawback of unions is that unions do try help protect companies for targeting or firing individuals that dont deserve to be targetted.ex some managers just have personal vendetta's against some employees and the unions would protect that employee. I have seen happen before.

But more often than not, they are protecting weaker, under performing employees, and this is where I think unions need to evolve or change to be up to todays standards. They need to find better ways to let go of these people as it's hurting the union's reputation. However, the employers are pretty smart and managers usually have other ways of punishing the unproductive employees. ie. have them do boring paperwork until they quit etc. but this is misuse of resources as they should have been fired in the first place.

Unions also go into the wrong industries or corporations at times that they wont succeed in. - like for example Ikea. Lastly I also think that unions should convert to define contribution plans instead of defined benefit plans. This is costing taxpayers a lot of money. Most unions these days are no longer purely based on seniority, and it's leaning towards promotion by merit + seniority, so they slowly evolving.

To say that unions are unproductive is not true. Sweden has the highest percentage of unionized employees in the world and they are doing relatively well as an economy. Same goes for Germany. I've also met many smart people in unions, former Investment bankers, people with CA's, CFAs, skilled engineers who rather work 40 hours a week and have work life balance than make lots of money.

Imho, the rate of low paying, low benefit jobs is ever increasing, and for the Majority of people, real wages are being reduced due to inflation. The economy is disproportionately producing low paying jobs and things are only going to get worst I think. All this while employers are creating "record profits".

Companies and employers also have access to much more money and can lobby, put advertisements or skew the public's perception of unions.

I don't know if you were trying to answer my question or not, after all I am just a dumb fucking tradesperson.

Can you answer these two questions very simply?

1. What is the fundamental difference between a Teacher and a Bachelor of arts student working in an office setting?

2. Why does the Teacher need a union, and yet that Bachelor student seems to make an entire career with no problems, and certainly without the need for job action?


Use small words please. My brain is harmed from breathing so much welding fumes.

[iEatClams]

I don't know if you were trying to answer my question or not, after all I am just a dumb fucking tradesperson.

Can you answer these two questions very simply?

Originally Posted by meme405 View Post
1. What is the fundamental difference between a Teacher and a Bachelor of arts student working in an office setting?

2. Why does the Teacher need a union, and yet that Bachelor student seems to make an entire career with no problems, and certainly without the need for job action?


Use small words please. My brain is harmed from breathing so much welding fumes.
not sure if this is a rhetorical question or what you are trying to get at.

1. they are not the same. one is trained to teach, usually has a bachelors in education or equivalent, arts student may or may not have requirements such as physics / chem / bio etc that they can teach that to other students.

2. the main thing here is the ability to join collectively as a single entity or group so to speak. teachers have a single employer, and can organize better because they are joining up to go negotiate against that one single employer.

it's harder to collect a group of arts students working for 15-20 companies that all do different things in each of those offices.

yes they can make an entire career with no problems, but if they had the ability to join forces they could essentially "bargain" for higher wages / better pay / working conditions etc.

and a lot of these office workers do face problems, they dont ever get to voice it for fear of repercussions.

[Lomac]

Did anyone catch the $3000 for extra massages benefit... LOL.. is this like "lets throw random shit and see what sticks?"

I basically get unlimited benefits through my work. Well, obviously there's a limit but it's pretty damn hard to reach it with the benefits package I have. *shrug*


I know I tend to bash unions in general on here, despite the fact that two of the three I worked for in the past were actually quite awesome. However, that awesomeness of those two unions actually helped me see just how overbearing they can be. In the case of IATSE669, one of the "perks" of the union contract was that for every 6 minutes (after the initial 12 minutes past due) that you're late for your lunch break, you get paid an extra $x until the first hour, at which point you start getting paid even more until you're able to wrap to eat. I understand the reasoning behind having such a clause in the contract, but it can be seen as a union nitpicking every fine detail and simply being overbearing to the employers.

One thing I don't like about unions, however, is that if a motion to strike is given the green light by the required number of members, those who voted against it have no say or recourse (apart from quitting) after it goes ahead. They can't cross the picket line without risking being fired, and if they're tight for cash (for whatever reason) they may not be able to survive on strike pay for very long. I genuinely feel that union members who want to cross the picket line (or otherwise defy the restrictions their union has placed on its members) should be allowed to without fearing repercussions. That, I feel, is the greatest downfall of the modern union and one no one really seems to want to bring up.

[MindBomber]

I'm just a dumb fucking tradesperson. I don't integrate into society well...:concentrate:

Let's be clear, your being dumb and your being a tradesperson are not interrelated.

[7seven]

My stance against the teachers has not changed after this weekends round of negotiations. As I have stated in a previous post, if it were up to me, I would reduce and rollback teacher salaries permanently, so in my view, the Province's offer of 7% over 6 years is more than fair and the teachers already.

Now this isn't because I'm jealous of teachers having 3 months off, their benefits (pension, extended health, etc..) or their salaries, as a couple of the founders of RS and some other members know, I'm in two different fields that has rewarded me very lucratively financially and with salaries substantially more than teachers and with similar benefits (extended health, dental, life insurance, etc...). Rather my stance against the teachers and the BCTF is based on my view on keeping cost to the taxpayers/taxes low, there is only a limited amount of public money to be spent and simply the supply and demand of teaching.

Enrollment numbers of students in BC continue to fall, while the number of teachers and teachers on call continue to grow. Unlike some of the other public sector employees like nurses, police officers, doctors which are facing a shortage of qualified recruits and workers, the number of able and willing teachers with their credentials out there waiting for permanent postings just keeps growing. I think the teachers really have to look into this issue with some of their senior teachers who are just hanging around or are taking up other TOC positions when they are in semi retirement. From a purely financial viewpoint, there really is no need to increase salaries to entice new workers or recruits into teaching.

All the BCTF keeps screaming is they want a fair deal for teachers, well in my opinion, and others can disagree, a starting salary of $43,790 (in 2013 for Vancouver teachers) and an average salary of $71,485 (in BC with allowances in 2012-13) is more than fair for a work cycle with 3 months off, pension and benefits for a occupation with a current oversupply of workers which isn't too highly specialized with too many graduates with their BA and B.Ed. I don't care that compared to some Provinces, BC teacher's salaries are less, at the end of the day that is all unions will keep pointing at, one Province gives more to their teachers, then teachers from the other Province will just point at that and back and forth we go. BC teachers already have a fair deal and salary in my personal opinion.

What I will side on with the teachers and BCTF however is the need to increase funding and resources into the infrastructure of our schools with the upgrades on buildings, facilities, programs and supplies for students. With only so much public money to be spent, I would rather any funds be allocated to that then salary increases or benefits to the teachers when there is already an oversupply of eager, ready and willing teachers out there looking for postings.

So in short, while teaching is an honorable occupation, their salaries and benefits are already more than fair and the Province I hope will not give into the BCTF salary demands, rather allocate those resources and funds to the schools and system.

[meme405]

1. they are not the same. one is trained to teach, usually has a bachelors in education or equivalent, arts student may or may not have requirements such as physics / chem / bio etc that they can teach that to other students.

2. the main thing here is the ability to join collectively as a single entity or group so to speak. teachers have a single employer, and can organize better because they are joining up to go negotiate against that one single employer.

it's harder to collect a group of arts students working for 15-20 companies that all do different things in each of those offices.

yes they can make an entire career with no problems, but if they had the ability to join forces they could essentially "bargain" for higher wages / better pay / working conditions etc.

and a lot of these office workers do face problems, they dont ever get to voice it for fear of repercussions.

I have family which works for a bank, the bank employs 79000 employees. Many of which work in a very similar capacity just at various locations in Canada. 13000 are here in BC, that means that they are roughly 1/4 the size of the BCTF. They could easily unionize and have a large impact. And that's just one bank. Think about if all the tellers from every different bank unionized.

And yet they have not joined together in a union, and they do not strike. My family has somehow managed to make a living.

And yes they could join together and "Bargain" for higher wages, but then they would need to make a union, and then they would need a union administrator, and if big enough they would need to have many others working in that union as well. Then these people need to be paid, and where does that pay come from? Right out of the pockets of the union members. So right off the bat a bunch of the gains they make will end up just going to pay for the union they just created, at the end of the day even a 3% bump in each employees salary would probably end up just going to the union.

Also you would have to look at if the bank as an employer is not paying them adequately are their salaries artificially low? Can RBC continue to operate if it has to pay each employee 5% more?

Finally do these employees actually DESERVE a raise? Are they specialized, and their positions difficult to fill? How many people are ready to fill the shoes of those who quit.

-----------------

Transfer the above to the BCTF:

1. BCTF represents 41 000 teachers. The actual union employs some 200 people. I don't know how much the union costs to operate as a whole, but last I checked it had 8 presidents, these individuals’ salaries and expenses equaled over $1million a year.

^That's a lot of money the teachers are giving up to somebody just to gain this right to "bargain".

2. Are they being paid unfairly low wages? Well since most people seem to agree in this thread that teachers are paid very well for the job they perform (and it’s a prevalent opinion by just about everyone else besides teachers), I'd say they are paid pretty fairly. Sure you could say that if they dissolved the union that their wages would go down, and you would probably be right, but their wages would go down only because they are making artificially high salaries right now; Salaries which they have continuously pushed upwards through countless previous job actions until now, Salaries which have gotten so large that the government can no longer afford to pay them.

3. Do they actually deserve a raise? Well there are thousands of people waiting to become teachers, so the supply is there and the positions for these people are not; therefore, in terms of supply and demand...no.


Also... Really? The difference between a teacher and someone working in an office building is the fact that one of them took physics in first year? No. There is no difference between the two individuals. The only difference is that one works under a union, and the other has to actually has to be good at their job to make a living.

[meme405]

I was interested in a point made by 7seven, one that I hadn't really considered much previously when talking about the strike.

Enrolment.

Check out this report:

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/reports/pdfs/student_stats/prov.pdf

Since 2009 the number of enrolled students in this province has decreased by 22000 students.

Now check out this report:

http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/reports/pdfs/teacher_stats/public.pdf

The total number of teachers has only gone down by 519.

In percentage:

Students went down by 4%. Teachers went down by only 1.5%.

EVEN MORE INTERESTING:

During that period the average salary of a teacher went from $69,631 to $73,920.

[MarkyMark]

I basically get unlimited benefits through my work. Well, obviously there's a limit but it's pretty damn hard to reach it with the benefits package I have. *shrug*


I know I tend to bash unions in general on here, despite the fact that two of the three I worked for in the past were actually quite awesome. However, that awesomeness of those two unions actually helped me see just how overbearing they can be. In the case of IATSE669, one of the "perks" of the union contract was that for every 6 minutes (after the initial 12 minutes past due) that you're late for your lunch break, you get paid an extra $x until the first hour, at which point you start getting paid even more until you're able to wrap to eat. I understand the reasoning behind having such a clause in the contract, but it can be seen as a union nitpicking every fine detail and simply being overbearing to the employers.

One thing I don't like about unions, however, is that if a motion to strike is given the green light by the required number of members, those who voted against it have no say or recourse (apart from quitting) after it goes ahead. They can't cross the picket line without risking being fired, and if they're tight for cash (for whatever reason) they may not be able to survive on strike pay for very long. I genuinely feel that union members who want to cross the picket line (or otherwise defy the restrictions their union has placed on its members) should be allowed to without fearing repercussions. That, I feel, is the greatest downfall of the modern union and one no one really seems to want to bring up.

I get where you're coming from, but on the stance of union members should be allowed to cross the picket line if they want, i'd have to disagree. These employees enjoy the pay and extra benefits of being in a union, which were given to them because the union had fought for them. The employer isn't just paying you higher wages and extended benefits because they are nice in a lot of cases.

So then there's a strike looming. If you're in a union you have a pretty good idea months in advance whether there's a good chance you will be going on strike or not. Even if you're against it, you still have time to prepare for whats coming. Do you think it's fair for an employee to reap the benefits of the union, but when the time comes to strike, they are allowed to just say "Nah im good, have fun on the picket line boys i'm going to keep working. Oh and when your strike is over i'll take any extra pay increases you got from the strike."

You're either all in when you join a union or you shouldn't join one, because there will be situations where you might have to strike when you don't want to.

Having worked in a union though, there are some things that pissed me off about a strike. I believe strike pay was something like 250 bucks a week, which isn't much when you have bills to pay or a family. But when the union found out people we're taking on other jobs while on strike, they made the members sign a waiver stating that they can't collect strike pay if they are working somewhere else as well. To me thats bullshit. You paid union dues for that strike pay, and now when you want to get another job so the strike doesn't bankrupt you your own union tries to screw you over.

So yeah, it's definitely give and take being in a union

[meme405]

So then there's a strike looming. If you're in a union you have a pretty good idea months in advance whether there's a good chance you will be going on strike or not.

...

Having worked in a union though, there are some things that pissed me off about a strike. I believe strike pay was something like 250 bucks a week, which isn't much when you have bills to pay or a family. But when the union found out people we're taking on other jobs while on strike, they made the members sign a waiver stating that they can't collect strike pay if they are working somewhere else as well. To me thats bullshit. You paid union dues for that strike pay, and now when you want to get another job so the strike doesn't bankrupt you your own union tries to screw you over.

Yeah but you knew months in advance about the potential strike, so most people would be more conscious of their budget at that point.

When you are on strike, you are supposed to be STRIKING, not working another job.

I can understand if the strike took months to resolve, but a little 2 week thing event would not be difficult to plan for.

[SoNaRWaVe]

Yeah but you knew months in advance about the potential strike, so most people would be more conscious of their budget at that point.

When you are on strike, you are supposed to be STRIKING, not working another job.

I can understand if the strike took months to resolve, but a little 2 week thing event would not be difficult to plan for.

I have 2 jobs. I pretty much pay for everything in the household due to our financial situation. If my union had went on to actually strike (Translink here), I would still be going to work to my 2nd job. They cannot prevent me from working my 2nd job. That being said, I would still have to fulfill my requirement to be on site to strike.

Any strike HURTS. Whether it be 2 weeks, to months. If you have bills to pay, strike pay is usually LESS than what you would normally get paid. In some instances, strike pay would be more for a few employees.

Being on strike for 2 weeks can mean missing rent payment/mortgage payment for most. But if you have single mom/dads out there, that can be also mean not being able to afford food on the table, or pay for daycare. The list goes on.

You can argue that people should be better with their money, but I can guarantee not everybody have the savings that they would like in their bank account.

Even with months of advance notice of full strike, it is very hard to find a 2nd job to accommodate your current work schedule and strike schedule.

[MarkyMark]

Yeah but you knew months in advance about the potential strike, so most people would be more conscious of their budget at that point.

When you are on strike, you are supposed to be STRIKING, not working another job.

I can understand if the strike took months to resolve, but a little 2 week thing event would not be difficult to plan for.

We were required to be on strike duty one day a week for 4 hours, split up between everyone who worked there during the week. So basically you had the whole rest of the week doing nothing, so why not get another job as well? The longer everyone can stay on strike the better it is for the union, no? Kinda hard to get what you want when everyone is broke after a month and the company knows it.

And that strike lasted 4 months, so it's safe to say all the financial planning at that point was out the window.

[Soundy]

The government used the clause in order to strike a deal with the BCGEU, and now that they have done it, they are using that like a pair of handcuffs...
Kind of like enticing a hockey player to sign a cheaper offer by sweetening it with a no trade clause that then leaves you unable to trade a lump of coal?

https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xap1/t1.0-1/c8.0.160.160/p160x160/1384100_601931309863686_574273026_n.jpg

this government is just a big bully, imo.
1. The term bully is WAY over-used and abused and really, REALLY doesn't apply here.
2. If the government is a "bully" then the BCTF are terrorists holding the schools and kids hostage. "MEET OUR DEMANDS OR THE SCHOOL YEAR DIES! CAPITALIST PIGS!"

So you are saying the teachers should have just said we are not happy we are not happy and sing kumbayah? They really don't have bargaining power unless they pull a strike.
There really needs to be differentiation between "the teachers" and the BCTF.

Before jumping on THIS government, keep in mind that this union has butted heads with EVERY government pretty much since its formation. Their tactic has never been to bargain "reasonably", but to ask for the stars and maybe, eventually, settle for the moon.

The BCTF could have been a little more prepared. Then again, look at who's at the head of the BCTF. Dude is like a 60's hippy gone bad. Not very eloquent, either.
The BCTF really isn't doing their members any favors. Teachers are especially hurting because the fund for strike pay ran out weeks ago, because it's had no time to replenish since the last strike... but the union apparently didn't take that into account and just went full steam ahead playing chicken with the PSEA.

Soundy, you old fart, you gonna make us copy and paste?

j/k
Stupid Tapatalk doesn't parse URLs, I guess. Or the mobile app, forget which one I was using... both of them intermittently don't work.

Yeah, the government offer looks good. I think most teachers would go for it. Unfortunately, the hippie wannabe and his merry men are speaking on behalf of the teachers. Who knows, perhaps some teachers might start to prod the union to get their shit together and reach a deal. As I've mentioned before, it's always the workers who get the short end of the deal.
This, to me, is the great travesty here. The employer and the union hate each other and just want to have a slap-fight, and the kids AND TEACHERS are caught in the middle.

I still think class size and composition should be decided by people other than the teachers.
That's one of the things on the government proposal, though... BCTF doesn't want that.

Thing is, to go ALL OUT with what the TF wants for "class size and composition", adding all the staff and facilities necessary, would add a huge amount to the total cost of the deal - I think I've heard anywhere from $700M to over $1B mentioned.

Now add to that, some of over-the-top perks they're looking for: the signing bonuses, the benefits (the $3000 massage allowance gets mentioned a lot), all these things that would also add up to HUGE dollars.

Bill Good worded it well this morning: imagine how much money could go to class size and composition if all these other things were taken off the table? But you know, it's easy to spend SOMEONE ELSE'S money.

I had an idea that would put a quick end to this, but it's probably too simple for anyone to go for: total up the government's offer, total up the BCTF offer... find a median of the two numbers. Then give that to the BCTF in a lump sum. Then they can decide how much of it they want to hand out in signing bonuses, raises and benefits, and how much to allocate toward "important" things like class size and composition. We'd see really quickly what demands are really a priority to them, and which are just "greediness" or bargaining pawns.

You know in the spy movies and what not, where the evil genius has the tank of piranhas, and the good guy pushes the henchman into it during his escape? Remember what that scene looks like? Yeah... I picture something similar happening in the BCTF if they were actually given full control over a fixed amount.

[Soundy]

One thing I don't like about unions, however, is that if a motion to strike is given the green light by the required number of members, those who voted against it have no say or recourse (apart from quitting) after it goes ahead. They can't cross the picket line without risking being fired, and if they're tight for cash (for whatever reason) they may not be able to survive on strike pay for very long. I genuinely feel that union members who want to cross the picket line (or otherwise defy the restrictions their union has placed on its members) should be allowed to without fearing repercussions. That, I feel, is the greatest downfall of the modern union and one no one really seems to want to bring up.
Shit like this just backs up my biggest beef with most unions (especially public sector unions): that they've become power entities themselves, many of them more interested in wielding and maintaining that power than doing what's right for their members. After all, can't show yourselves to be soft or yielding at all come bargaining time, or they'll just take advantage of you next time, right?

And of course, the inability of members to waver from the party line is another issue, but a far more troubling one: in essence, those unions have become the very thing unions were created to combat.

[meme405]

I had an idea that would put a quick end to this, but it's probably too simple for anyone to go for: total up the government's offer, total up the BCTF offer... find a median of the two numbers. Then give that to the BCTF in a lump sum. Then they can decide how much of it they want to hand out in signing bonuses, raises and benefits, and how much to allocate toward "important" things like class size and composition. We'd see really quickly what demands are really a priority to them, and which are just "greediness" or bargaining pawns.

You know in the spy movies and what not, where the evil genius has the tank of piranhas, and the good guy pushes the henchman into it during his escape? Remember what that scene looks like? Yeah... I picture something similar happening in the BCTF if they were actually given full control over a fixed amount.

As hilarious as it would be to watch a teacher try and teach math by getting her students to count rocks, I really think this is an unwise thing to do...

[MG1]

Actually, counting rocks (using manipulatives) is good for some of the slow kids. Just saiyan.

On a side note, I went casino hopping in the US this morning and on my way back, took the Guide Merridian/264th back. Went through Surrey (man, Clayton Heights is nice), and over the Port Mann. I honked in support whenever I saw teachers pounding the pavement. I kind of got lost at one point and came across this one elementary school, Berkshire, where all the teachers were like under a tent and chilling in lawn chairs. Couldn't see a single stike sign or placard. Most, if not all, of these teachers were very young. Granted this school was off the beaten track, but it made my blood boil witnessing this. Lazy asses................ the only school I've come across that was doing this. Anyway........... someone should report those bastards and light a fire under their butts. Maybe they all need massages and foot rubs, LOL.

[tiger_handheld]

Did anyone catch the $3000 for extra massages benefit... LOL.. is this like "lets throw random shit and see what sticks?"

Actually, counting rocks (using manipulatives) is good for some of the slow kids. Just saiyan.

On a side note, I went casino hopping in the US this morning and on my way back, took the Guide Merridian/264th back. Went through Surrey (man, Clayton Heights is nice), and over the Port Mann. I honked in support whenever I saw teachers pounding the pavement. I kind of got lost at one point and came across this one elementary school, Berkshire, where all the teachers were like under a tent and chilling in lawn chairs. Couldn't see a single stike sign or placard. Most, if not all, of these teachers were very young. Granted this school was off the beaten track, but it made my blood boil witnessing this. Lazy asses................ the only school I've come across that was doing this. Anyway........... someone should report those bastards and light a fire under their butts. Maybe they all need massages and foot rubs, LOL.

I just had to.. :)

ok i'm done with the petty points.. on topic now..

to the guy that was a union rep - what would happen if union members decided to do against the union? be it IKEA workers going back to stocking shelves or teachers going back to the classroom to teach? what are the repercussions?

[MG1]

I just had to.. :)

ok i'm done with the petty points.. on topic now..

to the guy that was a union rep - what would happen if union members decided to do against the union? be it IKEA workers going back to stocking shelves or teachers going back to the classroom to teach? what are the repercussions?

They get fined by the union. Since you cannot teach in the public school system without being in the union, getting kicked out would not be a good. Much like Christy Clark and her refusing to pay the fines at SFU, you'd be kicked out. I recall seeing somewhere that she didn't pass anything at UVic, either.

I guess you can always take up the bible or whatever and go teach at a private school. Yes, there are secular private schools out there, but not a whole lot.

Speaking of which, there are exceptions. Some teachers way, way back got exempt due to..................... you guessed it, on religious grounds. I think most are now dead, dying, or retired.

As for crossing any picket lines, whether you be CUPE, Teamsters, etc. you get fined by your union, so going into work to be fined more than you would be making would not add up, unless you did it on principle...... in which case hard core union members would break your legs or put a golf club through all the headlights, windshields, and windows in all your cars and probably do other shit, like mess with your family. Hey, union people are pretty weird, man. I've seen it first hand. Longshoremen, IOF, Fishermans Union, etc.....man, those were the days.

[shenmecar]

Breaks my heart reading this:

A Student's Questions For Christy Clark | Justine Taylor (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/justine-taylor/bc-teachers-strike-2014-student_b_5497950.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-british-columbia)

I'm A First-Year Teacher And This Isn't What I Signed Up For | Ryan Harrington (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ryan-harrington/bc-teachers-strike-2014-first-year-teacher_b_5483072.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-british-columbia)

PS: There's more at the bottom of these articles

[MG1]

People always see shit from their own POV. The few posts in here like yours, Graeme's and our resident teacher opens our eyes a bit. Walking mile in the other people's shoes before or at least doing some research is pretty important. Otherwise you're just an ignorant buffoon. This thread has it all.

Oh, for the record, I respect accountants. They make a big difference in people's lives. They're not all pencil neck geeks like most people think. I just give them a hard time because my cousins are accountants.

[tiger_handheld]

Sweet deal for BCTF administrators



Whenever I've criticized the B.C. Teachers Federation -- especially their over-the-top contract demands and illegal strike tactics -- I could always count on plenty of angry backlash from union activists to fill up my e-mail and voice-mail inboxes.



By The Vancouver Province April 16, 2006



Whenever I've criticized the B.C. Teachers Federation -- especially their over-the-top contract demands and illegal strike tactics -- I could always count on plenty of angry backlash from union activists to fill up my e-mail and voice-mail inboxes.
But I'd also get reaction from rank-and-file teachers frustrated with their own union's militant leadership. Recently, a group of fed-up teachers contacted me with some fascinating facts about the union's internal workings.
"The thing that bugs me is that we pay some of the highest annual dues of any union in the country -- nearly $1,500," one teacher complained.
"And where does that money go? To gold-plated salaries, benefits and pensions for BCTF staff, that's where! It's disgusting what they receive -- way higher than what any classroom teacher gets."
The ticked-off teachers -- who asked to remain anonymous -- supplied me with copies of two internal BCTF contracts. One contract covers the union's 36 administrative staffers, who are members of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers' Union. The other covers about 100 union support staff, who are members of their own independent union, the Teachers' Federation Employees' Union.
Talk about a sweet deal:
The starting salary for a BCTF administrative staffer is $80,000 -- more than twice the starting wage for a classroom teacher. That same BCTF staffer's salary escalates to $99,112 after just five years' service.
"Nearly 100 grand after five years," the frustrated teacher moaned. By comparison, it can take up to 11 years for a classroom teacher to hit a top wage of around $69,000. The pensions for union staff are proportionately higher than teachers' pensions, too, because of their higher salaries.
The benefits for union staff are equally juicy. The extended-health package includes unlimited annual visits for physiotherapy, massage therapy, chiropractors, naturopathy and acupuncture. Classroom teachers face an annual cap of about 12 visits per year for these services (not including naturopathy and acupuncture, which aren't covered).
Here's a classic: BCTF staffers are eligible for $500 a year to pay for erectile dysfunction drugs.
Do classroom teachers get free Viagra?
"Are you kidding? We're too tired anyway," the teacher moaned. Erectile dysfunction drugs are not covered in the teachers' contract.
Union staffers get six months' maternity leave at 95 per cent of salary -- far better than teachers. And if a union administrative staffer takes public transit to work, the BCTF refunds half their fares. There's no such coverage for teachers.
Details of the internal BCTF contracts are not published on the union's website or in member magazines. Individual teachers who ask to see the contracts are provided copies, BCTF president Jinny Sims told me.
Sims has heard complaints from rank-and-file teachers about the salary and benefits for union staff.
"These contracts were in place before I got here and they do concern me," said Sims, who is paid a 30-per-cent "stipend" on top of her teacher's salary for serving as union president.
"There is a gap there. I have serious concerns about the differential. In fact, it's one of the issues I promised to address when I ran for president."
How does she plan to close the gap? Not by reducing the wages and benefits of union staffers.
"We don't believe in contract-stripping," she said.
Meaning the plan is to bring teachers' salaries and benefits in line with those of union staff through hard contract bargaining with the government.
No wonder their wage demands are always so outrageous! But with the union's staff so far ahead of its members, it's a gap that I doubt will ever be closed.
Oh, and by the way, Sims confirmed that about a dozen BCTF staffers attended an education conference this month in Oaxaca, Mexico. They stayed in $60-a-night hotel rooms, ate "very basic" meals and attended all-day seminars at a local public school, she said.
"It's not a tourist region of Mexico . . . I wasn't on the beach all day," said Sims, adding she double-bunked in a hotel room "that was so small you could barely turn around in it."
Listen to Nightline B.C. with
Michael Smyth every weeknight
at 7 p.m. on CKNW, AM 980
Voice mail: 604-605-2004
E-mail: msmyth@direct.ca
TEACHERS VS. BCTF ADMINISTRATORS
Here's how the pay and benefits of BCTF administrative staff (left column) and the average classroom teacher (right column) stack up.
BCTF administrators AVERAGE CLASSROOM TEACHER
Salary
Five-year scale: 9- to 11-year scale:
$80,000+ in year 1 $37,000+ in year 1
$99,112+ by year 5 $69,000+ in year 9, 10 or 11
Benefits
Unlimited visits for: Limited number of visits (about 12/year)
physiotherapy for physiotherapy, massage therapy
massage therapy and chiropractor
chiropractor No naturopathy or acupuncture
naturopath
acupuncture
Erectile dysfunction drugs: None
$500 per year
Time off for working overtime None
Maternity/paternity leaves: Varies from 90% for two weeks to
Six months at 95 % of salary 6 months at 50%
Orthotics: $1,000/year $250/24 months
Transit Bus: 50% covered None
Pension
30% to 45% higher
Note: BCTF staff only pay higher premiums on pension while at BCTF; unfunded portion of BCTF pension paid by all members.

© (c) CanWest MediaWorks Publications Inc.
source: http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=733d0c5e-be44-4605-b732-05313ee36d16&k=66349

Rather interesting article about BCTF and how some teachers feel about them.

I know its getting to be 10 years old, but i'm sure not much has changed...

Shouldn't the teachers be asking their leaders ... why so greedy?

My earlier comment about benefits now also make sense..

[Soundy]

I'm A First-Year Teacher And This Isn't What I Signed Up For | Ryan Harrington (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ryan-harrington/bc-teachers-strike-2014-first-year-teacher_b_5483072.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-british-columbia)

I have little sympathy - where has this clown been the last 30 years? This shit happens on a regular basis, everyone knows to expect it.

[meme405]

People always see shit from their own POV. The few posts in here like yours, Graeme's and our resident teacher opens our eyes a bit. Walking mile in the other people's shoes before or at least doing some research is pretty important. Otherwise you're just an ignorant buffoon. This thread has it all.

Giving great speeches and writing long essays about how "I just want to do the best by my students" is great.

But as soundy pointed out; give these teachers one lump sum payment and let them decide how to spend the money. I guarantee you will see very quickly how much they really care about the kids.

Human nature is human nature. At the end of the day ITS A JOB, you are there to MAKE MONEY. 99% of people would not be there if it wasn't for the paycheque.

If they just got rid of their union, individuals like Ryan Harrington and the other dedicated teachers would be doing their jobs right now, and if they truly are dedicated an great teachers, they stand to gain a lot more than if they were in any union, and were constantly being pushed down to the same level as all those teachers who are just there cause they have to be to make a living.

Instead the teachers insist on having this union, and therefore they get to have the repercussions of their decision. Even if it wasn't this "1st year teachers" decision to join a union, he knew, or at least should have, known what he was getting himself into. All throughout his schooling teachers striked, I myself went through school and was involved in three separate labour disputes. My grade 12 was heavily impacted by labour disputes between the teachers and government.

TL;DR - There is a great disparity between talking the talk, and walking the walk. A lot of the teachers POV essays are great at talking the talk, but when it comes down to it, 99% of teachers are just money grubbing leeches, just like the rest of us.

[gars]

Not a fan of everything in this article, but the gist of it sums up how I feel.

As A Therapist, I Call 'Bullsh*t' On B.C. Teachers' Union, Province | Alyson Jones (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/alyson-jones/bc-teachers-strike-divorce_b_5496009.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false)

Earlier this month, the B.C. Teachers Federation (BCTF) voted overwhelmingly in support of a teachers' strike. Over the last few weeks both parents and students have watched this conflict build, and now it appears to be moving into a full-scale battle with no sign of compromise on either side.

Before I go any further, let me clarify that I highly value teachers, and as a professional who has worked with children for many years, I feel a kinship and respect for the hard work teachers do. As a parent I feel fortunate that my children have been receiving an enriched education from such committed professionals. It is with deep gratitude I honour the teachers who contribute to the growth and development of our children every day.

As a child and family therapist who specializes in highconflict divorces and conflict resolution, I have watched this escalating situation through the eyes of not only a parent, but also a professional who assists families in dispute resolution. Something interesting has begun to emerge in my observations.

What has stood out for me is how much the "government versus the BCTF" has begun to resemble a bad divorce. Yes, the children are in the middle of a provincial divorce, and as far as I am concerned, both sides have lost sight of the children in all of this. There is a lot being said about the children, but little attention is being paid to their actual needs.

In the high-conflict divorces I work with, this is usually the case. Both sides are convinced they are fighting for what is best for the children, when it fact in is their own issues and needs that are actually taking precedent.

So, now onto my biggest issue with this teachers' situation. I can no longer tolerate hearing the rhetoric from the BCTF that somehow job action, or a strike, is needed to protect the rights "of the children." I am also frustrated with the B.C. government position that is forging ahead without any concerns or sensitivity as to how the lockout has actually been affecting the children.

The reality is that unresolved conflict changes children. It changes their brains and causes significant stress for the children. Conflict is a reality, and not all conflict is destructive. Each of us has our own threshold in regards to conflict, but there are many aspects of conflict that can be constructive.

If we resolve conflict, it can move us forward and build deeper connections with others and increased life skills. This is in keeping with my MORE Philosophy, where movement is the first principle in exceptional living. But there is one kind of conflict that has no redemption in it at all, and has the biggest negative impact on children. That is the type of conflict in which the children are the focus of the adult conflict, and the parties justify their actions by saying they are fighting for the children.

It is time for us to insist that this adult conflict regarding the teachers and the government focus on the adults, and not the children. In the same way that I call "bullshit" on adults who say they are fighting for the children in a high-conflict divorce, I call "bullshit" on the situation between the BCTF and the government. They are not fighting for the rights of the children. This is not an altruistically driven stance in which there is a high moral ground. This is not a situation where the protection and needs of the children is being given the highest priority. This is not an ethical dilemma in which the most vulnerable are taken care of first. THIS IS A CONTRACT NEGOTIATION! That is it, and that is all it is.

If the BCTF and the government are honest about it, they are fighting for adult rights and responsibilities. In my book "M.O.R.E. A New Philosophy for Exceptional Living," I discuss the importance of having "honest conversations." It is time for us to have an honest conversation about this situation.

Does the BCTF have a right to do this? Yes, of course teachers have a right to negotiate their pay and work conditions. I am not arguing with the right to due process. We need our teachers, and we need our government to recognize this, but as a child advocate that has seen the destruction caused by involving children in adult conflicts I can no longer stay quiet on this topic. I cannot tolerate the children being used in this process.

It is time for both sides of this conflict to call it what it is, a contract negotiation based on the needs and rights of the adults, and then get to work on the issue. Leave the children out of it!

In my work with families in transition I act in the role of child advocate. It often falls to me to remind well-intentioned but overly emotional parents to put aside their own issues and hurts in order to continue to provide leadership and direction to the children. Let's actually move this conflict to a higher moral ground where the most vulnerable are protected, and in order to do this I am challenging the BCTF and the government to provide leadership that shows our children how to resolve conflict in a dignified and respectful manner!

[quasi]

Sweet deal for BCTF administrators



source: Sweet deal for BCTF administrators (http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=733d0c5e-be44-4605-b732-05313ee36d16&k=66349)

Rather interesting article about BCTF and how some teachers feel about them.

I know its getting to be 10 years old, but i'm sure not much has changed...

Shouldn't the teachers be asking their leaders ... why so greedy?

My earlier comment about benefits now also make sense..

Not really surprised, my Aunt in Sask. was a parole officer and for the last 25+ years she's been a prison guard mainly working at halfway houses. She is all about Unions but she hates her Union so much. She has told me so many stories of the waste and staright up in your face corruption and bullshitthat goes on within the Union by the people running it. Keep in mind she's obviously biased on one end of the spectrum but some of the things she told me are pretty crazy, they basically run it with a go fuck your hat type mentality we could give a fuck about what you think and it's almost impossible to get rid of them.

[iEatClams]

I just had to.. :)

ok i'm done with the petty points.. on topic now..

to the guy that was a union rep - what would happen if union members decided to do against the union? be it IKEA workers going back to stocking shelves or teachers going back to the classroom to teach? what are the repercussions?

In addition to mg1s response. I like to add that there are many type of unions and some are more progressive/modern than others. Our union was pretty good and the employer never really had major issues as we were very willing to adapt as we understand we need to be efficient in this day and age. As well there are many types of reps and levels of reps depending on the size of the union. I was more of a low level rep.

I never encountered any union members misusing funds or admin staff being paid lots of money or anything like that and we were pretty transparent and even communicated through social media like twitter or something I believe. Not sure how they are like now though. But I'd assume we were the same.

[iEatClams]

Most union reps do not get paid. Or get paid minimally and its done more on a volunteer basis. When those employees miss days off to attend bargaining units or union activities only then does the union pay for those days off as the employer does not pay for that time off.

ne thing I'd like to add is that for most companies the management/employet is in charge of hiring people. And they really do select some of the brightest people to work for some of these unions. One problem with unions is that whenever a bad apple falls through the crack, its very difficult to terminate them. However you still get many many Keeners that work very hard in order to make it to managent or get promotions that somewhat offset those bad apples. But its those low performing workers that are a major issue.

[iEatClams]

But as soundy pointed out; give these teachers one lump sum payment and let them decide how to spend the money. I guarantee you will see very quickly how much they really care about the kids.

Human nature is human nature. At the end of the day ITS A JOB, you are there to MAKE MONEY. 99% of people would not be there if it wasn't for the paycheque.


TL;DR - There is a great disparity between talking the talk, and walking the walk. A lot of the teachers POV essays are great at talking the talk, but when it comes down to it, 99% of teachers are just money grubbing leeches, just like the rest of us.

This is entirely not true. You thinking like this is more of a reflection of your character. Not everyone is a "greedy capitalistic pig" like you said you are.

Contrary to popular believe, most unions do consider the public's reaction when they do things. I think the bctf is out to lunch and have a poor president representing them. Just the way he speaks doesn't resonate with the public.

[tiger_handheld]

So today I was listening to the Kid Carson show on Sonic and the guy had this 3-5min session about how the teachers are money this, money that, not in for the money ,its more than the money. What bothered me the most was that not once, did he mention what the teachers are "supposedly" in for "OUR KIDS"... When you talk for 5mins about money... and all the listener hear is money... I think most of us can come to a conclusion what the teachers really want...

Also, he mentioned that teachers don't make 80k a year. I wonder if he has seen some of the numbers that's been floating around/public.

I regret not calling in and telling them about this thread on revscene.net. Free publicity for RS and better informed Mr.Carson is.

Regardless of his opinion, I switched to sonic so I can listen to him - great DJ!

[Soundy]

Contrary to popular believe, most unions do consider the public's reaction when they do things. I think the bctf is out to lunch and have a poor president representing them. Just the way he speaks doesn't resonate with the public.

"Most" unions don't NEED to care what the public thinks - the idea of a strike is to put economic pressure on their employer and the only one really hurt is the employer, and maybe some downstream customers, which naturally puts more pressure on the employer.

Public sector unions, however, really need to remember that their actions don't directly impact their employers; the ones most affected have ZERO direct control over the situation. Their best hope is to get the public on their side so THEY can put pressure on government, but invariably the public are the ones who suffer from their actions.

But of course, most unions don't understand this; they just go straight for the ol' Union Playbook Page 1 and fire up the job action, because well... you're a union and that's how you roll.

[MG1]

I regret not calling in and telling them about this thread on revscene.net. Free publicity for RS and better informed Mr.Carson is.


:heckno:

:seriously:


^sorry, was out of word..................

[acrophobia]

So today I was listening to the Kid Carson show on Sonic and the guy had this 3-5min session about how the teachers are money this, money that, not in for the money ,its more than the money. What bothered me the most was that not once, did he mention what the teachers are "supposedly" in for "OUR KIDS"... When you talk for 5mins about money... and all the listener hear is money... I think most of us can come to a conclusion what the teachers really want...

Of course this strike is about money. But, the current stumbling block is about money that will never find itself in my bank account.

The proposals for salary increases are close and I have no doubt that both sides could come to a resolution in an afternoon. However, the government is still unwilling to increase workload funding (used to hire more specialist teachers and CEAs); the BCTF wants 225 million per year while the government won't budge on the current funding of 75 million per year. Also, the government is doing everything in their power to make sure that they aren't held accountable ($ wise) for the illegal stripping of our contract in 2002 since retroactive grievances could total over one billion dollars. I don't know if 225m/year is realistic, but I know that the current 75m/year isn't enough; I hope the sides can find some middle ground, and quickly.

People need to actually listen when dollar figures are mentioned in the media.; don't assume that "the money" is going into the pockets of teachers; if salary were the main issue then I doubt the strike would have occurred at all.

*Disclaimer: I realize that the media does a fantastic job of making the public assume that salary is the focus of the negotiations. My local newspaper ran a front-page article that mentioned no numbers other than the small differences in proposed salary increase. Believe me that the money for teachers is a wash, but the money for students is far from settled.

[meme405]

Of course this strike is about money. But, the current stumbling block is about money that will never find itself in my bank account.

The proposals for salary increases are close and I have no doubt that both sides could come to a resolution in an afternoon. However, the government is still unwilling to increase workload funding (used to hire more specialist teachers and CEAs); the BCTF wants 225 million per year while the government won't budge on the current funding of 75 million per year. Also, the government is doing everything in their power to make sure that they aren't held accountable ($ wise) for the illegal stripping of our contract in 2002 since retroactive grievances could total over one billion dollars. I don't know if 225m/year is realistic, but I know that the current 75m/year isn't enough; I hope the sides can find some middle ground, and quickly.

People need to actually listen when dollar figures are mentioned in the media.; don't assume that "the money" is going into the pockets of teachers; if salary were the main issue then I doubt the strike would have occurred at all.

*Disclaimer: I realize that the media does a fantastic job of making the public assume that salary is the focus of the negotiations. My local newspaper ran a front-page article that mentioned no numbers other than the small differences in proposed salary increase. Believe me that the money for teachers is a wash, but the money for students is far from settled.

We all know exactly what the problem is, and how you all want more money for the kids. We get it. The problem is there is no more money. That's it, and we don't want to up our taxes to pay for more.

Take a pay cut, and we will fund your 225 million.

Contrary to teachers belief, government money doesn't grow on trees, those of us out here actually trying to make a living fund everything the government pays for, and in this economic climate, many of us are stretched to the limits as well.

Meanwhile teachers who work 9 months out of the year are averaging $74,000. You do realize that extrapolated out to a full year that is equivalent to almost 100k?

As stated on every page since like page 6, the supply of able bodied and adequately trained teachers is evident. The demand IS NOT. Therefore the market price for your services is declining, and yet because of your unionisation you guys are artificially pushing the price of your salaries upwards. This has been happening for the last decade, this time around we have finally reached a point that the government has finally said "enough is enough, we can't afford this any longer".

EDIT: When I say "we" I mean me, but my opinion is a prevalent one, so it may very well be more of a "royal we".

Also don't think I say any of the above from a position of disrespect to the role teachers play, I am saying this from a purely economic standpoint. I have a good deal of respect to those who teach, I just don't see the need to pay them more in this current market.

[Traum]

We all know exactly what the problem is, and how you all want more money for the kids. We get it. The problem is there is no more money. That's it, and we don't want to up our taxes to pay for more.

Take a pay cut, and we will fund your 225 million.

Contrary to teachers belief, government money doesn't grow on trees, those of us out here actually trying to make a living fund everything the government pays for, and in this economic climate, many of us are stretched to the limits as well.

Meme405,

I completely disagree that that problems lies in the fact that the provincial government has no more money. It may be true that there really is no net increase in total provincial revenues, but that should not be the problem. If there isn't enough money for public education, take a cut from something else. What is plainly evident to me is that the BC Liberals simply does not want to spend any more money on public education. I will not speculate whether Crusty Cunt really has a grudge against public education even though her history is suggestive of it. But what I will say is that in the past 12+ years, the BC Liberals government has been slashing public education funding, and that is not acceptable.

[saveth]

Anyone else notice that you don't really see many cars honking when driving past school? I drive by 2 schools on my way to work and I haven't heard a single honk this whole week.

[MG1]

Remove class sizes from the table. Make it about increase in wages. It's very simple then. Let the class sizes be determined by the community. Let the parents do the fighting on that one.

Christy is full of shit when she says she wants it to end. Wait a little while longer and it will be a moot point when the Supreme Court tells the government to rip up all contracts then you get to start from scratch.

BCTF now wants mediator. Government said no and left the bargaining table. why? Yeah, government won't be taking a chance like that. They will only do shit if it's to their advantage. Kiss ass suck a banana much like their leader does. Who do surrey people make fun of? Ladner girls, lol.

If only Christy Crunch's ex husband could share stories with us....... Then Kid Carson would be enlightened.

[meme405]

Meme405,

I completely disagree that that problems lies in the fact that the provincial government has no more money. It may be true that there really is no net increase in total provincial revenues, but that should not be the problem. If there isn't enough money for public education, take a cut from something else. What is plainly evident to me is that the BC Liberals simply does not want to spend any more money on public education. I will not speculate whether Crusty Cunt really has a grudge against public education even though her history is suggestive of it. But what I will say is that in the past 12+ years, the BC Liberals government has been slashing public education funding, and that is not acceptable.

Your right:

Health care - don't need that.
Infrastructure - fuck that
paying down our debts - why money's free ain't it?
social housing - fuck those homeless people
police - a better educated public all but replaces the need for law enforcement
transit - Haha transits for uneducated poor people

^do you see? Not easy to find money in a budget that's balanced on the edge of a knife.

For records sake:

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s52/meme405/Capture_zpse339f8bd.jpg (http://s149.photobucket.com/user/meme405/media/Capture_zpse339f8bd.jpg.html)

^That's how the government spends it's money. You tell me where you feel they should pull extra salary for you from.

Do you see which series of numbers is INCREASING in the above? That's right it is education, they are planning on spending MORE in education even though statistically enrollment in our education system is dropping at over a percent a year.

EDIT: Crusty cunt and her goon squad of idiots are not doing fuck all for my industry either, so don't think I support her. This has nothing to do with the government and their tactics, this has to do with: Where the hell do we try and sever the bleeding?

Seriously ohki? How can someone who hasn't posted since 2012 still come on here just to fail people.

[inv4zn]

Anyone else notice that you don't really see many cars honking when driving past school? I drive by 2 schools on my way to work and I haven't heard a single honk this whole week.

Slightly off topic, but the honking is bloody annoying.

If you support the teachers, park and tell them - don't surprise other drivers around you lol

[Traum]

Your right:

Health care - don't need that.
Infrastructure - fuck that
paying down our debts - why money's free ain't it?
social housing - fuck those homeless people
police - a better educated public all but replaces the need for law enforcement
transit - Haha transits for uneducated poor people

^do you see? Not easy to find money in a budget that's balanced on the edge of a knife.

I wish I have time to dig up some numbers like you have just done, and it is great that you are doing that. But let's look at healthcare and infrastructure/transit.

Healthcare as we have it is in serious need of reform. IMO, the single most effective method to slash costs is to open up the floodgates for private sector healthcare, but regulate the salary levels and treatment costs so that we won't see a mass exodus of healthcare professionals jumping ship to the private sector nor a US-style free-for-all (healthcare) business environment. Especially in Metro Vancouver, there is no shortage of people who are willing and capable of paying for private sector healthcare. Doing so will dramatically ease the cost pressures on the public sector healthcare system. Even with this scheme, I do not necessarily support dramatic cuts to healthcare funding because doing so means we have simply created a 2-tier class system. But with a private sector to cater to those can afford their services, the public sector can provide significantly better services to those who couldn't afford the private sector treatments.

As far as infrastructure is concerned, I am very skeptical of developments such as the Hydro's Site C. It is hugely expensive, and consumers and taxpayers alike are paying through their noses for it (esp in the upcoming years). Despite the city's population growth and general increase in total energy use, our per capita usage is actually going down. Do we really have a need to build something like that?

IMO, the BC Ferries is a lost cause. I am not saying we should just "fxxk the Islanders and let them rot", but the losses have to be cut. From selling off / privatizing the entire BC Ferries business to discontinuing only the unprofitable routes, the province needs to explore some possible options.

Obviously, these suggestions are by no means exhaustive. I'm sure people more familiar with other sectors can comment on how costs could be better controlled.

[shawnly1000]

BCPSEA says will agree to Vince Ready as mediator. But waiting to hear Vince Ready's availability.

[freakshow]

The supply of able bodied and adequately trained teachers is evident. The demand IS NOT. Therefore the market price for your services is declining, and yet because of your unionisation you guys are artificially pushing the price of your salaries upwards. This has been happening for the last decade, this time around we have finally reached a point that the government has finally said "enough is enough, we can't afford this any longer".This is a great summation of the problem with unions… in any normal industry, to promote a healthy level of competition and continued learning, your job and salary are contingent on your performance as well as supply and demand. When you allow workers to stagnate, the industry does the same.
If all software companies were unionized, we'd still be using dial up modems.

[meme405]

I wish I have time to dig up some numbers like you have just done, and it is great that you are doing that. But let's look at healthcare and infrastructure/transit.

Healthcare as we have it is in serious need of reform. IMO, the single most effective method to slash costs is to open up the floodgates for private sector healthcare, but regulate the salary levels and treatment costs so that we won't see a mass exodus of healthcare professionals jumping ship to the private sector nor a US-style free-for-all (healthcare) business environment. Especially in Metro Vancouver, there is no shortage of people who are willing and capable of paying for private sector healthcare. Doing so will dramatically ease the cost pressures on the public sector healthcare system. Even with this scheme, I do not necessarily support dramatic cuts to healthcare funding because doing so means we have simply created a 2-tier class system. But with a private sector to cater to those can afford their services, the public sector can provide significantly better services to those who couldn't afford the private sector treatments.

As far as infrastructure is concerned, I am very skeptical of developments such as the Hydro's Site C. It is hugely expensive, and consumers and taxpayers alike are paying through their noses for it (esp in the upcoming years). Despite the city's population growth and general increase in total energy use, our per capita usage is actually going down. Do we really have a need to build something like that?

IMO, the BC Ferries is a lost cause. I am not saying we should just "fxxk the Islanders and let them rot", but the losses have to be cut. From selling off / privatizing the entire BC Ferries business to discontinuing only the unprofitable routes, the province needs to explore some possible options.

Obviously, these suggestions are by no means exhaustive. I'm sure people more familiar with other sectors can comment on how costs could be better controlled.

:facepalm: @ BC Ferries they are a world of problems.

In terms of your comments regarding health care and infrastructure, much like how so teachers are claiming people other than teachers don't understand the needs of education funding, you do not understand the needs of these sectors.

I currently am involved with several BCH projects including recent upgrades at GMS, and the northwest transmission line. People are simply unaware at the shocking needs for upgrading our transmission systems. In many cases these are systems which are ageing and we are just throwing money at them to keep them operating, when in reality it is simply time to completely overhaul or replace them.

On top of that Site C is something that has seen 100's of studies, including feasibility and economic viability, environmental assessments and so on. The project is one that was promised to be funded in part by both the federal and provincial governments, because it represents such a great opportunity for BC to become a huge leader in clean energy. On top of that regardless of what you think about our power usage and our need for it (of which there is a need), even if we didn't have the need for it, we sell a lot of electricity to our friends south of the border during peak periods. So Site C represents an opportunity to make money. Will that money cover the cost of building the site? I have no idea, but given how stingy the government is in projects like this I have a distinct feeling that over the life of the project it very well may.

Have you ever driven down through Oregon and seen all those windmills?

Oregon has in total like 1900 windmills which overall has cost them some 6 billion dollars.

In comparison site C will cost about 8 billion dollars.

Do you know what the differential is between the power generation of the two projects?

Site C will generate double the power, meanwhile it will not cost HALF as much to operate year to year, and the life cycle of Site C is like 4 times longer than any windmill. (the dam is expected to produce for 100 years)

[MG1]

.

Is Vince ready?

okay, that was bad, but is Peter Cameron willing to let go of his $225.00/hour wage or does he still get paid until it's over?

This is so weird. Earlier in the day, Cameron said

“Binding arbitration, in theory, is just handing over to a third-party the decision that the party should be making,” Cameron said. “That’s a big challenge to ask of any government to do.”

Now he's saying they're open to the idea?

I guess poll results are a powerful thing. Mind you, the media can report whatever and however it wants by twisting and stretching the truth.

[MG1]

Sounds like Cameron resigned. Vince won't be around till next week. Cameron has been at it since February. Pretty nice gig.

EDIT: sauce

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-strike-government-agrees-to-vince-ready-as-mediator-1.2682810

[acrophobia]

We all know exactly what the problem is, and how you all want more money for the kids. We get it. The problem is there is no more money. That's it, and we don't want to up our taxes to pay for more.

Take a pay cut, and we will fund your 225 million.

Contrary to teachers belief, government money doesn't grow on trees, those of us out here actually trying to make a living fund everything the government pays for, and in this economic climate, many of us are stretched to the limits as well.

Meanwhile teachers who work 9 months out of the year are averaging $74,000. You do realize that extrapolated out to a full year that is equivalent to almost 100k?

As stated on every page since like page 6, the supply of able bodied and adequately trained teachers is evident. The demand IS NOT. Therefore the market price for your services is declining, and yet because of your unionisation you guys are artificially pushing the price of your salaries upwards. This has been happening for the last decade, this time around we have finally reached a point that the government has finally said "enough is enough, we can't afford this any longer".

EDIT: When I say "we" I mean me, but my opinion is a prevalent one, so it may very well be more of a "royal we".

Also don't think I say any of the above from a position of disrespect to the role teachers play, I am saying this from a purely economic standpoint. I have a good deal of respect to those who teach, I just don't see the need to pay them more in this current market.

Again, you need to stop thinking only about salaries. A cost-of-living increase is not the reason that the government is saying "enough is enough". The government has priorities and is choosing to put money into ventures other than education. Every government has and has had limited funds but ours has chosen to reduce their funding for education from 300 million to 75 million dollars per year. And because of their spending habits I am supposed to take a pay cut? Business owners can spend their funds as they please (let's take a vacation!) then have employees pay for it? I can take my limited funds and spend them as I please and then ask the bank to reduce my mortgage? I'd like to think that teachers are pretty darn altruistic already, so let's not take advantage of that and ask us to give up our money, that supports our families, to make up for the government's spending habits. I realize that money is not plentiful, which is why I already stated that we will probably not get the 225m/year we are asking for. We are looking for negotiation and compromise (I hope).

Also, keep in mind that a teacher's workday is 9 or 9.5 (I can't recall which is the actual number) according to the government. That puts us very near the number of yearly working hours for 9-5ers. If you include the time spent coaching sports or clubs, then we work more hours per year than 9-5ers. If you include the hours many teachers (including myself) spend at work in the evenings, on the weekends, over the summer...you get my point.

But I should take a pay cut. To show that I really care. And because all teachers think money grows on trees.

*I fully admit that I am writing this a little tired and cranky ;)

[meme405]

Also, keep in mind that a teacher's workday is 9 or 9.5 (I can't recall which is the actual number) according to the government. That puts us very near the number of yearly working hours for 9-5ers. If you include the time spent coaching sports or clubs, then we work more hours per year than 9-5ers. If you include the hours many teachers (including myself) spend at work in the evenings, on the weekends, over the summer...you get my point.

But I should take a pay cut. To show that I really care. And because all teachers think money grows on trees.

*I fully admit that I am writing this a little tired and cranky ;)

Look we are going to disagree until we are both blue in the face.

Here are more facts to show you how much a teacher makes:

Starting salary for a teacher: just shy of $50k.

AVERAGE salary for the rest of the province (for those who are 18 and older): $45k

My point is NOT that teachers should take a pay cut so that the government can save a few bucks. My point is that the teachers should take a pay cut so the government can use those funds to help correct the other issues that are plaguing the system.

Also on the number of hours a teacher spends throughout the year:

I always see this argument about coaching sports and volunteering their time. You know that regular people do this as well right?

I volunteer at telethons (both sponsored by companies I have worked for and not), I used to coach a kids hockey team, and I assisted a young boys soccer team, and I also helped out with my family members scout troop fairly often.

^NONE of this counts towards working hours. It's great teachers do this, and I applaud those that do, but there are those that don't do these things either.

And no you shouldn't take a pay cut to show you care, you should be taking one because if you otherwise weren't part of a union, I would have fired your ass and hired any number of the other willing applicants for the MARKET PRICE.

[MG1]

^^I have friends who are old school teachers and they talk shop all the time when they are just hanging. It never ends "Oh, I can us this in my socials class." They are always looking for deals on shit- they're married to their job. Those kinds of teachers are becoming extinct. Like I mentioned, the newer ones are less likely to be that dedicated. Having said that, a lot of the good teachers over the years have given up. They're just tired of the same ol' teacher bashing shit that goes on all the time September rolls around or job action is in progress. They just put in their time and go home to mark and prep for the next lesson. Sad.

I remember all the teachers I had when I was a kid. Man, they were like gods to me. They inspired me with their passion for learning. I'm sure all of us had those teachers at one time or another (unless you were a moron or a slacker). It's always easier, however, to remember the lazy-ass fucktards who made school boring and painful as hell.

achrophobia, you give me hope. If I ever have grandchildren (hint, hint, hint), I hope you're one of their teachers. BTW, pease tell me there are still dedicated teachers out there. I always said it's not the delivered curriculum that makes a difference, but the other stuff that a good teacher brings to their class day in and day out.

Honesty, integrity, ethics, life long learning, attitude, compassion, inclusion, open minded and critical thinking, etc. Not grammatically insync, but you get the idea.

Mr. Parmar, Mr. Madhosingh, Dr. Goldberg, Mr. H. King, thanks for being my teachers.

Addendum: Dr. Theo Goldberg was my grade 4-7 music teacher. I just found out he passed away not that long ago. He was an awesome individual. Had a German accent, drove a mustang, and was ahead of his time as far as music education was concerned. I remember a musical he wrote and directed. It was amazing. "Flute Island" I think it was called. Lord Strathcona Elementary was like 98% Chinese. He used traditional Chinese music and used it to create a modern musical. Later on, I bumped into him at UBC of all places, where he was a prof there. Sadly, he passed away in 2012. I will have to see where his final resting place is.

[MG1]

And no you shouldn't take a pay cut to show you care, you should be taking one because if you otherwise weren't part of a union, I would have fired your ass and hired any number of the other willing applicants for the MARKET PRICE.

Wow, and you volunteer and work with kids? Hockey coach, eh?

On that note, I'm outta here. The thread was fun. It's RS............. Nuff Said.




god bless

[acrophobia]

Also on the number of hours a teacher spends throughout the year:

I always see this argument about coaching sports and volunteering their time. You know that regular people do this as well right?

I volunteer at telethons (both sponsored by companies I have worked for and not), I used to coach a kids hockey team, and I assisted a young boys soccer team, and I also helped out with my family members scout troop fairly often.

^NONE of this counts towards working hours. It's great teachers do this, and I applaud those that do, but there are those that don't do these things either.

I knew this argument was coming. The type of community volunteer activities you mention are the ones that we also volunteer for. I was referring to the plethora of high school sports teams and clubs that are sponsored almost solely by teachers, because many consider these activities 'part of the job' (but don't like to include them when discussing how 'little' teachers work).

meme405- We can agree to disagree. Do remember that the vast majority of teachers work their tails off to make their classrooms safe and engaging for all of their students, while funding dwindles and expectations increase. Like me or hate me, I'm going to make sure that your kids have a blast in my science class :)

MG1- I work with many amazing teachers that are entirely dedicated to their craft; these folks make up the majority of my colleagues and I'm willing to bet that it's not like this at only my school. I don't often have the opportunity to experience other teachers' lessons first hand, but based on the discussions I hear between students and the hard work behind the scenes that I do observe, I leave my school every day believing that I have an exciting and special job, staff, and school. Teaching is not the same as it was in the 90s when I went through, and the change has certainly been for the better.

[meme405]

Wow, and you volunteer and work with kids? Hockey coach, eh?

On that note, I'm outta here. The thread was fun. It's RS............. Nuff Said.




god bless

Sorry.

Seriously Sorry Acrophobia, I didn't mean like you yourself I would fire, I meant that as in teachers in general. I operate on a strictly financial level, so sometimes when talking about that, something comes off in a way I don't intend. In my world of management and business ownership, dollars and cents do 90% of the talking.

I'll be honest teachers like you and traum seem to be the ones on here actually defending others, in my opinion you guys probably represent the upper echelon of teachers...aka...those that actually care. (this is my opinion after never having sat in your classes, but just going by your words on here). While other teachers are simply using the strike time to just dick off, you guys are here defending them and trying to further people's faltering opinion of teachers.

I will agree to disagree with you, although I don't think our mentalities are very different I think our perspectives are just too far apart.

I will stop posting as I have cluttered this thread plenty, and I think i've made my point a few too many times.

Sorry everyone.

EDIT: oh and MG1, I have lots of younger kids in my family, and I love kids. Believe it or not, I'm not just a keyboard warrior, I do other things as well.

[MG1]

Yeah, I said I would stop posting but I had to respond. Meme, you're a good shit as far as shit goes, just kidding. At least you were good enough to apologize to acro.

Me, on the other hand......... I'm just an old miserable fart. I'm at Gardenworks for their annual sale and I'm getting coffee. This middle aged Canadianized Chinese lady has two cups stacked together. I knew why, but I tell her she has two cups stuck together. She tells me she does this on purpose to protect her hands. I tell her she's no gardener, then. She gets all defensive and husband starts chuckling. I've been apologizing all my life. It's time to be the true Azzhole I am.

Anyway, thanks, meme, I won't have to ask the mods to change your user name to Mean405.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Look we are going to disagree until we are both blue in the face.

Here are more facts to show you how much a teacher makes:

Starting salary for a teacher: just shy of $50k.

AVERAGE salary for the rest of the province (for those who are 18 and older): $45k

My point is NOT that teachers should take a pay cut so that the government can save a few bucks. My point is that the teachers should take a pay cut so the government can use those funds to help correct the other issues that are plaguing the system.

Also on the number of hours a teacher spends throughout the year:

I always see this argument about coaching sports and volunteering their time. You know that regular people do this as well right?

I volunteer at telethons (both sponsored by companies I have worked for and not), I used to coach a kids hockey team, and I assisted a young boys soccer team, and I also helped out with my family members scout troop fairly often.

^NONE of this counts towards working hours. It's great teachers do this, and I applaud those that do, but there are those that don't do these things either.

And no you shouldn't take a pay cut to show you care, you should be taking one because if you otherwise weren't part of a union, I would have fired your ass and hired any number of the other willing applicants for the MARKET PRICE.

You do know that a lot of parents expects teachers to do these type "Volunteers work" right? Even though is not part of the their job. Let's see how will the sports team, yearbook club, camping trips, band trips, gard party are without teachers to volunteer their time. Those events or activites won't happen.

I volunteer and I can tell you some of these so call volunteer activites won't run without teachers being there. Ex. Sports team, some of the teachers even drives their students to such events (happen to me when I was in high school) Will parents be willing or let a totally stranger drive their kids or trust a teacher?

I make decent money and have friends who are teachers who makes maybe about the same. Their workload is way way more than mine. See after work for me is no work if I do need to do work well that's OT. Teachers, good luck, you have prep, mark exams, call parents, pay, stay OT if there are still kids in the classroom asking questions. These are all not included in their salary. Sure let's get teachers to take a pay cut but in order for them to do anything after school they are paid OT. How's that?

Tons of teachers volunteer because they feel is part of their job. Sure fire all of their ass and let's see if you prepare school can actually open in Sept.

[Tapioca]

If I were a teacher, I would advocate for cutting back volunteer hours for sports teams, field trips, etc. If the public isn't willing to pay for the time, then let the parents takeover.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

does it even matter in the long run?

i remember as a kid teachers went on strike and shit. all that meant for me was more vacation time.

decades later, i don't think those strikes affected me as a student that much. i still had to write and do all those exams eventually. and i still eventually graduated elementary and HS and all that.

yeah i had some cool teachers that taught "better" than others. but in the end i still had to study and "luckily" i had a billion different after school study programs such as tutors and group studies and other crap... i didn't really do much "learning" in school (i went to public school).

i basically went to school to hang out, and get my assignments and try not to fall asleep in class. all the studying was done outside of school.

i think in the end it doesn't really matter. as long as you have a few good teachers that's all that matters. the rest is still in the parents hands.

i think parents still have a huge % of the responsibility of encouraging their kids to learn.
they shouldn't depend on schools for that. school is just a really complex text book that gets thrown at the kids.

now as i get older, i realise why parents get pissed at these strikes and shit...

but really, i'm still a kid, so hooray for extended holidays!

playing in the back yard, following ants around and climbing trees, throwing eggs at buses... that's where the real learning is at. haha...

[quasi]

If I were a teacher, I would advocate for cutting back volunteer hours for sports teams, field trips, etc. If the public isn't willing to pay for the time, then let the parents takeover.

I'm totally OK with that, my son plays a bunch of sports that take up a lot of not only his time but ours and none of them through the school. My wife and I volunteer all the time, I help with coaching and my wife volunteers to help with team management. He's our kid, I have no problem paying for it and pitching in it only makes sense. School sports although I'm sure great for some are easily trumped by all the community stuff out there, hockey, football, baseball, lacrosse, swimming ect.....We had our last Lacrosse game yesterday afternoon and Football starts next Thursday so we have no problem finding things to keep him active.

Teachers should concentrate on teaching and spend their free time with their own family just like everybody else, no disagreement from this guy.

[Tapioca]

^ This supports my point. It seems that parents today, for whatever reason, trust teachers less. If I were a teacher, I would just throw my hands up and say, "My role is to help your child learn the province's curriculum and to pass exams. Nothing more, nothing less." If you want your kid to be a superstar, it's your responsibility. Teachers then wouldn't have to fight the province and public opinion on their importance to public education - they can simply focus on the hours worked in the classroom and test results as metrics. An average of 70K after 10 years for 8 hours a day of work and 2 months off is a pretty good deal. If parents want their kids to play sports or put together a yearbook, they can organize sich activities on their own. Things like grad and recitals should be entirely volunteer driven too. If kids want to use schools for activities after hours, they should have their parents to sign waivers and make their families liable for any damage done to school property, injuries, etc.

[MG1]

If I were a teacher, I would advocate for cutting back volunteer hours for sports teams, field trips, etc. If the public isn't willing to pay for the time, then let the parents takeover.

Most of the teachers who do the extra-curricular stuff do so because they love to. It's their passion. It's how they connect with the kids. It's one of the most rewarding parts of the job. This job action hurts them way, way more than the ones who get there just before the bell rings and then beats the kids out to the parking lot.

As for field trips, districts have a strict teacher to student ratio. Parents, more often than not, end up causing some problems. They are not great at discipline, and in all fairness, aren't expected to. It's more for good PR and to have the adult to student ratio met at some venues.

Coaching and volunteering local teams and clubs are cool for parents, because their kid and their kids' friends are known to them and vice versa. School teams are a little different. In higher grades, parents coaching is not a big deal, but in lower grades, there has to be a sponsor teacher involved. Not always in capacity of coach. Accountability when at other schools (tournaments).

As for curriculum, it doesn't matter what they teach - school is about socializing, learning to get along with each other, and learning to deal with shit. Not all parents are there for their children. There are some really ugly situations out there. For some kids, school is the only escape from a shitty home life. School is the only place where they feel safe and the teachers become the role models they don't have at home. School offers structure for some really needy kids. Without good schools (great teachers, effective administrators, and good support from the community), these kids will be out on the streets.

Again, most people on RS grew up with great parents and a good home life. Not talking about money and shit, but a place where there was something called love and caring for one another.

There are kids who fall through the cracks and there are lots of other complicated issues. One thing is for sure, the ministry of education is always the last to figure things out. We put people in charge who have absolutely no idea what the hell happens in classrooms, let alone schools.

Fassbender? Yeah.......... when's the last time he was in a classroom? Does he know the children of today and the big issues?

Why do I keep posting in this thread, LOL.

I miss being involved wth the PAC. It was great being able to work with teachers, principals, district staff, and parents in general, to make a difference in our children's lives. "Community of Learners."

[MG1]

Also, for those kids on the other end of the spectrum, being involved in local organized sports is on the difficult side. School sports is probably the only alternative for them and in most cases, is a game changer (pun not really intended). Their parents wouldn't care less if their kids were having sex in the bushes, smoking pot, into crack, whatever......... as long as mom can fuck around with boyfriend (fifth one in as many weeks) or do drugs and turn tricks. Kids are just a fricken nuisance to them. Some parents out there are pretty scary, but that's our society. You'll never see those parents out on the fields with their kids on weekends. People from West Van, Point Grey, Shaughnessy, etc. have no clue what types of shit goes on in other parts of the province. It's actually better not to know.

Teachers on the other hand cannot turn a blind eye.

[Tapioca]

MG1:

You make some great points about the role that teachers can play. There are always bad apples who punch-in and punch-out and administer multiple choice exams, but I definitely appreciate teachers who go above and beyond what's expected to make a difference.

With that said, I think teachers have to be in touch with the public's sensibilities. The general public no longer values nor trusts public institutions to the same extent as 10-20 years ago. People are being squeezed and want everything for nothing. The teachers will never win the war of public opinion if they emphasize the role they play when Joe Average doesn't value education and thinks he can do a better job raising his child. Sure, there are many kids who come from broken homes, but such families don't vote, nor do they pay their share in taxes. It's a deeply cynical view, yes, but considering the passionate posts from those in this thread, what I've described about the public's attitude is not far off-base. Ultimately, the teachers have to look out for themselves.

[Traum]

I wonder how many RS-ers are from Templeton or Britannia? IMO, those are probably the 2 schools with the highest percentage of dysfunctional families. It doesn't mean they don't have good, smart kids -- of course they still do. But there are some really fxxked up families out there, and as MG1 was saying, school and school-based activities are really their only escape and their guides to a proper and more structured world.

[MG1]

Yes, but the good ones don't really care about what Joe Public thinks. I can guarantee you some are deeply hurt by the teacher bashing that goes on, but in the end, that is what teaching is all about.

They used to say in times of war, certain people are always shot first. Teachers are one of the first. It's not like that here, of course, but if everyone bowed to public opinion all the time, all shit goes to hell or is it all hell goes to shit.......... my brain hurts and it's only like afternoon.

And those kids who's parents don't vote or give a rat's ass........... something has to be done for them. Hopefully, when they grow up and have kids, they will not prepetuate what they are used to at home and remember what their school did for them.

Like I said previously, I've had the good fortune to encounter some really stellar educators growing up the the DTES. I will always support public education. Not bash it like others like to do, but rather work with everyone to make it better. "It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness."

[MG1]

I wonder how many RS-ers are from Templeton or Britannia? IMO, those are probably the 2 schools with the highest percentage of dysfunctional families. It doesn't mean they don't have good, smart kids -- of course they still do. But there are some really fxxked up families out there, and as MG1 was saying, school and school-based activities are really their only escape and their guides to a proper and more structured world.

Having attended Britannia myself and having cousins who attended Templeton back in the 60's, those two catchment areas were awesome. Britannia being predominantly Chinese and Italian, where family is a big deal, there were no dysfunctional families. Mind you, during that era, the kids from the worst of families probably never went to school, LOL.

I did visit Brit not that long ago and things have changed. Okay, quite a bit, but I see more issues at schools out in areas like Abbotsford, Mission, and dare I say, parts of Surrey. New West isn't a bed of roses, either. More Guns than Roses (okay, bad joke). Of course, there are some good areas in these communities, but a community and how it rallies around its schools is so important.

[Tapioca]

^ My point is that teachers should care what Joe Average thinks to a certain extent because they are paid by taxpayers. If your position can resonate with what Joe Average is thinking, then the politicians will notice (eventually). The days of being a public servant in an altruistic ivory tower are over, unfortunately.

I feel the same way as teachers do when people bash arts majors. People are becoming less and less accepting of perspectives other than their own. My point is that teachers and their union have to speak the language that Joe Average is speaking. You can't win hearts and minds if you talk about helping kids in the DTES. Most people, especially middle class families, would rather not think about such people at all.

[quasi]

^ This supports my point. It seems that parents today, for whatever reason, trust teachers less. If I were a teacher, I would just throw my hands up and say, "My role is to help your child learn the province's curriculum and to pass exams. Nothing more, nothing less." If you want your kid to be a superstar, it's your responsibility. Teachers then wouldn't have to fight the province and public opinion on their importance to public education - they can simply focus on the hours worked in the classroom and test results as metrics. An average of 70K after 10 years for 8 hours a day of work and 2 months off is a pretty good deal. If parents want their kids to play sports or put together a yearbook, they can organize sich activities on their own. Things like grad and recitals should be entirely volunteer driven too. If kids want to use schools for activities after hours, they should have their parents to sign waivers and make their families liable for any damage done to school property, injuries, etc.


For me it's not that I don't trust teachers, my son has a had some really good ones so far. I don't feel I need to rely on the school or the teachers to provide him with extra curricular stuff after school. I'm happy if they teach him what he needs to learn to move to the next grade and we'll take care of the rest and help guide him along the way.

My elementary school growing up we we're able to go to the school 2 nights a week and play in the gym it was organized by parents completely volunteer. Mind you that was a different time before people we're sue happy and school boards were worried about some kid tripping and suing them.

It's hard to compare how things are now to when I was a kid. Even things like daycare are so much different. When I was a kid I went to some ladies house down the street, we had to sit in her living room all summer long, not allowed outside no cable only a bunch of old coloring books it was the closest thing to prison I can think of. My son goes to daycare, during the summer they take them to Science World, Playland, waterparks, waterslides, Granville Island, movie theatres just to name the first bunch of things off the top of my head. Then again when I was young we could hop on our bikes and take off wherever our parents wouldn't worry about bad shit happening to us, I don't let me son further then the front yard without an escort.

[MG1]

My point is that teachers and their union have to speak the language that Joe Average is speaking. You can't win hearts and minds if you talk about helping kids in the DTES. Most people, especially middle class families, would rather not think about such people at all.

Politicians will never get it. And when shit gets their attention and they basically have to do something about it, they rarely come up with real solutions.

Middle class families should care......... who are the ones breaking into their cars and homes?

Also, as mentioned by a few others in this thread, the BCTF are out to lunch and out of touch. I have this feeling the teachers voted with a yes majority to show support for their union, sending a message to the BCSPEA....... ugh, whatever they're called. That very same union is now taking that mandate and screwing things up.

Stop messing around and let the teachers vote on the last offer by the government. All that greedy little union wants is more members' dues. Smaller class size = more teachers = more union dues.

As far as DTES reference, that was my situation. There are ghettos everywhere. Also mentioned elsewhere, it's not always about poverty but attitudes. There are plenty of poor neighbourhoods with great schools. The community reaps what it sows (or doesn't).

I think Joe Average doesn't get it and may never get it, but those with kids, do, or better yet, can if given the opportunity. That, is what the PAC is there for. To educate and promote parental involvement.

[Traum]

When I mentioned Templton and Brit earlier, I was really only thinking in terms of the VSB. I am not familiar enough with the other school districts, so I can't say too much about those.

As recent as the late 90's, I'd say Templeton still had a good number of Italian kids attending the schools, but the Chinese population seemed to have given up a bit of its size to the Vietnamese groups. School fights and stuff, especially those involving the Italian kids, generally follow an unspoken protocol (some will undoubtedly call this an unspoken code of honour) -- you duke it out 1-on-1 with little else other than your fists and your body, and you solve your differences / issues there. But with the smaller stature and fierce character of the Vietnamese kids, 1-on-1 duels just didn't make sense. So the rules of the game got changed a bit. Knives, batons, plumbing pipes, and sometimes even guns came into the picture, and things just got a lot more complicated...

Damn, I feel old...

[Traum]

Followers in this thread probably already knows my anger and hatred towards the BC Liberals government in the current government-BCTF labour dispute. Naturally, as the government-appointed arm in this bargaining / negotiation, my hatred towards the BC Liberals government extends to the BCPSEA as well, and there are numerous reasons why.

BCPSEA Math Lesson

BCPSEA and the BC Liberals government are doing everything they can in their mud-slinging smear campaign to try and make public believe that teachers are demanding a wage increase that is unreasonable. What BCPSEA is not telling you is that they are using calculations that are completely wrong to deceive the public in the hopes to sway public opinion in the government's favour.

In a nutshell, percentages in wage increase demand and benefit demands cannot be just added up to give a grand percentage. The total amount of wage and benefit increase, when divided by the current sum of wage and benefits, is actually right in line with what other government employees have been given in recent contracts. This government continues to paint teachers in the public education system as greedy and lazy. Unfortunately, too many people simply just take everything the government and BCPSEA feeds them at face value, and arrive at a mis-informed understanding of what is really happening.

The use of these dirty tactics is one of the things that pisses me off. Shame on this POS government.

[Soundy]

And the BCTF isn't equally full of shit? $5000 signing bonuses? Up to $3000/yr allowance for fucking massages?!

Let's not forget the BCTF has butted heads with EVERY government since their inception, not just these Liberals. What's the common denominator in this equation?

[Traum]

The BCTF is certainly full of shxt at least part of the time, but as far as signing bonuses are concerned, didn't the other public sector union get some sort of signing bonus as well in their last round of CBA negotiations? At a minimum, I thought the medical staff (nurses and doctors) did, and they haven't been put on the same 6-year 0% wage freeze as the teachers have.

But again, salary increases isn't the important thing to me. It is the BCPSEA / Liberals gov tactics of portrayal that disgust me, and it is the re-injection of education funding (not salaries) that should be the focus of the discussion.

[freakshow]

scumbag teacher meme:

It's not about the wages!

Continues to ask for more wages and signing bonus

edit: i'm sure you could say similar things about the govt, but that's pretty ironic

[Traum]

If the government were smart, they should concede on class size and special needs staff, and only stand firm on minimal salary increases, perhaps even less than what they are offering now. The class size and special needs issues have already been ruled by the provincial supreme court, so they are merely abiding by the court's decision. (I think it makes perfect sense to just do what the supreme court ruling tells you to do, isn't it?)

With an offer like that, I am almost certain that public support for teachers will evaporate if BCTF doesn't accept it. The public will then rightfully accuse the BCTF and teachers as a bunch of fxxking greedy bastards.

But no, the government has to get what they want. What a bunch of dumbasses...

[Soundy]

But no, the BCTF has to get what they want. What a bunch of dumbasses...
Works both ways.

[Traum]

Works both ways.
Perhaps so. But the fact of the matter is (and this is really what counts), the BCTF and the Liberals have some longstanding bad blood between them, and there is deep mistrust from both sides towards the other. How do you even bridge a gap this wide?

Also, do not forget the power difference between the two sides. No matter how you look at it, as the employer and legislator, the provincial government is always the one that has the upper hand, and they have taken advantage of their upper hand time and again in the past -- namely by legislating the teachers back to work in the past, and recently openly disrespecting the supreme court's ruling to roll back the class size limit. In that sense, the provincial government is very much the hard, high wall while the teachers are the eggs that are trying to break against it...

[Mike Oxbig]

BC gov should just allow new teachers to apply teaching with a lower salary to replace these greedy teachers that strike.

With a 15-20% roll back on the teacher salary, they can either be employed or unemployed. These assholes needs an ultimatum.

[MG1]

With all due respect, stick to hockey, my friend. And come back when you have kids. It might also help to read some of the posts in this thread, instead of jumping in like this was a Canucks thread.

god bless

[Soundy]

Perhaps so. But the fact of the matter is (and this is really what counts), the BCTF and every BC government have some longstanding bad blood between them, and there is deep mistrust from both sides towards the other. How do you even bridge a gap this wide?
Fixed that for you.

Also, do not forget the power difference between the two sides. No matter how you look at it, as the employer and legislator, the provincial government is always the one that has the upper hand,
That's true of any employer/employee relationship, including other trade unions, both private and public sector. And yet hundreds of unions and hundreds of thousands of workers in BC make it through every day without this kind of idiocy.

[Traum]

Fixed that for you.

Labour disputes and head butting with other non-BC Liberals government, yes. Bad blood and a general lack of dis-trust as serious as what the two sides have now? Never in the 20-something years that I have known the BC public education system.

That's true of any employer/employee relationship, including other trade unions, both private and public sector. And yet hundreds of unions and hundreds of thousands of workers in BC make it through every day without this kind of idiocy.
Soundy, you are a reasonable fella. So please answer me this -- do these hundreds of unions and hundreds of thousands of workers in BC get legislated back to work against their will? Do they get a unilateral contract with unfavourable terms stuff down their throats? Is it difficult to see why the BCTF hates this government's guts?

The single most serious BC labour dispute that I remember is the Coast Mountain Bus multi-month (3-4 months?) strike back in the early 2000's. If you ask me, the repercussions of that strike is far more long-reaching and carried a significantly bigger impact to the majority of local residents than the several strikes that the BCTF has put on over the years. In the end, I think the bus drivers got legislated back to work as well, but that was after a solid 3-4 months. And I think that only happened once.

Now look at Toronto's city garbage pick up strike that happened in the summer a few years ago. Again, I would say this is a far more long-reaching job action, and carries far more impact than our BCTF's various job actions -- it had the potential to turn into a serious public health concern. As far as I can remember, the City of Toronto didn't legislate the garbage pick up people back to work.

What I am trying to say is, our current provincial government doesn't even have the slightest respect for our teachers (and their cruddy union) to exercise their right to take job action. And I am going to remind you that the same government also doesn't seem to respect a decision coming straight from the provincial supreme court. When an employer behaves this way, how can it expect its employees to have any respect for itself?

[freakshow]

Traum, unfortunately, I think it's hard for most people sympathize with a union in general. The govt aren't angels, I actually hate crusty clark.. but I hate unions more.

[capt_slo]

Since the topic of inaccurate / skewed campaigning has been raised, I'll point out that it is not just the Government doing this.

How many teachers have you heard complaining about the years of 0% wage increases? Many. But what they don't tell you is that teachers are still getting pay raises every year.

Raises through the teacher's salary grid.

Example:

The salary grid also provides automatic salary increases year over year for accumulated teaching experience to a maximum of 10 years. These are referred to as "Steps" in the grid. Steps begin at 0 and end at 10 years. So a teacher starting last September would see the following increases to their pay over 10 years of teaching:

Based on the 2010-2011 salary grid in Vancouver a beginning teacher at Level 5 Step 0 would earn $48, 083.
By 2021 this same teacher would have received automatic salary increases that average about 4.5% per year.
In 10 years his or her salary would have increased by about 55% to $74,353.

In addition to increases for years of experience, negotiated salary increases also affect the salary grid.
Salary grids ensure pay increases for teachers despite net zero | City Caucus (http://citycaucus.com/2012/03/salary-grids-ensure-pay-increases-for-teachers-despite-net-zero/)


The union is actually fighting for increases to the base numbers in the "levels." The "steps" are unaffected by wage increase freezes.

The 10-yr step system allows steady raises despite any negotiations so that a teacher can work towards learning & certifying to move up a level. Upon entering a new level, a new step grid starts as well.

Considering how union-demanded increases are compounded within this step system, it's quite easy to relate to the government's opinion that the current BCTF demands are excessive and out of touch with fiscal responsibility.

The current demands also are asking that the 10-yr grid be reduced to 8, thereby adding another compound to the % increase per year. Not to mention the $5k cash bonus.

Only a step-10 teacher who cannot certify to move up a level is truly asking for the publicly discussed percentage increase per year.

[freakshow]

Get a raise each year that isn't based on job performance.. then ask to raise the baseline and maximum.. sounds legit.

[MG1]

Since the topic of inaccurate / skewed... snip, snip, snip.......


I didn't think this was some hidden secret. It's common knowledge. I guess you're just pointing it out - fair enough.

What I don't get is the signing bonus. Let's say everything gets settled and there is a signing bonus of $1000.00. So every teacher gets this amount? A first year teacher, a part time teacher, a teacher on leave, a teacher who's been at it for 25 years? Should it not be based on the salary grid?

I get the idea of a signing bonus, but would it not be better to give a signing bonus according to percentage of wage?

Anyway, the BCTF is way out of touch. They better be careful how they conduct themselves over the next few weeks.

I have a friend who has been a teacher for like forever. He's actually a counsellor, but he's been around. Taught in more than one district. He told me that the BCTF came into existence back in 1988, which is not that long ago. Before then, the teachers were part of an association. They bargained for wages and working conditions with their individual school districts. There were no strikes as everything was left to binding arbritation. He told me everything was cool and for the most part, was a good system that worked well for both sides. Even the administrators (district principals, principals, vice principals) were part of the same association.

Then along came Bill Vander Zalm (Social Credit political party). He gave the teachers the option to form unions. Local unions. It's more complicated than that, but Coles Notes, the teachers formed a union, because they were given a choice between the ability to strike (being part of a union) or lose binding arbitration if they stayed as an association. Again, this is just Coles Notes version, but we have Bill Vander Zalm for the teachers becoming unionized.


So far, the teachers in BC have lost a helluva lot of money. People say, it's about the money and not the kids. 10% claw back (what union in their right mind would stand up for that?), zero increase for two years, about three weeks lost wages (so far)........ that all ends up being a lot of money. The teachers will never recover that money.

Get class size and composition off the table! It should be someone else's fight. I get it that it is a working condition, but let things go to hell. Then, there is only one person to point the finger at. The premier who has a hate on for teachers. Let her take the blame for setting education in this province back to 1930's level. Only bad thing is, parents who should be the ones fighting for class sizes and composition will just shrug their shoulders and continue on their merry way. Got a kid with tourettes, Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, behaviour issues, ADD, etc? Who cares? Just put them in with the rest of the kids. They'll survive. Hey, they closed down Riverview, it wasn't so bad, was it?

Dropout rates will rise, we will have all kinds of messed up people on our streets........ big things start off small.

And, when they get rid of the union one way or another and turn all public schools into private schools, the troubled kids can flood that system.......... nice!

My kids have all graduated, so why should I care? Nuff said.

How about those Canucks, eh? Gonna be a good season..........

[MG1]

edited

[godwin]

Is this really necessary? Let's subsitute your daugher's /wife and see how you feel. Your candidate didn't win the election, that's democracy at work, you don't like it, you can move to another province.

Some stuff MG1 had said.

[MG1]

Yeah, you're right............ as usual.

I will delete that part. I have been shamed. I kinda lost it there. Thanks for knocking some sense into me. I appreciate it.

[MG1]

bad post

[Traum]

Get a raise each year that isn't based on job performance.. then ask to raise the baseline and maximum.. sounds legit.
I am all for performance-based renumerations. At a very general and vague level, we can all identify some general traits and characteristics that makes a teacher "good" at what he does. However, how do you suppose those performance can be judged objectively?

Student performance have often been used as a metric to determine teacher performance, but that is absolutely the poorest form of metric to use.

[7seven]

Since the topic of inaccurate / skewed campaigning has been raised, I'll point out that it is not just the Government doing this.

How many teachers have you heard complaining about the years of 0% wage increases? Many. But what they don't tell you is that teachers are still getting pay raises every year.

Raises through the teacher's salary grid.



And this is just one of the reasons why I stand firm on wanting teachers salaries rolled back or at the very least continue with a 0% increase to the grid and benefits. Let's face it, the teaching profession in BC is not healthy, with an oversupply of qualified workers still waiting for positions and declining student enrollment every year. In a situation like this, there is absolutely no reason teachers should be getting any sort of increase from year to year, let alone a bump to the salary grid, benefits or a signing bonus. When the nurses got a signing bonus, at least that made sense due to the shortage of nurses and the ever increasing demand in healthcare.



Things are getting ugly over in Victoria, a couple days ago the teachers picketed a construction site building a new school and another site where much needed seismic upgrades to a school were taking place, blocking construction workers from doing the job. How exactly is trying to delay construction of a school and much need seismic upgrades for safety good for students? :facepalm:

Yesterday a court ruling banned the teachers from picketing those sites and just saw on CTV news that garbage was dumped at where some teachers were picketing in Victoria to mess with the teachers.

Construction workers were back at work Wednesday at the new Oak Bay High School and at Quadra Elementary School after striking teachers were banned from picketing.

Construction shut down for a full day on Tuesday when picketing teachers — in a battle with the province over a new contract — showed up at the sites in the morning.

Supervisors for Farmer Construction and Kinetic Construction, both locally owned companies, stopped work and sent workers home.

Farmer won a court injunction to allow work to resume on the $52.5-million Oak Bay school.

An order from the B.C. Labour Relations Board led to work resuming at Quadra school, which is undergoing a $9-million seismic upgrade.

Kinetic’s own union workers, members of Local 1 with the Canadian Iron, Steel and Industrial Worker’ Union, lost a day’s pay due to the shutdown, said Katy Fairley, company business development lead, on Wednesday. Some sub-trades would also have been on the site, she said.

In all, about 50 people were anticipated on the site Tuesday, Fairley said.

“Thankfully, it [the shutdown] is only one day,” she said.

Quadra is slated to reopen in time for classes in September. The construction schedule is a complex scheme, requiring milestones to be reached by certain dates.

Summer is the prime time for school construction work because students are gone.

Kinetic, for example, is also carrying out a seismic upgrade on George Jay Elementary School on Cook Street and will start improvements on Esquimalt High School soon.

- See more at: Victoria school construction resumes after picket ban takes effect - Local - Times Colonist (http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/victoria-school-construction-resumes-after-picket-ban-takes-effect-1.1157428#sthash.RJciluw6.dpuf)

[bing]

Again, you need to stop thinking only about salaries. A cost-of-living increase is not the reason that the government is saying "enough is enough". The government has priorities and is choosing to put money into ventures other than education. Every government has and has had limited funds but ours has chosen to reduce their funding for education from 300 million to 75 million dollars per year. And because of their spending habits I am supposed to take a pay cut? Business owners can spend their funds as they please (let's take a vacation!) then have employees pay for it? I can take my limited funds and spend them as I please and then ask the bank to reduce my mortgage? I'd like to think that teachers are pretty darn altruistic already, so let's not take advantage of that and ask us to give up our money, that supports our families, to make up for the government's spending habits. I realize that money is not plentiful, which is why I already stated that we will probably not get the 225m/year we are asking for. We are looking for negotiation and compromise (I hope).

Also, keep in mind that a teacher's workday is 9 or 9.5 (I can't recall which is the actual number) according to the government. That puts us very near the number of yearly working hours for 9-5ers. If you include the time spent coaching sports or clubs, then we work more hours per year than 9-5ers. If you include the hours many teachers (including myself) spend at work in the evenings, on the weekends, over the summer...you get my point.

But I should take a pay cut. To show that I really care. And because all teachers think money grows on trees.

*I fully admit that I am writing this a little tired and cranky ;)

LOL to teacher's being altruistic :lawl:

Some truly are but a lot are there because they need a job. Where else can you find employment starting at 38k with only a bachelor's degree and get 3 months off every summer?

Also, how many hours do you need to prep every year to teach the same thing? its basically reciting shit you already know. Don't coach teams then cause nobody is forcing you.

I don't care if the government cut back funding for education cause last time I checked, federal and provincial governments were in massive debt.

This isn't about the kids. It's really about enriching yourself at the expense of future generations. I'm okay with wages being tied to inflation but definitely no wage increases.

Finally, fuck the teacher's that voted for the strike and the teacher's union.

[tiger_handheld]

I am all for performance-based renumerations. At a very general and vague level, we can all identify some general traits and characteristics that makes a teacher "good" at what he does. However, how do you suppose those performance can be judged objectively?

Student performance have often been used as a metric to determine teacher performance, but that is absolutely the poorest form of metric to use.

Use a more objective teacher rating system. I remember having to fill out sheets and was assured that answers would be typed. Instead of that why not have a survey monkey or similar site set up where you can offer feedback - offer 3% of the grade as a incentive to complete it.

questions would be like: does your teacher volunteer time for sports team, does the teacher clearly explain concepts, how long are the teacher's office hours, what subject does he/she teach. It'll be comprehensive will take about 10-15mins. The kids who get F's will rate the teacher shitty and kids with A's will give the teacher perfect .. so use an average to measure.

[Traum]

^^ Asking kids to evaluate their teachers is just not going to work. Even a lot of the more senior grades may not have a good enough grasp of what a fair and objective evaluation is like. And then when it comes to the elementary grades, what you are you going to do?

There is a reason why our electorial system does not allow for minors to vote. Scientifically, the typical brain doesn't really mature until we hit around 25. There would be all sorts of issues if teacher evaluations rely on these very same minors to affect the outcome.

I don't necessarily agree with using market principles on the teaching profession, but it does seem a bit odd that no one at the government level has tried to sell that as one of the reasons to freeze wages.

[gars]

Nobody would use market principles because the fallout would be terrible.

I definitely don't agree with student evaluations, but definitely - there are plenty of teachers that don't give two shits and shouldn't be teachers. I definitely took courses where I learned absolutely nothing - I'm not sure if that's the fault of the administration of that school, or the teachers.

[Xplicit_EL]

Nobody would use market principles because the fallout would be terrible.

I definitely don't agree with student evaluations, but definitely - there are plenty of teachers that don't give two shits and shouldn't be teachers. I definitely took courses where I learned absolutely nothing - I'm not sure if that's the fault of the administration of that school, or the teachers.

maybe thats your OWN faullt for not learning anything. People need to stop blaming teachers, I think they get shitty pay and deserve a salary increase.

Plus, the government has failed to pay back the 2mill in damages according to the court order (previously). The government is blatantly not following court orders. This coming from a lawyer myself.

[xpl0sive]

I don't know if this has been discussed, but it seems to be an elephant in the room that no one wants to mention. The increasing class sizes in the GVRD are one of the main points that the teachers want to address. I see where they are coming from, as they are expected to do more and more work, for the same amount of money. More homework to check, tests to grade, questions to answer.

Why are the classes growing at such a fast rate? Is it because people are having more children? Not according to Stats Canada. According to them, fertility rates have been dropping steadily.
Full article here: Births: Analysis (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/84f0210x/2009000/part-partie1-eng.htm)

This rate was below the generational replacement level of 2.1 children per woman—the fertility rate that must be maintained to replace the population in the absence of migration. The last year that the total fertility rate exceeded the generational replacement level was 1971. 1

In the past twenty years, the TFR has closely paralleled the trend in number of births (Chart 1). After peaking in 1990 at 1.71 children per woman, the TFR fell throughout the 1990s and then began climbing at the beginning of the 2000s. The drop in the TFR (and the number of births) in 2000 and the recovery in 2001 may have been related to the desire to have a baby in the first year of the new millennium. The number of marriages also increased in 2000.

So where are all these kids coming from? Simple answer, mostly China...
I know some of you may think I'm being racist or picking on the Asians, but I'm just telling it how I see it. I'm in the construction/real estate industry and see the facts on a daily basis. Asian families coming to Canada and bringing their kids there, so the kids can get a good education. They buy houses in the areas with the best schools. They want the best for their kids, and who's to blame them, I'm sure everyone else does too.

But unlike the new immigrants, Canadians have been living here, paying high taxes, so that schools can have good teachers and new books for students. New immigrants? Nope, the only taxes they pay are property taxes on their new houses. I'm all for immigration, which drives the country and benefits everyone. But I'm not interested in paying more taxes so that more people can come here from China, get their kids educated for free and not even bother to learn the language.

I feel that non-citizens should not be entitled to free education. There are plenty of private schools that have great teachers and even better materials than public schools. If a family can afford to come here and buy a $5mil house in Shaughnessy, they can afford to pay for private school. If an immigrant comes to this country and they can prove that they are truly here for a better life and to work and pay taxes, then great, give their kids a free education.

[bomiheko]

A lot of them do go to private schools. Problem is they are full and have high entrance grades. You can't even buy your way in anymore. Property tax is the one that covers education and school, so they are already paying for it, why should they be denied education. And not all the kids are immigrants. Many of them have international student status, they pay in full.

[Xu.Vi]

International students aren't entitled to free education anyway from what I know.

[godwin]

There are 2 types of "Chinese" students.

1. International students who pay multiples of what local students pay, especially to public schools and education. (not to mention it create jobs for house parents etc).
2. New immigrants, if they own property (which most of them do). Their property taxes will pay for the schooling.

I would argue we DON'T have enough international students. We have a huge glut of teachers.. more International students create jobs for those teachers, at a profit margin higher than local students.

One way to solve the problem is force all the private language colleges with ESL teachers to close and make all those students pay extra to go to schools run by the gov.. so we can take those profits.

The problem especially in Coq.. is there are NOT ENOUGH international students in public schools.. the programs are running deficits.

Another point to consider: because of "blended families" and divorces, we have the same population living in 1+ more households, diluting population density, make providing services harder and making real estate more expensive. Honestly we need a tax on divorces. You want a divorce? You have to pay for the additional burden on social services you incur.

Just because YOU see things, doesn't mean it is true.. it is called confirmation bias.


So where are all these kids coming from? Simple answer, mostly China...
I know some of you may think I'm being racist or picking on the Asians, but I'm just telling it how I see it. I'm in the construction/real estate industry and see the facts on a daily basis. Asian families coming to Canada and bringing their kids there, so the kids can get a good education. They buy houses in the areas with the best schools. They want the best for their kids, and who's to blame them, I'm sure everyone else does too.

But unlike the new immigrants, Canadians have been living here, paying high taxes, so that schools can have good teachers and new books for students. New immigrants? Nope, the only taxes they pay are property taxes on their new houses. I'm all for immigration, which drives the country and benefits everyone. But I'm not interested in paying more taxes so that more people can come here from China, get their kids educated for free and not even bother to learn the language.

I feel that non-citizens should not be entitled to free education. There are plenty of private schools that have great teachers and even better materials than public schools. If a family can afford to come here and buy a $5mil house in Shaughnessy, they can afford to pay for private school. If an immigrant comes to this country and they can prove that they are truly here for a better life and to work and pay taxes, then great, give their kids a free education.

[xpl0sive]

As far as I know, international students only have to pay in full for schooling for post secondary education. For elementary school and high school, all you have to do is show that you live in the designated area for that particular school and that you are a permanent resident in Canada. Before the investor program got shut down, the Chinese immigrants were granted automatic permanent resident status. That means free education for their children. Shutting down the investor program is a step in the right direction, not only for real estate, but for the schooling issues as well.

[godwin]

Actually it is $12k a year at VSB Year-long Study | Vancouver School Board (http://intered.vsb.bc.ca/year-long-study) for foreign elementary to high school students. Also the school board can refuse problematic students with low academic grades (so other than ESL, you don't need Special Ed teachers which are labour intensive). + they pay their own health insurance + of course home stay etc.

Granted it is still pittance compared with 80k at my old high school charges out in TO.

As for investors program, you have to have a few million in an approved business plan invested in the local economy (no matter if it is a Best Western or a Chinese restaurant).. that generates revenue for CRA.

As far as I know, international students only have to pay in full for schooling for post secondary education. For elementary school and high school, all you have to do is show that you live in the designated area for that particular school and that you are a permanent resident in Canada. Before the investor program got shut down, the Chinese immigrants were granted automatic permanent resident status. That means free education for their children. Shutting down the investor program is a step in the right direction, not only for real estate, but for the schooling issues as well.

[xpl0sive]

But those fees are not applicable to Landed Immigrants or Permanent Residents...

What I'm saying is, before the Investor Program got shut down, the families that came over and bought up all the houses in Vancouver West were granted permanent residency. Same goes for Burnaby. Their kids now go to schools for free.

[godwin]

Investors program still need to have an approved business plan. It is not as simple as writing a cheque.

When they buy up properties, they do pay for taxes that go directly to schools annually just like any property owner (due next week BTW). In fact the bigger their houses, the larger will be their assessments. There are often no grants for them either. Last I check, the funding for public schools come largely from the real estate assessments (at least as a line item) not personal or corporate income taxes.

In fact for the landed immigrants who enroll their kids in private schools, they are paying extra into the public school system without complaining about it. Heck I don't use any local school system (ever, I moved from out of province), yet I still pay for it via my property assessment every year, I estimate it is 7k a year portion of my property assessment?.


But those fees are not applicable to Landed Immigrants or Permanent Residents...

What I'm saying is, before the Investor Program got shut down, the families that came over and bought up all the houses in Vancouver West were granted permanent residency. Same goes for Burnaby. Their kids now go to schools for free.

[xpl0sive]

that's fine, but clearly they aren't paying enough. Maybe the property taxes for $3mil+ houses should be increased, especially if the family residing there has school age children. If the Gov't is saying that every person is BC will need to pay an additional $13k in taxes over the next 6 years, where are they going to collect those taxes? From property taxes or income taxes?

[godwin]

School taxes have traditionally come from property assessments. I don't think BC property assessment has the authority or data to separate households with or without kids.. Even if we go that route, I would say tax every special cases, as I had alluded, the divorced parents. Then you will devoid into tax parents with kids who need special attention at school, eg fetal alcohol etc etc? I would say resource wise, new immigrants use much less education resource than local kids with ADHD, FAS or other behavioral problems, because we get to preselect immigrants (along with their parents) during the immigration process. Any immediate family with psych, physical issues, you don't get to get in because you need a Canadian gov approved doctor to do a physical exam.

Besides I suspect the new immigrants kids play a significant role of the reason why we are 3rd in rankings in educaiton (http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/06/british-columbia-education-ranked-third-in-world/). Basically BC gets to cherry pick the bright and richest students from the world's population pool. No to mention, not all new immigrants or permanent residents are from China, I would say a minority. Most of the profs at universities are Americans, not to mention high to mid level workers at local tech, engineering and aviation firms, also MDs, (especially the good ones, not to mention the majority who shlep at boondoggle no where) They don't need to go through the "traditional" immigration process, just present their education credentials (MSc+) and employment letter at the border they are free to enter. They are all classified as permanent residents and are no need to queue for citizens of NAFTA countries eg.

Honestly even if you increase 3mill+ assessment, it won't change the fact that all teacher colleges in town make a killing in training teachers and there is just a glut of grads. With realty prices increasing 10% a year, it won't take that long for all the standalone houses in YVR to be 3mill+. Heck my townhouse already passed that threshold a while back and I bought it when it was built in 99.

that's fine, but clearly they aren't paying enough. Maybe the property taxes for $3mil+ houses should be increased, especially if the family residing there has school age children. If the Gov't is saying that every person is BC will need to pay an additional $13k in taxes over the next 6 years, wheere are they going to collect those taxes? From property taxes or income taxes?

[gars]

that's fine, but clearly they aren't paying enough. Maybe the property taxes for $3mil+ houses should be increased, especially if the family residing there has school age children. If the Gov't is saying that every person is BC will need to pay an additional $13k in taxes over the next 6 years, where are they going to collect those taxes? From property taxes or income taxes?

My company's CEO has a 9 Million dollar home in White Rock, he's paying $26k a year in property tax, and only has 1 kid who's in private school. How much more do you want him to pay?

[MG1]

International students bring in a tonne of money. We're not talking immigrants. Schools that have international students use all that extra money to pay for a lot of the materials they need for the other students. Why is the government so keen on making sure summer school this year is a go? They don't care about the few who need it to pass or make up classes. It's the money International students bring in.

Back to the immigrant students. They are the least of the schools' problems. Asian kids are,by nature, the quiet ones. No problem with core subjects except English.

[Tapioca]

International students bring in a tonne of money. We're not talking immigrants. Schools that have international students use all that extra money to pay for a lot of the materials they need for the other students. Why is the government so keen on making sure summer school this year is a go? They don't care about the few who need it to pass or make up classes. It's the money International students bring in.

Also, the immigrant students are the least of the schools' problems. Asian kids are,by nature, the ones. No problem with core subjects except English.

I think the larger issue is that a vocal minority of people would rather turn down the money if it means a more homogenous culture.

[MG1]

wow, I was on my iPhone and somehow saw a post from a page ago........ most of what I've said has already been addressed by the time I replied.

[MG1]

I think the larger issue is that a vocal minority of people would rather turn down the money if it means a more homogenous culture.

International students are only here for a relatively short time. They bring oodles of money. Not sure how much, but by the time everybody takes their share, the schools get a couple of thousand per student. Have a dozen or so of them and it's like 20 to 30 grand for extra computers, textbooks, etc. for that school.

Ah, here is an article that sort of gives you an idea of what it's all about.

Cashing in on foreign students - Macleans.ca (http://www.macleans.ca/society/life/cashing-in-on-foreign-students/)

As a side note, every district has different ways of dealing with the money.

[godwin]

I rented properties to international university students in the Interior mostly Kelowna.. They are insanely generous, since most of them, it is their first experience outside their home and they have unlimited resources from their parents. Especially at the end of their stay. One of them left her Smart as gift to the house keeper etc. I had a few didn't come back next school year and all their belongings (computers, clothes etc were all donated to local churches).

The key is to structure your lease thoughtfully, think in their perspective what they need. Include housekeeping and cleaning services, storage over summer etc. Make it clear in the lease agreement. (especially storage they have to prepay or put a deposit). I think there are huge trickle down effect, as I try to hire neighborhood house cleaners, yardsmen etc.

International students are only here for a relatively short time. They bring oodles of money. Not sure how much, but by the time everybody takes their share, the schools get a couple of thousand per student. Have a dozen or so of them and it's like 20 to 30 grand for extra computers, textbooks, etc. for that school.

[noclue]

My company's CEO has a 9 Million dollar home in White Rock, he's paying $26k a year in property tax, and only has 1 kid who's in private school. How much more do you want him to pay?

For 9 million that's really low in property taxes to be honest. BC and Canada have very low property taxes. Course we make it up by higher sales tax. Look at Seattle or worse California he'll be paying 1% of his assessment.

[Lomac]

International students are only here for a relatively short time. They bring oodles of money. Not sure how much, but by the time everybody takes their share, the schools get a couple of thousand per student. Have a dozen or so of them and it's like 20 to 30 grand for extra computers, textbooks, etc. for that school.

Ah, here is an article that sort of gives you an idea of what it's all about.

Cashing in on foreign students - Macleans.ca (http://www.macleans.ca/society/life/cashing-in-on-foreign-students/)

As a side note, every district has different ways of dealing with the money.

I was accepted into University of York in the UK a few years back. For a three year course as an international student, the tuition was just shy of $150,000. And that didn't include school materials, rent or living expenses.

So, yeah... you can see why Universities in particular and schools in general love international students.

[Mr.HappySilp]

I was accepted into University of York in the UK a few years back. For a three year course as an international student, the tuition was just shy of $150,000. And that didn't include school materials, rent or living expenses.

So, yeah... you can see why Universities in particular and schools in general love international students.

It will be pretty funny and sad at the same time if university in BC accepts way more international students then locals due to money not because the locals don't meet the requirements.

[noclue]

global competition. International students have better grades and AP/IB scores than locals why not? Honestly nowadays with High school being MUCH easier (no provincial exams except for English etc) if you dont get good grades, you really are slacking.

Unless UBC adopts a similar system like California where the school must admit a majority from in-state, international students are going to keep coming. Come to think of it international students are absolute cash cows for UBC, Aside from high tuition, Im sure ENGL110 and 112 will make a good chunk of international students retake it or do the LPI which means more money from repeat semesters. $$$$$.

[tiger_handheld]

UBC already has a "international student" school - UBC Vantage College (http://www.vantagecollege.ubc.ca/)

[Carl Johnson]

UBC already has a "international student" school - UBC Vantage College (http://www.vantagecollege.ubc.ca/)

Minimum English requirements



a minimum score of 70 on the TOEFL iBT with no section less than 16 OR
a minimum overall score of 5.5 on the IELTS with a minimum band score of 5.0 in speaking and listening, and 5.5 in reading and writing


Minimum requirements for science streams



senior-level Mathematics (Pre-Calculus) with a minimum grade of 68% (or nearest equivalent on other grading scales)
junior- or Grade 11-level Physics and Chemistry (or nearest equivalent)

UBC - You Bring Cash

[godwin]

Also note it is only 1st year programs.

I really don't know what's the attraction of UBC in the last 10 years.. when you get that GPA to get in, you can get into any Ivy League universities. Business? Do it in Stanford is way more profitable on the long run than UBC.


Minimum English requirements



a minimum score of 70 on the TOEFL iBT with no section less than 16 OR
a minimum overall score of 5.5 on the IELTS with a minimum band score of 5.0 in speaking and listening, and 5.5 in reading and writing


Minimum requirements for science streams



senior-level Mathematics (Pre-Calculus) with a minimum grade of 68% (or nearest equivalent on other grading scales)
junior- or Grade 11-level Physics and Chemistry (or nearest equivalent)

UBC - You Bring Cash

[tiger_handheld]

Also note it is only 1st year programs.

I really don't know what's the attraction of UBC in the last 10 years.. when you get that GPA to get in, you can get into any Ivy League universities. Business? Do it in Stanford is way more profitable on the long run than UBC.

The attraction is that asian parents can tell their friends they their kid goes to UBC, because everyone in Vancouver knows what UBC is. Many asians who are local may not know where Yale, Stanford, or Queens is and might regard that "oh your kid wasn't good enough so they had to go to a out of town school to get in".

It's also close enough that the kid can stay at home so the parents can keep an eye on them.

[Carl Johnson]

The attraction is that asian parents can tell their friends they their kid goes to UBC, because everyone in Vancouver knows what UBC is. Many asians who are local may not know where Yale, Stanford, or Queens is and might regard that "oh your kid wasn't good enough so they had to go to a out of town school to get in".

It's also close enough that the kid can stay at home so the parents can keep an eye on them.

1 year is extremely ambitious don't you think for somebody who does not even need to have Physics, Chemistry, Biology, or Calculus 12? I would be really interested to know how you can solve university-level physics problem with only a 68% pre-calc grade and no calculus at all. The intentional students will probably need at least 2 years to go into regular stream if everything goes to plan with no course repeats.

[noclue]

The attraction is that asian parents can tell their friends they their kid goes to UBC, because everyone in Vancouver knows what UBC is. Many asians who are local may not know where Yale, Stanford, or Queens is and might regard that "oh your kid wasn't good enough so they had to go to a out of town school to get in".

It's also close enough that the kid can stay at home so the parents can keep an eye on them.

Umm... many asians who are local will know what stanford or yale is and those schools are way more prestigious to brag to their friends about.

[bing]

The attraction is that asian parents can tell their friends they their kid goes to UBC, because everyone in Vancouver knows what UBC is. Many asians who are local may not know where Yale, Stanford, or Queens is and might regard that "oh your kid wasn't good enough so they had to go to a out of town school to get in".

It's also close enough that the kid can stay at home so the parents can keep an eye on them.

UBC's ranked pretty high on global charts and the assumption is that if you are staying locally, you better end up at UBC. I was on a tour bus full of seniors in China and all of them would ask me if I was in university and subsequently whether I went to UBC. Only if I said yes that I was still in school would it make them feel at ease and many of them don't seem to recognize SFU as well.

I disagree that many don't know what Yale, Stanford, and Queens are since Chinese are big on education. If Asian mom's are anything like mine, they'll inform their friends how difficult and prestigious it is to get in. I had a family friend's son only get on the waitlist for Stanford undergrad and that was already being talked about by everyone (his dad threatened to kill himself if he choose UBC cause he said it was a once in a lifetime opportunity and he's a silicon valley guy).

Also, since my cousin got into Stanford law (ranked #2 with Harvard) with a 99% average from UBC, his mom knows the other mom of a local guy who got into Yale law (ranked #1).

The point? there are so few local people getting into these top schools that word spreads. The only people that might not know are the illiterate, grandparent's, or family's where there is no tradition of education.

And No, I disagree with godwin that if you have the grades to get into UBC then you get easily get into an Ivy, which have acceptance rates ranging roughly from 6.72% - 14%. There are also minimum SAT scores you probably need to be accepted which many students can't attain without an excellent grasp of English. Another personal anecdote, my other cousin even got rejected for Stanford undergrad yet she was obviously capable since she ended up graduating magna cum laude from a different Ivy and then later getting an MBA as class president.

[MG1]

And No, I disagree with MG1 that if you have the grades to get into UBC that you get easily get into an Ivy. I think you need min. 1300-1400+ SAT scores as well.

What? When did I say that?

[bing]

What? When did I say that?

sorry. Correction godwin.

[Lomac]

Funny enough, it's actually not that hard to get into an Ivy League school. I know two people who are attending them, one at Brown and the other at St Andrews. The biggest issue for them wasn't grades, but the cost of associated with attending. As neither one of 'em came from a rich background, they busted their asses to get scholarships and bursaries and everything else they could get their hands on.

As for the UBC comparison, I believe it's course dependent at certain Ivy League schools. You may need X to get into Politics at St Andrews, but only Y for Physics.

[MG1]

sorry. Correction godwin.

Oh, okay. At least I'm in good company

[bing]

St. Andrews is in the UK and not one of the 8 ivies (brown, cornell, harvard, U penn, dartmouth, princeton, yale, columbia), which are all on the US east coast.

[godwin]

I don't know what your personal experience is but I found getting into US universities not that hard for a Canadian, granted it was a couple decades ago. I went to Cornell Engineering but I also got into Brown for Computer Science, for the same score I was also admitted to all the universities in Canada that I applied for.

After working with a few profs who helped designed the testing schemes at ETS. and having taken SAT. I would say SAT is a lot easier than provincials since it is not subject based AND it is known one is able to train for it. (whether a student would train or not is another question). The key here is prep time, you only know you cannot achieved the best score not on the first try, I think the mean is about 5+ times, when you performance plateaus. I think these days computerized simulation helps a lot.

As for the essay part, I think it is easy as long as you had spend time around at campuses and are familiar with the university and what they do. For Cornell it can be a riff about the counter culture around the area.

The issue with US universities for Canadian parents is you have to start really early to travel with your kids to the universities to help them select. Most of my classmates and I started at grade 10, to visit universities, attend summer camps, practice writing essays, 11 is basically a test application and 12 is the actual application . It is way more productive than helicoptering kids till university that a few of you seem to imply? (seriously!?) Do parents still wipe their kids asses in high school these days?

The advantage of the US? If you are a student you have an idea, the university is more than happy to help you patent / start your business, or pair you up with a prof to mentor you (don't be too trusting would be my advice here). I think that is invaluable. Coop is great and chances you will get your green card that way. Not to mention there are more post grad places in the US (no matter it is med, law or liberal arts:devil:)

I admit it will be impossible to talk to Vancouver public school career counselors about it because it is just an area they are not familiar with. It seems very weird that a lot of young Vancouverites seems to think the world ends at the Rockies and the Columbia River.



And No, I disagree with godwin that if you have the grades to get into UBC then you get easily get into an Ivy, which have acceptance rates ranging roughly from 6.72% - 14%. There are also minimum SAT scores you probably need to be accepted which many students can't attain without an excellent grasp of English. Another personal anecdote, my other cousin even got rejected for Stanford undergrad yet she was obviously capable since she ended up graduating magna cum laude from a different Ivy and then later getting an MBA as class president.

[bing]

Godwin, it sounds like you had a privileged background growing up and were one of the brighter students. My neighbor is from Cornell as well but I still think that statistically, it is hard to get in.

For example (assuming these numbers are realistic):


Total undergraduate enrollment -- 15.7 million
Total four-year college enrollment -- 11.5 million
Total Ivy entering/graduating class -- 14,000 (Cornell and Penn are pretty big)
Total Ivy enrollment -- 60,000

So . . . Ivy graduates are about 0.9% of total bachelor's degree recipients. Ivy students are about 0.6% of total four-year college full time students, 0.5% of all four-year college students, and 0.4% of all college students.

Also, I found this on a blog but can't verify the numbers.

Brown University:

Out of 30,946 applications received, Brown University accepted 2,692 applicants. That’s an 8.7% admit rate, including applicants who applied both Early Decision and Regular Decision. For the fall of 2011, Brown anticipates an incoming freshmen class of about 1,485 students.

In recent years, Brown has experienced a 50% surge in applications. Three years ago, for the Class of 2012, Brown received 20,630 applications.

Here are the highlights of the admitted Class of 2015:

Geographic Diversity: Admitted students hail from all 50 states. The states with the highest number of accepted students are: California (393), New York (322), Massachusetts (216), New Jersey (141), and Texas (101). International students were admitted from 79 countries. The nations with the highest number of admitted students were from China (57), India (34), United Kingdom (33), Korea (30), and Canada (28).

If I had to make a guess, I would say it is much harder to be accepted today with all the competition from international students and the larger number of people entering post-secondary (along with the fact that with the Internet, everyone knows which are the top schools to apply to).

College Admissions: Ivy League Acceptance Rates Decline | TIME.com (http://nation.time.com/2013/04/02/ivy-league-schools-accepting-even-fewer-kids/)

[Lomac]

Pft. Anyone can get into Cornell these days.

http://majidatmyworkplace.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/office-joker-2.jpg

:p

[godwin]

I would say BC students are doing okay on terms of competition (ranked 3rd in the world (http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/06/british-columbia-education-ranked-third-in-world/)). In fact you will be amazed the large contingent of Canadian students at US grad schools.Considering we are talking about Ivy League schools which are invariably private US universities where students are considered by merit and the same no matter it is out of state or in state. Where BC Students lack are parental awareness and honestly school counselors that are not very good.

My family is not rich but middle class, but my school had a school counselor who cared and see Canada is not the only country in the world for education. He himself was US educated. I think that made a huge difference as he invited pretty much all the Ivy League reps to come and give talks. I am not "bright" either, I prefer median + a bit less of one SD.

By the time parents are aware of the US opportunities (Grade 11 or 12) it is always way too late. I don't find it too surprising, but I find it is the new immigrant Chinese parents who are most on the ball realizing the opportunities of US colleges. They sink the time in for research and visits. (not to mention some rather lack lustre efforts like educational consultants).. but they care vs I find local parents just seem to moan and groan how hard it is to get into UBC and do crap all or constructive about it. If you kid score a solid 85 and can't get into UBC, don't stick them to Langara etc! there are alternatives in the States on the East coast.

For students who are interested to US colleges. Look up universities local alum meetings, usually once a year. You get a free dinner at a fancy hotel and get to meet and greet some officials and students and get a sense of what the university are like. VISIT the college and surrounding area, do a summer camp (Grade 10).. It is not just for private school kids, I know a few students from the inner city who got invited to the Yale science camp this summer. The key is research and connect early. The kids initiated the connections themselves, and I have to say the teachers were hapless.


If I had to make a guess, I would say it is much harder to be accepted today with all the competition from international students and the larger number of people entering post-secondary (along with the fact that with the Internet, everyone knows which are the top schools to apply to).

College Admissions: Ivy League Acceptance Rates Decline | TIME.com (http://nation.time.com/2013/04/02/ivy-league-schools-accepting-even-fewer-kids/)

[Traum]

Canadians studying in US universities should be way expensive. Not unaffordably so for middle class families, but definitely way more expensive than sending them out to other Canadian universities. We have lots of good schools across Canada that are close to UBC / SFU level, and I'd say those are more financially viable than sending someone down to the States or overseas.

[godwin]

Of course it is, but if your kids only score 86 in provincials.. or have aspirations to work as in fields like automotive engineering or technology, US just offers a heck lot more opportunities.

Besides some places like North Western.. living costs is extremely low.. 3 bedroom houses in the college down is about 70k.

I content most public school counselors in BC are not aware or know how to approach it because it is not on their radar or priority. Advising their students to local school is just easier and areas they are familiar with in detriment of their students.

Canadians studying in US universities should be way expensive. Not unaffordably so for middle class families, but definitely way more expensive than sending them out to other Canadian universities. We have lots of good schools across Canada that are close to UBC / SFU level, and I'd say those are more financially viable than sending someone down to the States or overseas.

[gars]

Like Traum said, I don't understand how a middle class family affords to send a kid to the US for schooling. Yes, you will have more opportunities coming out of university - but you will also be heavily in debt. Unless your family has saved 100k+ (just for tuition), you will be saddled with massive student loansout of graduation.

A 3 bedroom house may be cheap to buy outright because of their housing bubble that burst, but your tuition alone will cost you more than the house.

[godwin]

If a family bought a house in the early 2000s.. time to put that home equity to work?

You do realize say UBC denistry annual tuition is ~50k right? (no gov subsidy vs med school). All education involves some kind of debt.

Calculate how much kids spend on Hockey in the summer / soccer or baseball in the summer and fall, camps etc it adds up. So any sane human being would do is to plan with finite resources.. much like this thread is all about (callback to the original argument). What do we do with finite resources.

Of course each family has their own priorities. However I do believe it is viable for most. You won't live like a chav in the States, put your head down and work hard (there are amazing amount of bursaries reserved for Canadians). Much better than moan and groaning how your kid can't get into UBC.

Honestly I do think tertiary education is another frontier at the fight for jobs in the global economy, we have highly qualified new immigrants competing with local kids for local university placements and local parents are caught napping (I think simply don't care). Don't complain your are stuck at home with minimum wage jobs because you choose not to compete.

Life is full of uncertainty, but one thing is certain if you expect and wait for other people to do things for you, you are bound to fail.

Like Traum said, I don't understand how a middle class family affords to send a kid to the US for schooling. Yes, you will have more opportunities coming out of university - but you will also be heavily in debt. Unless your family has saved 100k+ (just for tuition), you will be saddled with massive student loansout of graduation.

A 3 bedroom house may be cheap to buy outright because of their housing bubble that burst, but your tuition alone will cost you more than the house.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

a family friend of mine got into harvard, and is now an intern at one of the major banks in new york.

the banks pay these interns 2500 a month, and i think supply then with 2500 dollar rent money a month too.

her rent is 5000 dollars per month for a 200sq feet apartment split with another intern. lol. (washrooms are shared with other apartments haha).

you guys tell me, how anyone in the middle class or below can ever land or support themselves through this.

remember, this is while paying your Harvard tuition.

that being said, her family has millions so it's not a problem.

and that being said, she's probably gonna do it a for a few years, reach middle management and pull in several hundred k a year, then quit cuz she'd rather have kids and do more important things in life than slave away for a bank haha...

[Mr.HappySilp]

r, then quit cuz she'd rather have kids and do more important things in life than slave away for a bank haha...

Important thing as in get implants and plastic surgery and marry a rich husband, then start her own "Super Duper Rich Asian Mom show"?

[bing]

I think it'll be a challenge affording US tuition if your not at least upper middle class (even though many people tend to identify as 'middle class', there's a huge distinction in terms of resource availability between those in the lower middle, middle middle, and upper middle classes i.e. see Bourdieu's distinctions on social/cultural/economic capital). Average US tuition even at state universities should be way higher than us including the fact that international status means higher prices.

I agree that the US has more choices in schools especially post-grad. For instance, my buddy's girlfriend is an eye doctor and she told me there is only one school for that in Canada whereas there are a number in the US.

[godwin]

2 one is Waterloo and the other is Montreal but the Montreal one you need university level French. You don't have an option if you choose to self deselect in a school"s core requirements.

The closest school of optometry to us is Seattle.


I agree that the US has more choices in schools especially post-grad. For instance, my buddy's girlfriend is an eye doctor and she told me there is only one school for that in Canada whereas there are a number in the US.

[adambomb]

Anyways... Can we pleeease get back to thinking about the children!! :(


VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – Another potential mediator has declined a request to get involved with the ongoing teachers dispute.

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Kelleher participated in exploratory talks with the BC Teachers’ Federation and the BC Public School Employers’ Association.

Kelleher has found that both sides remain too far apart for mediation to be effective.

Fassbender adds the government is committed to balancing the budget and has an obligation to “deal fairly with all 300,000 B.C. public sector workers.”

“However, the BCTF continues to demand total compensation gains that are more than twice what other unions have settled for. On top of that, they are also pushing for hundreds of millions more each year in other contract demands,” he adds.


BCTF and BCPSEA denied by another mediator | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2014/07/02/bctf-and-bcpsea-denied-by-another-mediator/)

[Traum]

A second potential mediator turning down the job. That is probably enough reason to confirm that all the mediators know how difficult / impossible it is to bring the 2 sides together, so nobody is gonna touch this big pile of shxt with a 10 feet pole.

[Durrann]

so no summer school at all now?

[Mr.HappySilp]

so no summer school at all now?

Looks like it. Is kinda of funny how the gov wants to summer school to open claiming is for the students who fail (Most likely they want summer school open for the $$$ from international students). The teachers came quickly and said they can offer summer school but only those those gr10 to 12 students what actually failed a class ONLY. Funny how it turn out and the gov is piss off now coz they can't milk the international students and the teachers know it.

[inv4zn]

Something I overheard over the watercooler and was wondering if it had any merit or truth to it.

Basis was that the government saves $$$ every day the strike goes on, because they don't have to pay the teachers.

So by prolonging the strike and refusing to negotiate, they now have the money to give the teachers and satisfy them.

So in the end, the teachers think they got what they wanted (a win), the government doesn't actually spend more money (a win), and the only ones shafted are the kids.

Again, not my opinion, but asking for opinions.

[Traum]

^^ Usually, that is what happens, and it has already happened that way the last few times.

[quasi]

Nothing will happen until Sept, I'm guessing the start of the school year will be delayed 1-2 weeks before finally either coming to an agreement or getting legislated back. The public backlash at that point will be so huge neither side will have a choice.

[MG1]

So, this 10% claw back that the government initiated and got LRB ruling on has nothing to do with extra curricular work (coaching, arranging games, etc. ) it has everything to do with what is expected of a teacher. Attending staff and department meetings, planning, supervision duties, marking, etc. When the teachers went into stage two, they were not doing those things - so why pay them? I have no idea how the LRB came up with 10%, but it could have been more, way more. It's a moot point since a full out strike means no pay, period. Just thought I'd point that out. A lot of people were confused about that part of the job action.

As for summer school, it ain't gonna happen. Some districts were planning on getting administrators to look after that, but it was too difficult to make it work.

As for legislating teachers back, it's no going to be that easy. They would have to declare education an essential service (life or death) again. There would be no bargaining and the alternative would have to be binding arbitration. Once that happens the other public sector unions would have to get involved. General strike.

I think the only way out of this is to suspend the talks on class size and composition on the promise it will be discussed. Settle on wages and benefits for the time being to make sure the school year starts off as it should. A third party has to be agreed upon to ensure the government not just make an empty promise. This way, the teachers won't be getting more than the other unions, things will get rolling again.

Can you tell I want that $225.00/hr job? LOL. It's a helluva lot more complicated than that, but what the heck.........

What will be interesting is while the government is saving oodles of money by not paying its teachers, the teachers themselves will eventually have to give in. They have to pay bills and feed their families. No win on the teachers' side. Government will wait it out. Only if their popularity suffers will they act.

Class size and composition should be fought by the parents. When I say that to people, the first thing they say back to me is, it ain't gonna happen.

[godwin]

I feel the teachers picked the wrong horse in the last election and honestly they just have to eat it and live with the consequences. Refusing to accept reality, doesn't struck me as wise. Honestly I think that sets a bad example to students. Life just doesn't always go your way. It seems the teachers collectively are just holding their breath and hoping the gov will change its mind. The lack of grace is amazing. I think would have been a better life lesson for the students (if they really care) to show them how to live through and rise from adversity.

Liberals were elected back with a STRONG mandate. Their popularity won't matter much this early.


What will be interesting is while the government is saving oodles of money by not paying its teachers, the teachers themselves will eventually have to give in. They have to pay bills and feed their families. No win on the teachers' side. Government will wait it out. Only if their popularity suffers will they act.

[Tapioca]

Liberals were elected back with a STRONG mandate. Their popularity won't matter much this early.

At the end of the day, most parents just want their kids at school. With the rise of private tutoring companies and private schools, I don't think parents have a lot of faith in the public system anyway. The teachers are fighting a losing battle.

[nah]

Let me preface this by saying that I think the teachers are in the wrong here. They should take a queue from the nurses and bargain appropriately without having the need for job action.

Interesting fact most people don't know is that private schools get funded 35% (per student) of public schools. I don't know why we need to subsidize rich kids when it's their choice to forgo public schools

[Traum]

^^ Nurses can bargain "appropriately" because they have the power to do so. Back in 1980, the nurses went on strike for 2 weeks and chaos promptly occurred. I don't remember if any patients have died as a result of the their job action, but the government understandably caved in, and the nurses went on to secure themselves a 40% raise over 3 years, while hospital nurses got a 49% increase over 27 months. The BCTF is not asking for raises like that, and will never get those levels even if they try.

But what is interesting is that a good 16 - 17 years ago, nurses and teachers make about the same amount of money. But now? Nurses are probably making a solid 20 - 30% more.

As I have said many times in this thread, the issues between the provincial government and the BCTF (and its members) is complicated, and the bad blood runs deep between the two. There is no single side that is "in the wrong", although I believe that this time around, the government is at the bigger fault.

[gars]

Let me preface this by saying that I think the teachers are in the wrong here. They should take a queue from the nurses and bargain appropriately without having the need for job action.

Interesting fact most people don't know is that private schools get funded 35% (per student) of public schools. I don't know why we need to subsidize rich kids when it's their choice to forgo public schools

it's actually funding up to 50%. The flipside of the argument is - imagine if you cut funding to the private schools, and half of their students now enter the public school system. BC would not be able to afford having that many more students in their public schools.

Their parents all pay taxes, some of them even quite a bit more taxes than the average person. I don't see why part of the funding can't go to independent schools when BC is actually saving money by having them forgo public schools.

[multicartual]

If I ever have kids there is no fucking way I would send them to a public school with the unwashed masses

[Gumby]

If I ever have kids there is no fucking way I would send them to a public school with the unwashed masses
Please do not have kids.

[Tapioca]

^^ Nurses can bargain "appropriately" because they have the power to do so. Back in 1980, the nurses went on strike for 2 weeks and chaos promptly occurred. I don't remember if any patients have died as a result of the their job action, but the government understandably caved in, and the nurses went on to secure themselves a 40% raise over 3 years, while hospital nurses got a 49% increase over 27 months. The BCTF is not asking for raises like that, and will never get those levels even if they try.



Health care costs will continue to consume the public purse, but as long as we continue to have public health care, nurses will always have more bargaining power than teachers. Everyone needs health care (particularly older people who vote), while parents can choose private schools, home-schooling, etc over the public school system.

Methinks that some teachers should have become nurses or other health-care practitioners instead.

[quasi]

If I ever have kids there is no fucking way I would send them to a public school with the unwashed masses

Haha, if I ever have a kids that turn out like you I'll do the world a favor, take them out to the barn and shoot them. :)

[Frenchie]

Stage 2 only included no supervision and no meetings led by administration. Teachers were still marking and planning. It was the government lockout that prevented any work to be done 45 mins before and after school, and during breaks and lunch. I will agree that the 10% figure is completely arbitrary.

I also agree that the class size and composition should be fought by the public and not the teachers. When the teachers say that they are fighting for the kids, this is what they are referring to. Short term pain (no exams, summer school, some grad activities) for long term gain.

[adambomb]

‘One per cent apart on wages’ technically not true, says BCTF.

Union admits it’s over different time periods. The union often says this when they are arguing that they are close enough for mediation. The province continues to disagree. BCTF President Jim Iker now admits that’s technically not true and the one per cent is over different time periods. “We’re at five years and they’re at six. Like, I said we’re open to compromise.”

:yuno:


?One per cent apart on wages? technically not true, says BCTF | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2014/07/04/one-per-cent-apart-on-wages-technically-not-true-says-bctf/)

[Soundy]

As I have said many times in this thread, the issues between the provincial government and the BCTF (and its members) is complicated, and the bad blood runs deep between the two. There is no single side that is "in the wrong", although I believe that this time around, the government is at the bigger fault.

And I would remind the class again, that the decision to go to a full-scale walkout WITH TWO WEEKS LEFT IN THE SCHOOL YEAR was ENTIRELY THE CHOICE Of (a large majority of) THE TEACHERS THEMSELVES.

[Traum]

And I would remind the class again, that the decision to go to a full-scale walkout WITH TWO WEEKS LEFT IN THE SCHOOL YEAR was ENTIRELY THE CHOICE Of (a large majority of) THE TEACHERS THEMSELVES.
Soundy, should I remind the class again that the provincial government has twice been ruled by the provincial supreme court that the provincial government has broken the class size law and special needs student provisions?

We can go back and forth, round and round as many times as well want over these details, and this is exactly what the government and the BCTF have been doing to result in this impasse.

[Soundy]

Soundy, should I remind the class again that the provincial government has twice been ruled by the provincial supreme court that the provincial government has broken the class size law and special needs student provisions?

We can go back and forth, round and round as many times as well want over these details, and this is exactly what the government and the BCTF have been doing to result in this impasse.
All of which is irrelevant to my point above.

[melloman]

I hate unions that work for the public sector. IMHO, it happens at the end of every contract with the BCTF.

Sign contract now for 5 years. In 5 years BCTF again shoots for the fucking stars, doesn't get it, and strikes. And then they say "its for the children."

Sure everybody wants a raise, I understand that. Yet not everybody needs fucking benefits falling out their asshole. $3k annually for massages.. Paid hours to "take care of a friend"?!?! MORE paid vacation hours... None of which benefits "the children."

IMHO the BCTF is just greasy. They should be fighting to increase the budget for more teachers, fuck all their benefits. I personally know tons of teachers who either; can't find work, can only pick up sub. jobs, or get laid off at the end of every school year.

[GLOW]

Sign contract now for 5 years. In 5 years BCTF again shoots for the fucking stars, doesn't get it, and strikes. And then they say "its for the children."

Sure everybody wants a raise, I understand that. Yet not everybody needs fucking benefits falling out their asshole. $3k annually for massages.. Paid hours to "take care of a friend"?!?! MORE paid vacation hours... None of which benefits "the children."

IMHO the BCTF is just greasy. They should be fighting to increase the budget for more teachers, fuck all their benefits. I personally know tons of teachers who either; can't find work, can only pick up sub. jobs, or get laid off at the end of every school year.

That's Greasy - YouTube

[Soundy]

I hate unions that work for the public sector. IMHO, it happens at the end of every contract with the BCTF.[/quotes]
That's not YHO, that's just historical record. :troll:

[QUOTE]Sign contract now for 5 years. In 5 years BCTF again shoots for the fucking stars, doesn't get it, and strikes. And then they say "its for the children."

Well gee, if they were smart, they should just suck it up for now, and stick it out until the NDP gets in next time to give them a sweetheart deal for the next.... ooohhhh wait, didn't they try that once already, and it backfired with a Liberal majority?

Hmmmm....

[godwin]

I drove by a few schools today.. the teachers are not picketing anymore, what's the deal with that?

[Lomac]

Because summer vacation, that's why.

I noticed the same up here as well.

[quasi]

Handing out the money they would be paying teachers to help with daycare costs brought on by the strike is pretty smart if you ask me.

B.C. parents to receive $40 per day per child under 13 if teachers? strike drags on | Globalnews.ca (http://globalnews.ca/news/1485222/b-c-parents-to-receive-40-per-day-per-child-under-13-if-teachers-strike-drags-on/)

B.C. parents will receive $40 per day per child under the age 13 if schools are not open in September, Minister of Finance Mike de Jong announced today.

The $40 per day will be paid by savings from the teachers’ strike.

De Jong says that if there is no deal with teachers by September, the BCTF will lose any hope of receiving strike savings.

Parents will be able to claim their $40 per day per child through a website set up by the provincial government.

[inv4zn]

lol, for parents with 2 kids under 13 that's $400 a week.

I wonder if they'll deduct tax from that though..haha.

Anyway, it's essentially a big middle finger with a smile to the BCTF.

[quasi]

Yeah, basically strengthen there position by removing all that extra money saved out of the negotiations and at the same time gained favor with parents who are effected by the strike. Politically and as far as negotiations go this move was genius IMO.

[meme405]

lol, for parents with 2 kids under 13 that's $400 a week.

I wonder if they'll deduct tax from that though..haha.

Anyway, it's essentially a big middle finger with a smile to the BCTF.

It will be Tax free. Much like how LOA (living out allowance) is tax free and separate from general income.

[Traum]

Yeah, basically strengthen there position by removing all that extra money saved out of the negotiations and at the same time gained favor with parents who are effected by the strike. Politically and as far as negotiations go this move was genius IMO.
Depends on your perspective. It also shows you clearly how little interest the provincial government has in sincerely negotiating a contract with BCTF.

I would totally call this negotiation in bad faith.

[Gumby]

This is pretty slimy move by the gov't... it's essentially bribe money!

[acrophobia]

This is pretty slimy move by the gov't... it's essentially bribe money!

B.C. Teachers' Strike Can't Be Solved With Hush Money And Guilt Trips | Ashley D. MacKenzie (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ashley-mackenzie/bc-teachers-strike-40-parents_b_5639994.html)

[quasi]

This is pretty slimy move by the gov't... it's essentially bribe money!

I don't really disagree with that to some extent, it's also being used to tip the negotiating power into there favor. I believe your wife is a teacher you and your family have a huge interest in how this plays out and if I were you I'd be pissed.

I have kids as well and I also have an interest in how this plays out. My wife and I both work and don't have the luxury of family looking after our kid unless it's an emergency and like many we have to pay for before and after school care. I realize school is not a daycare but when schools on strike we have to pay an additional $200.00 per week for our one child. When it comes down to it those are real costs that I have to bare every time the teachers strike as a parent and as a taxpayer I'm glad the Government did what it did.

I really hope this thing gets settled before the start of the school year and this whole $40.00 thing is a mute point.

[Gumby]

I don't really disagree with that to some extent, it's also being used to tip the negotiating power into there favor. I believe your wife is a teacher you and your family have a huge interest in how this plays out and if I were you I'd be pissed.

I have kids as well and I also have an interest in how this plays out. My wife and I both work and don't have the luxury of family looking after our kid unless it's an emergency and like many we have to pay for before and after school care. I realize school is not a daycare but when schools on strike we have to pay an additional $200.00 per week for our one child. When it comes down to it those are real costs that I have to bare every time the teachers strike as a parent and as a taxpayer I'm glad the Government did what it did.

I really hope this thing gets settled before the start of the school year and this whole $40.00 thing is a mute point.
Nope, neither of us are teachers. I don't want the $40/day; I just want my kid to go to school in September.

And I do have the luxury of having the grandparents watch him, but even they will get sick of seeing each other. Plus, my wife is currently on mat leave, but she would rather focus her attention on the baby.

[shawnly1000]

Negotiators for B.C.’s striking teachers and the government have agreed to meet on Aug. 8, in the first bargaining session since the school year was ended by the strike in mid-June.

Striking B.C. teachers, government to return to contract talks (http://ow.ly/zRndP)

[Soundy]

Successful pandering tactic is successful? We shall see... :considered:

[RRxtar]

The government giving some cash back to parents is no different than the teachers constantly spouting off how this "isnt for us, its for the kids"

2 different tactics to try to win the public. Which neither party should be using public opinion to sway an employment negotiation.

[Soundy]

...neither party should be using public opinion to sway an employment negotiation.

This is one of the main problems: if they put in half as much time and energy at the bargaining table as they do mouthpiecing through the media (especially fucking Iker and his weekly press conferences to announce nothing had changed), this would have been solved before it ever started.

[Timpo]

B.C. budget runs billions short for education and health: report (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/budget+runs+billions+short+education+health+report/10098996/story.html)

B.C. budget runs billions short for education and health: report

Spending constraints will mean less funding for students and patients over the next three years, according to Conference Board of Canada

By Tara Carman, Vancouver Sun August 7, 2014

B.C. will need to spend $1.6 billion more than it has budgeted on education and $1.8 billion more on health care to maintain a constant level of spending over the next three years, according to a newly released Conference Board of Canada report.

The report, entitled British Columbia Fiscal Snapshot: Back on Solid Ground, notes that the 2014 budget caps education spending to increases of 0.6 per cent per year between now and 2017, “a rate of growth that has only occurred once in the last 10 fiscal years.”

Education spending, which the Conference Board defines as all government funding to public, private and post-secondary institutions, would need to increase by an annual average rate of 2.7 per cent, or $1.6 billion over three years, to maintain inflation-adjusted funding per student, the report said. The board took into account average funding per student, projected enrolment and inflation in its analysis.

Elementary school teachers’ salaries account for about three-quarters of the funding per student figure, said the Conference Board’s Matthew Stewart, and that figure is consistent across all provinces.

The average weekly wage for elementary teachers in B.C. is $1,022, compared with the Canadian average of $1,019, “which is pretty much on par,” Stewart said. Funding per student, however, is above the Canadian average.

B.C. Teachers’ Federation vice-president Glen Hansman said because the Conference Board combined government funding for public schools with post-secondary and private schools in its analysis, the funding-per-student figure is higher than it would be for public schools alone.

But he agreed with the report’s assertion that it will take significant reinvestment of funding to maintain service levels.

The government has budgeted the same amount of money for the 2014-15 school year as for the previous year, Hansman said, but costs such as hydro, gas for school buses and possibly wages for teachers and support staff are all going up.

“That just translates into ... cuts in service,” he said, noting that many school boards went through cost-cutting exercises in the spring.

“Even when you take declining enrolment into consideration ... the cuts have been greater than what would flow simply out of a decline in student population. The cuts have been because funding hasn’t kept pace with inflation.”

It’s a similar story with health care. The Conference Board notes in the report that the B.C. government has capped increases to health care spending at 2.6 per cent over the next three years, but estimates the province would have to increase spending by 4.3 per cent over the same period to maintain current levels of service, allowing for inflation and demographic change.

Add in another half-per-cent increase to cover new equipment or drug coverage approvals and the projected cost rises to 4.8 per cent, or $2.3 billion over budget, Stewart said.

“You can restrain the budget to anything in the short term, but in the long term with demand from the aging population and population growth, eventually it creates a large problem, unless you find productivity improvements, and provinces have not been successful on that front in the past,” he commented.

B.C.’s health spending per capita is much lower than in most other provinces once demographics are factored into the data, the report said.

This comes as no surprise to Christine Sorensen, vice-president of the B.C. Nurses’ Union.

“We certainly have seen an increased workload. Staffing levels are really challenging nurses’ ability to provide safe patient care,” she said, noting that ongoing overcrowding problems at Surrey Memorial in particular are a good example.

If the government fails to provide even enough funding to preserve the status quo, “patient care will suffer in this province, patients will wait, patients will continue to be provided care in hallways, urgent situations will be missed and patients will be put at risk,” Sorensen said.

Finance Minister Mike de Jong was not available for an interview, but said in a written statement that B.C. posted a modest surplus of $353 million for the last fiscal year despite lower-than-forecast revenues.

“This helps preserve our AAA credit rating and results in lower borrowing costs. While the fiscal plan does show continued spending discipline, spending in health and education sectors is not being reduced, and positive outcomes are being maintained.”

NDP finance critic Carole James accused the government of improving its own balance sheet by downloading costs onto school boards, health authorities and taxpayers, citing increased hydro rates, ICBC and MSP premiums as examples.

“You’re paying more, you’re getting less in services, less in support,” she said.

On the revenue side, the Conference Board said B.C. represents a good-news story, with its forecasts even more optimistic than those of the government due to the strength of the lumber and shipbuilding sectors, Stewart said.

“Overall, British Columbia is in a sound fiscal position and, while it will face mounting cost pressures for health and education spending, it is in a much better position to deal with these challenges relative to most other provinces,” the report concluded.

James disagreed, saying in an interview that a strong economy needs a healthy, well-educated workforce. The Conference Board analysis shows the government’s projections for health care and education spending, though higher than previous years, will in fact amount to billions in cuts because of rising costs.

“To think of seeing those kinds of massive cuts in education and health care simply is not sustainable, nor is it responsible, because it will have a huge impact on the economy of British Columbia if we start seeing those kinds of cuts to both critical services in our province,” she said.



http://www.vancouversun.com/business/cms/binary/10098998.jpg?size=620x400s

[Mr.HappySilp]

Nope, neither of us are teachers. I don't want the $40/day; I just want my kid to go to school in September.

And I do have the luxury of having the grandparents watch him, but even they will get sick of seeing each other. Plus, my wife is currently on mat leave, but she would rather focus her attention on the baby.

How come only parents get it? Shouldn't everyone who lives in BC gets the money as well? Because to me it is unused tax revenue the gov have (coz teacher on strike so they don't pay them) Since everyone who lives in BC pays tax towards education we all should get $40/per day from the gov.

[meme405]

How come only parents get it? Shouldn't everyone who lives in BC gets the money as well? Because to me it is unused tax revenue the gov have (coz teacher on strike so they don't pay them) Since everyone who lives in BC pays tax towards education we all should get $40/per day from the gov.

The $40 a day is good will from the government to help out parents with young kids who have to utilize day care while school is not in session. The $40 a day is not to give the citizens back their unused money.

The government and teachers are in this stalemate because the government is pushing the budget to the limit. Money is tight, you ain't seeing shit back from the government, just be happy if they don't raise your taxes after the teachers are done taking all our lunch money.

[freakshow]

The $40 a day is good will from the government to help out parents with young kids who have to utilize day care while school is not in session. The $40 a day is not to give the citizens back their unused money.What HappySlip is getting at is, why do I (as a SINK/DINK) have to pay towards the education of other people's kids, and when there is money being saved in that same fund that I paid towards, it's only paid out to people with kids. Is the government unfairly rewarding certain lifestyles (w/ kids) over others (no kids)?

/devilsadvocate /toomuchphilosophy /rabbithole /stirthepot

[inv4zn]

What HappySlip is getting at is, why do I (as a SINK/DINK) have to pay towards the education of other people's kids, and when there is money being saved in that same fund that I paid towards, it's only paid out to people with kids. Is the government unfairly rewarding certain lifestyles (w/ kids) over others (no kids)?

/devilsadvocate /toomuchphilosophy /rabbithole /stirthepot

This logic seems false to me, as you don't singularly pay for the education of other people's kids.

You pay taxes, which pays for a plethora of things, which includes public education.

So, of the 100% taxes that you pay, if 0.4% is used for education, and 0.94% of that 0.4% was unused due to the teacher's strike, you're saying it makes financial and common sense to return said miniscule percentage to every single tax payer?

Yes I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the government is not rewarding people with children; they are using money that they've collected to address an ongoing problem.

Whether this address is correct or not, or whether the government is using any of the collected money correctly is another issue, but to say that this $40 payout is "unfair" is stretching it, in my humble opinion.

[Mr.HappySilp]

This logic seems false to me, as you don't singularly pay for the education of other people's kids.

You pay taxes, which pays for a plethora of things, which includes public education.

So, of the 100% taxes that you pay, if 0.4% is used for education, and 0.94% of that 0.4% was unused due to the teacher's strike, you're saying it makes financial and common sense to return said miniscule percentage to every single tax payer?

Yes I pulled the numbers out of my ass, but the government is not rewarding people with children; they are using money that they've collected to address an ongoing problem.

Whether this address is correct or not, or whether the government is using any of the collected money correctly is another issue, but to say that this $40 payout is "unfair" is stretching it, in my humble opinion.

So why give the money to parents then? They already don't have enough funding for education,shouldn't the gov kept the money and use for education instead of just giving it to parents?

[quasi]

So why give the money to parents then? They already don't have enough funding for education,shouldn't the gov kept the money and use for education instead of just giving it to parents?

Politics, nothing more. The Government is trying to gain favor with parents and weaken the teachers negotiating position. Normally when there is a strike teachers use the money that was saved as one of the bargaining chips, the Government is taking that away from them by spending it.

In a perfect world the money would be used to help class sizes or whatever is deemed to be the biggest issue is in the classroom.

[shenmecar]

So why give the money to parents then? They already don't have enough funding for education,shouldn't the gov kept the money and use for education instead of just giving it to parents?

To help those parents with daycare costs. It is a freaking joke to be honest. They're willing to pay out $13.6 million a day to keep kids out of school. Tells you a lot about our Gov't doesn't it.

[capt_slo]

So why give the money to parents then? They already don't have enough funding for education,shouldn't the gov kept the money and use for education instead of just giving it to parents?

Because politics.

It's all leverage. Why aren't teachers picketing all summer? Don't they want their cause to stay relevant to the topic of the day?

Union uses children as pawns for pressure at the end/start of school year for negotiating a deadline. Gov. found a temprary workaround this time in the form of a minor cash stipend.

Both sides have a long history of fighting dirty and that won't end anytime soon.

[vitaminG]

What HappySlip is getting at is, why do I (as a SINK/DINK) have to pay towards the education of other people's kids, and when there is money being saved in that same fund that I paid towards, it's only paid out to people with kids. Is the government unfairly rewarding certain lifestyles (w/ kids) over others (no kids)?

/devilsadvocate /toomuchphilosophy /rabbithole /stirthepot

There is a collective social benefit to having kids. You actually subsidize other people's children in a variety of ways.

It could even be argued that as a non parent it is YOU who is leeching of the hard work of parents raising the future generation. Certainly your pension and RRSPs would be worthless without a future generation, which is just one example of the economic benefits of children to the childless.

[RRxtar]

You know the government is running a massive deficit building massive debt right? If they should give everyone in the province a handout for a few bucks saved from this, by that logic they should come collect more tax from you to cover the things that are over spent or under funded right?

[carisear]

To help those parents with daycare costs. It is a freaking joke to be honest. They're willing to pay out $13.6 million a day to keep kids out of school. Tells you a lot about our Gov't doesn't it.

I think what you meant to say was:

"[the gov't] has to pay $13.6 million a day to families to help with daycare costs, since the teachers are keeping the kids out of school. Tells you a lot about the teachers, doesn't it."

easy to spin any argument any way you want.

[snowball]

It's all leverage. Why aren't teachers picketing all summer? Don't they want their cause to stay relevant to the topic of the day?
.

The point of picketing is to be at the workplace when work is supposed to be in session to prevent people from going into work. Pickets for any other industry would make sense year round, but there's nothing to picket in the summer for the school system.

[Timpo]

so the question is...are kids going back to school in September?

or are they gonna extend it even more...perhaps October? :suspicious:

[godwin]

Plenty of things happen in the summer at school, maintenance, painting etc etc.. oh things that make teachers' job easier in the fall.

Also is it smart to keep people you will be working with all year round out of a job for minimal political benefits?

The point of picketing is to be at the workplace when work is supposed to be in session to prevent people from going into work. Pickets for any other industry would make sense year round, but there's nothing to picket in the summer for the school system.

[inv4zn]

Timpo, are you asking because you still haven't bought your school supplies?
:troll:

[Timpo]

B.C. teachers' strike: talks resume with time running out

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-strike-talks-resume-with-time-running-out-1.2732810

they're talking about october

[Timpo]

Timpo, are you asking because you still haven't bought your school supplies?
:troll:

http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/1/14061000/ngbbs46f54d802b091.jpg

[Lomac]

To help those parents with daycare costs. It is a freaking joke to be honest. They're willing to pay out $13.6 million a day to keep kids out of school. Tells you a lot about our Gov't doesn't it.

It's not like it's money that the government has suddenly found sitting in the back of the communal safe...

[quasi]

B.C. teachers' strike: talks resume with time running out

B.C. teachers' strike: talks resume with time running out - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-strike-talks-resume-with-time-running-out-1.2732810)

they're talking about october

Not to say it can't happen but I really really doubt it. There will be to much lash back on the Government and many Teachers can't afford to sit out that long without a paycheck. Both sides are going to posture and say they can ride this thing out until the end of time but that's not reality for either side.

[Timpo]

Not to say it can't happen but I really really doubt it. There will be to much lash back on the Government and many Teachers can't afford to sit out that long without a paycheck. Both sides are going to posture and say they can ride this thing out until the end of time but that's not reality for either side.

but mid September tho?
did you listen to this? sounds like there's a semi-serious possibility of this strike entering October.

CBC.ca Player (http://www.cbc.ca/video/player.html?clipid=2486406619&position=78622&site=cbc.news.ca)

[Timpo]

^ btw that audio was from this link
B.C. teachers' strike: talks resume with time running out - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-strike-talks-resume-with-time-running-out-1.2732810)

[godwin]

I thought the communal safe at the back of Captain Happy Bubble have gold bullion appear out of thin air?


It's not like it's money that the government has suddenly found sitting in the back of the communal safe...

[Timpo]

ok so are they gonna start school in septermber or what?

[Gumby]

Highly doubt it, Timpo.

[wingies]

Mediator walks away from B.C. teachers? strike talks - The Globe and Mail (http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/mediator-walks-away-ending-hopes-teachers-strike-will-end-before-school-starts/article20287114/?service=mobile)

[tonyzoomzoom]

Unfortunately, it would seem that only legislation would get the kids back in school.

[hotjoint]

Looks like no school Tuesday unless a miracle happens

[4444]

Fucking bullshit.

The government are a failure

The teachers are failures

The kids lose

How this is legal, I don't know. Education is a top 3 vital thing for a child along with health and love/nourishment, it is the govenrment's role to ensure this is not affected.

The teachers are two faced cunts, "we care for the kids" - not in my eyes. You care more about yourselves. You didn't go into teaching (a social service) for the money, and if u did, u got it wrong!

Fuck them all.

[Timpo]

Highly doubt it, Timpo.

oh..

[Gumby]

I came across this on Facebook and agree with it:

You want to know why the BCTF and the Liberals are in a current stalemate in their negotiations. It's pretty simple, but I can't believe it took me until now to figure it out. If I’m wrong, please let me know.

Everything goes back to Justice Griffin's ruling by the BC Supreme Court. As many of you know, Justice Griffin ruled against the BC Liberals and found them guilty of illegally tearing up a legally-binding, negotiated contract (a contract which had class size and composition language in it). The Liberals were also found to have negotiated in bad faith, having goaded the BCTF into a strike position.

Because the ruling is currently under appeal, the Liberals have been able to avoid re-instating the classroom size and composition language into the present contract. But this is the BIG CRUX, and this is why we are in a current stalemate: if the Liberals legislate teachers back to work, they will confirm to the courts that they are once again unable to negotiate a contract with teachers. The Griffin ruling will therefore remain as the most 'current' language in the contract. But, and this is a big but, if the BCTF 'accepts' the current offer on the table (an offer that does not have any class size or composition guarantees), then the Griffin ruling (moving forward) will be seen as null and void. In other words, a 'negotiated' agreement will be viewed as the most present and legal contract moving forward.

And that is why we are at a current stalemate in bargaining. If the BCTF accepts anything 'less' than what the courts have already awarded them (but actually don't yet have because of the appeal), then they will have to accept these terms moving forward. It will invariably trump the Griffin ruling and any hopes of re-establishing classroom size and composition to past levels. Why would the BCTF accept anything less than what the courts have told them is legally theirs?

In my opinion, the BCTF have no choice but to NOT accept the current Liberal offer, an offer that is not even close to what Justice Griffin has already awarded them. As a result, it is absolutely crucial that the BCTF out-wait the Liberals and stay on strike. And yet, on the flip-side this is extremely difficult for teaching professionals who both want to start school on time AND earn their first pay cheque in 10 weeks.

The only hope, then, is that the people of this province do not allow the Liberals to keep schools closed through September. Because, in all honesty, they are NOT acting on behalf of our children, they are merely taking a political stance that (yes, I agree) would allow them to continue their fiscal austerity when it comes to funding education. And, to a certain degree, this was their campaign promise. And the people of BC did vote them in.

The BCTF simply can't fold on this one. The courts have spoken. They won fair and square in the courts. Only an appeal keeps them away from this. The BCTF (teachers) are simply standing up for what the courts have legally awarded them.

It is a historical moment in BC regarding how education is funded. While we all want our children in school, hopefully the above has helped to explain why we are at a current stalemate. Accepting a deal that is anything less at this moment in time just doesn’t make sense. The Liberals hold the cards in terms of starving teachers out; the teachers hold the biggest card, however: the Griffin ruling. Kids and parents hold no cards--except for your willingness to protest starting September 2nd.

As a parent, and now knowing what we know, I think its time that we all take a side. We need to get off the fence and be active. Whatever side you choose, please be active on September 2nd.

[4444]

I came across this on Facebook and agree with it:

an opinion piece on facebook.

an opinion piece that is one sided and not based on fact.

not exactly something to use to make decision.

it could be right, but it's an opinion. we've all got them.

mine is that parents and their kids should go out with signs saying "fuck the liberals, fuck the teachers, just like they're fucking us!"

[Lomac]

an opinion piece on facebook.

an opinion piece that is one sided and not based on fact.

not exactly something to use to make decision.

it could be right, but it's an opinion. we've all got them.

mine is that parents and their kids should go out with signs saying "fuck the liberals, fuck the teachers, just like they're fucking us!"

Er, what's not fact about the rulings of Bill's 22, 27 and 28?

[4444]

Er, what's not fact about the rulings of Bill's 22, 27 and 28?

it is an opinion piece with some facts in it.

it is quite clear that the author has made conclusions based on certain facts, but there could be facts they have missed out.

i am not denying these bills exist, i'm sure they do, but is this what is actually going on? is this opinion piece a full assessment of the situation? or is it a well written (until it gets totally 1 sided) story of what could be the reason for the fact that nothing has happened yet.

i think everyone needs to learn to read with skepticism about who the author is, what their motivations are, and whether all facts are presented and represented equally and fairly. With the proliferation of shite news sources, it is up to you, the reader to decipher the real story as you see it, not take someone's word at face value.

and, by the way, we'll never know what's really holding things up, as there are two sides involved that will only report what is good for their position.

[4444]

Er, what's not fact about the rulings of Bill's 22, 27 and 28?

and to your credit, i see why you said what you said, 'not based on fact' in my wording does not mean bills 22, 27, and 28 aren't fact.

[quasi]

it is an opinion piece with some facts in it.

it is quite clear that the author has made conclusions based on certain facts, but there could be facts they have missed out.

i am not denying these bills exist, i'm sure they do, but is this what is actually going on? is this opinion piece a full assessment of the situation? or is it a well written (until it gets totally 1 sided) story of what could be the reason for the fact that nothing has happened yet.

i think everyone needs to learn to read with skepticism about who the author is, what their motivations are, and whether all facts are presented and represented equally and fairly. With the proliferation of shite news sources, it is up to you, the reader to decipher the real story as you see it, not take someone's word at face value.

and, by the way, we'll never know what's really holding things up, as there are two sides involved that will only report what is good for their position.

Exactly, the writer has his own agenda they are seldom unbiased.

Fault lies with both sides they are going to say it's the other side holding up the negotiations and being unreasonable. There is no question they both are responsible for what's going on. We should do a pool when school will start and how a resolution will come about. My best guess is still Sept 15th and it will end when they are legislated back to work.

[Timpo]

ok so it's official, school won't start tomorrow. B.C. teachers' strike: No school year start Tuesday - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-strike-no-school-year-start-tuesday-1.2751930)

[Timpo]

hmm some sources say the strike will continue til mid October. :eek:

[4444]

hmm some sources ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR OPINION THAT IS LIKELY NO MORE ACCURATE THAN YOURS OR MINE that the strike will continue til mid October. :eek:

fixed it for you

[parm104]

fixed it for you

But he has sources!! lol

[parm104]

This is pretty funny:

Why BC Teachers Are Angry (2014) - YouTube

[Shark Tank]

Does anyone realistically think we see so many Teacher strikes if cost of living weren't so high. How many teacher strikes you hear in Saskatchewan or Manitoba or PEI

Face it, the housing cost is one of the leading factors because teachers want to be compensated. They are smart too because they have insane leverage knowing there profession is invaluable. Nobody want to see kids not being teached or get there education. It puts massive pressure on government to appease there wishes!

[NKC ONE]

Does anyone realistically think we see so many Teacher strikes if cost of living weren't so high. How many teacher strikes you hear in Saskatchewan or Manitoba or PEI

Face it, the housing cost is one of the leading factors because teachers want to be compensated. They are smart too because they have insane leverage knowing there profession is invaluable. Nobody want to see kids not being teached or get there education. It puts massive pressure on government to appease there wishes!

Teached? Seriously?

[4444]

Does anyone realistically think we see so many Teacher strikes if cost of living weren't so high. How many teacher strikes you hear in Saskatchewan or Manitoba or PEI

Face it, the housing cost is one of the leading factors because teachers want to be compensated. They are smart too because they have insane leverage knowing there profession is invaluable. Nobody want to see kids not being teached or get there education. It puts massive pressure on government to appease there wishes!

cost of living is not low in vancouver, but it's hardly the picture you paint.

all the teachers i know are hardly living in squallier (quite the opposite, one lives in a nice beach community - hubby is a carpenter or something, respectable, but not mega rich)...

correct me if i'm wrong, but it's not the teachers, it's their representatives that are acting on behalf of them. much like it is our elected government that acts on our behalf on this matter, even though 99.9% of ppl just say "fuck it, get the kids back in school"

[melloman]

Might put massive pressure on the govt but I'd rather have lots of pressure and pissed off people.. than giving the BCTF another $300 million.

Teachers think this huge ordeal is making the govt look stupid and cheap, yet in my eyes it's just abunch of whiny kids wanting something and seeing how far they can push it. God, if I went to my boss and told him I want to work less, get paid substantially more, and have to look after fewer things.. well I'd be laughed at and fired.

[dbaz]

lots of you guys are unfortunately misinformed on what you think teachers actually do. try having one as a parent, and realize how much they have to do for this so called "easy 9 month work year".

[ZN6]

Does anyone realistically think we see so many Teacher strikes if cost of living weren't so high. How many teacher strikes you hear in Saskatchewan or Manitoba or PEI

Face it, the housing cost is one of the leading factors because teachers want to be compensated. They are smart too because they have insane leverage knowing there profession is invaluable. Nobody want to see kids not being teached or get there education. It puts massive pressure on government to appease there wishes!

This post is the epitome of failure that is the B.C. English curriculum. Herpity derpity doo.

[4444]

lots of you guys are unfortunately misinformed on what you think teachers actually do. try having one as a parent, and realize how much they have to do for this so called "easy 9 month work year".

Join the club for people that work hard for their money.

Working ur arse off is nothing new. Teachers have it no worse than the average cat, some have it easier than others, and that goes for teachers.

If they want a better deal, they need a better head of their union, simple as that.

Let's not forget the barrier to entry to becoming a teacher is quite low (a bs degree and 1 yr b.ed.) - the world is based on supply and demand, the only variable here to fuck up the invisible hand of economics is the shit union the teachers have, and the arsehole politicians in power

[westopher]

I'm glad someone posted the reality of how things work in the Canadian economy. The 10000 education graduates with no jobs would be happy to take some of the teachers places if they don't like their jobs. Is teaching a hard job? It sure is. So is construction, cooking, serving, banking, engineering, medical, firefighting, etc. If you really think that your job is that out of balance, go find a new career.
I understand, thats not what the strike is ALL about, and I strongly support the teachers demands for more aides for special needs students. That said, if there is no money in the budget for it, and you truly want to paint the picture that you care about the students, maybe you need to take the raises out of your demands and meet in the middle with the government. Both sides are trying so hard to manipulate the public through the media, and both look like idiots. It also doesn't help that the head of the teachers union looks like a serial killer.

[4444]

VERY well said, esp. the last bit ;)

[Traum]

With the most recently collapsed talks (negotiations), I would already interpret the BCTF to be sending a message that they are not primarily in this negotiation and job action for their own salary increases. Peter Fassbender (education minister) has already offered to only negotiate on wage issues, and his reasons for leaving the class size and composition clauses behind are because "the ruling is currently being appealed at the court". If the BCTF is only interested in wage negotiations, they should have taken Fassbender's offer, and I am sure something would have worked out.

In my eyes, the BCTF is resting on the fact that the supreme court ruling is in their favour, and they are not going to settle for anything less than what the court ruled.

I am generally a law-abiding citizen, and more than anything else, I think any government should follow their own laws, especially when a decision has already been given out by the government's own law courts. I am not discrediting that an appeal is in progress, but until the appeal process is finished, shouldn't all parties involved abide by the conditions of the most current ruling? In the legal world as I understand it, I am innocent until proven guilty, but if a ruling has already dictated that I am guilty, then I would have no choice but to serve whatever sentences the ruling has given me even though I might have filed an appeal. How can the government so blatantly and unashamedly violate its own laws, ignores its own court rulings, and not pay up?

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ coz you are talking about crack clark. When did she ever kept the promise she spoken of? Also she even lost at her own distract. The least she could do is step down as a party leader, but she refuse.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Let's put it this way. Most of us work 9 to 5 after work if we stay for OT we get OT pay or bank it as vacation. Teachers don't do that. If teachers were doing just 8 hours like us and demand OT pay when it is over 8 hours or simply stop caring after 8 hours all those extra activities at school will be cancel. No more after school sports, sports team , band trips, Tutor etc etc........ Also special students needs a lot of attentions.

i REMEMBER when I was younger I have major vision issue and having more time spend with my teachers after school is very important so I can catch up with notes and ask any questions I have because I can't see clearly. I am sure it will be pretty shitty for me if my teachers told me "well I love to help but is after 8 hours so my day is over. You are on your own." So having smaller classroom size is very important.

[quasi]

Let's put it this way. Most of us work 9 to 5 after work if we stay for OT we get OT pay or bank it as vacation. Teachers don't do that. If teachers were doing just 8 hours like us and demand OT pay when it is over 8 hours or simply stop caring after 8 hours all those extra activities at school will be cancel. No more after school sports, sports team , band trips, Tutor etc etc........ Also special students needs a lot of attentions.

i REMEMBER when I was younger I have major vision issue and having more time spend with my teachers after school is very important so I can catch up with notes and ask any questions I have because I can't see clearly. I am sure it will be pretty shitty for me if my teachers told me "well I love to help but is after 8 hours so my day is over. You are on your own." So having smaller classroom size is very important.

Not where I work, most of us are working 9-10 hours a day (salary no OT) and through our lunches half the time but to be fair I have taken 3 days off this year above and beyond long weekends so I'm not complaining..........no really I'm not I knew what I was getting into. :)

[Gumby]

Not where I work, most of us are working 9-10 hours a day (salary no OT) and through our lunches half the time but to be fair I have taken 3 days off this year above and beyond long weekends so I'm not complaining..........no really I'm not I knew what I was getting into. :)
Do you work 9-10 hours a day because you WANT to, or because you HAVE to, to ensure that deadlines are met?

Teachers don't have to volunteer their time for extra curricular activities... but many of them do.

[4444]

Do you work 9-10 hours a day because you WANT to, or because you HAVE to, to ensure that deadlines are met?

Teachers don't have to volunteer their time for extra curricular activities... but many of them do.

Isn't that a stupid question? If ur working 9-10 hrs, it's bc it's needed, or the norm. Want or need isn't really the question, you may not need to work 9-10 hrs, but if u don't, u may not get promoted, so really is it want or need?

[quasi]

I do it to make deadlines that are set by others. I estimate and manage commercial construction and have closing times that have to be met. Like I said I'm not complaining for the most part I don't mind my job and the hours are whatever, you get used to it.

[Gumby]

Isn't that a stupid question? If ur working 9-10 hrs, it's bc it's needed, or the norm. Want or need isn't really the question, you may not need to work 9-10 hrs, but if u don't, u may not get promoted, so really is it want or need?
I guess the point I was trying to make (but did a poor job of doing so) is that there are two types of teachers: those that work 9-3 for 9 months a year, and those that put in all sorts of extra hours volunteering because they want to make a difference in their students' lives. Hopefully there are more teachers in the latter category.

How the teachers that do extra are compensated/promoted/evaluated differently, I do not know.

[Mr.HappySilp]

I guess the point I was trying to make (but did a poor job of doing so) is that there are two types of teachers: those that work 9-3 for 9 months a year, and those that put in all sorts of extra hours volunteering because they want to make a difference in their students' lives. Hopefully there are more teachers in the latter category.

How the teachers that do extra are compensated/promoted/evaluated differently, I do not know.

They don't.

[dbaz]

there aren't any that work from 9-3. legally, they have to be there 15minutes before and after. add to the fact there is usually unpaid meetings in the morning, lunch, and/or after school, that have to be attended. plus any other stuff they do to help students, parents, or the community.
what they are asking for in the nearly 12% raise.. at first glance this is crazy, yet if you think about it, this is just a shot at the government, and a bargaining chip. its in reference to when the Liberals locked them out and cut their pay by 10 per cent. in reality both sides have said they are actually close to an agreement on wage increase, showing that this really didnt mean as much as other things to BCTF
yet the main problem is with special needs, and class sizes. most schools had teacher assistants to help those with learning problems, who are specifically trained to assist special needs, unlike regular teachers. with class sizes being increased, and the budget cuts towards teaching assistants, it put teachers to a point where their days are becoming much longer. you add to the fact that the teacher has to create new curriculum for the increased classes( how many grades? could be 1-3 per class, or more) + special projects for the special needs children. the time required to check on, and help each kid is different, with a large percentage going to the ones who needs the most help, the special needs. you could be looking at the time your kid has with each teacher drastically dropped per day, thus creating a sub par education.
simply saying we have no funds does not fix the problem, and cutting more only makes it worse. if we are so worried about putting extra money into education to fix both class size, and special needs, why don't we worry more about the liberals yearly raises? or the raises garbage men get? there's more fuss put into the teachers situation, than any other, yet many people just think of these people as babysitters.

even though i would side with the teachers, in my opinion i have to say the difference in quality teachers from elementary to high school drastically drops

[Xplicit_EL]

^^^ I agree. You all don't know what teachers have to go through and put up with. My gf is a teacher and the amount of extra work they have to put in (without pay) is staggering. All you people ragging on teachers need to STFU until you have experienced it.

[Gumby]

Curious - is there anybody here who supports the teachers and isn't one of the following:

a) a parent
b) a teacher (or spouse/partner of a teacher)
c) good friends with a teacher

[Mr.HappySilp]

Curious - is there anybody here who supports the teachers and isn't one of the following:

a) a parent
b) a teacher (or spouse/partner of a teacher)
c) good friends with a teacher

Me. Only know a few people from high school who are teachers but we don't keep contact anymore.

[Hondaracer]

^^^ I agree. You all don't know what teachers have to go through and put up with. My gf is a teacher and the amount of extra work they have to put in (without pay) is staggering. All you people ragging on teachers need to STFU until you have experienced it.

Yea cause shit, staying after work an hour here and there then having 3 months off is way harder than the guy working 12 hours trying to run a company, or a trade, or any sort of mangement position, etc etc.

Don't have kids, probably won't but if I do they'll be going to private school. Sure there are gems of teachers out there but I think the vast majority are mediocre and are there for the perks and pensions.

[Xplicit_EL]

Yea cause shit, staying after work an hour here and there then having 3 months off is way harder than the guy working 12 hours trying to run a company, or a trade, or any sort of mangement position, etc etc.

Don't have kids, probably won't but if I do they'll be going to private school. Sure there are gems of teachers out there but I think the vast majority are mediocre and are there for the perks and pensions.


I never said being a teacher was harder then any of the jobs you mentioned. I was pointing out the fact that you dumbasses underestimate the amount of work a public school teacher does unless you yourself have experienced it.

If u 'were' a teacher then I should shut up , but if you haven't experienced being one then who are you to comment on how hard the profession is??

what profession are you in anyways?

[MG1]

We are now comparing jobs........we have come full circle, again.

"Hey, I work just as hard, so why should they get xxxxxx." Yada, yada, yada...... Like I've said before, walk a mile in their shoes. Half you guys would not make it in that environment. As for the many who graduate to become teachers, most of them fail at it on their first day. Do you guys think the Universities prepare any of these people? Not even close. First day is an eye opener for these noobs. Many of my high school friends went into education only to be eaten alive.

Now if we are not discussing or comparing jobs, then let's get some facts out here (and I don't have all of them).

Both sides are full of fricken liars. Fassbender, Iker, and the media. Actually, the media's job is no longer to report the news but to distort it and get people all pissed off at each other. Talk shows, interviews, polls, you name it. Don't you just love polls? Today's poll question is........ then idiots chime in with all kinds of hate messages. Oh look how angry these people are! The media have turned this into a circus.

Will this thing be resolved? No. Unless a government is in jeopardy of losing an election they have nothing to lose.

BCTF is a stubborn bunch, also. They do not want the language of the contract changed or have to start all over again from scratch. They won twice. There's an appeal in progress. It ain't going away. Appeal after appeal after appeal. Government will not legislate teachers back. They are dead set on that one. Why? There's something fishy going on.

Lots of people are being affected, not just kids. Businesses that rely on schools being in session. Some of the newer teachers are financially up the creek. The government would love to bust the union. The union would love to have more teachers being hired......more union dues coming their way. Shit on both sides.

I mentioned the lying. The BCTF lied to their members about being locked out at lunch and recess. That came out not too long ago. The union also stated they were not that far apart....... um, yeah. Then there's the teachers making an average of xxxx.xx. Yeah, the average would be high, cause you included administrators. It isn't just teachers that make the education system work.

I'm just rattling things off here, but I put the blame squarely on the parents of this province. Not all, but a lot. Parents who have no idea how to be a parent. This problem would not be here if we didn't have children with issues. Abused, malnourished, neglected, FAS, etc. etc. etc. Raise your kids, not just make them someone else's problem. Stop being into yourselves and do what's right. You're the ones who brought them into this world. Take some responsibility.

Oh, private schools. Yeah, they don't ever have to deal with the losers of the world. Ask any private school teacher how their job is........ actually, comparing would not be fair. They have their own set of issues.

It was a much better system when each individual school district negotiated with their teachers. Local unions.

Should pimply faced, virgin boys be in a discussion, voicing their opinions on the topic of abortion? Apparently it's okay on RS. Doesn't matter if they've never dated a woman or been in a serious relationship. If they have a penis, they're good to go.

I'm sure we will continue to have replies with all kinds of fuck them, fuck you, fuck everyone else except me - my shit doesn't smell, call the kettle black, etc. posts.

Of course, everyone has an opinion................. shouldn't opinions be based on some facts or knowledge, experience on the subject?


god bless


My children have graduated from University......... now there's a great subject. Why can't we have profs at Universities we can all understand?


I expect a correction reply by godwin and a few "fuck you, fuck them, fuck everybody else" posts from 4444 along with a fail.

[MG1]

I want to know about the hidden agendas in this dispute.............

[Graeme S]

The Cost of Class Size and Composition | Ashley D. Mackenzie (http://ashleydmackenzie.com/the-cost-of-class-size-and-composition/)

On my phone or I'd copy and paste, but it's a good restatement of something I think I brought up awhile ago.