[Traum]

School districts across B.C. planning deep cuts to balance budgets (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/School+districts+across+planning+deep+cuts+balance +budgets/9746279/story.html)


VANCOUVER -- School boards around the province are facing at least $56 million in budget cuts and considering eliminating more than 350 jobs heading into the new school year.

And that doesn’t include some districts that have not yet released their budget figures for next year, including Surrey, the largest district in the province.

...

While Vancouver’s budgetary woes have been caused at least in part by declining enrolment — districts are funded by the province on a per-pupil basis — many districts, such as Central Okanagan and Delta, are facing shortfalls despite the fact enrolment is projected to increase.

Budget cuts are still necessary in many areas because the overall provincial budget for education has remained flat, while rising costs — such as support staff wage increases, hydro cost increases, Medical Services Plan premiums and other mandatory benefit costs — are not being covered by the provincial government.

...

I am not against budget cuts as long as there are good justifications for them, but when it comes to our public education system, it baffles my mind that our provincial government is doing this year after year. IMO, there are very few government services that is as important as public education, and having cuts in this area just doesn't make sense.

I really don't want to turn this into yet another BC Liberals bashing thread, but the fact of the matter is, these guys have been at the helm of the province for the past what... 4 elections now? If they are not at least partly responsible for it, nobody else is. (Of course, voters who kept voting them in must bear at least some responsibility as well.)

[Mr.HappySilp]

Remember back in the early 90's? When the liberal wasn't in power, yea all the gov did was borrow future money so they can fund everything. When it comes to paying the bill everything went up 2 to 5times as much as before.

Also to you maybe education is the most important but to me reducing tax and increasing jobs are on top of my list. Everyone have different views and also there are only so much funding and everything cost money. So something have to be cut.

[Traum]

The NDP heyday in the 90's was one end of the pendulum. Currently, we're at the other end of the pendulum with the BC Liberals. Neither extreme is good, and if you cannot see that, there is something drastically wrong with you.

I did not say education is the most important thing -- I said it was one of the most important things, and that means there are other things that are also very important. Law and order + healthcare readily comes to mind. A few other supportive structures will probably make the list as well.

As far as your concerns of reducing tax and increasing job numbers, education clearly plays an important role in that, although the effects are not immediate. I hope you'd have enough vision to see a bigger picture.

[6o4__boi]

it's only gonna get worse...this has been going on for a while now.
you just have to look at classrooms today to see the extent of the problem. I really feel sorry for the kids who have learning disabilities as they are the ones who are impacted the most with all these cuts.

Remember when classes used to be strictly one grade? It's gonna get to the point where all classes are gonna be a mix of two and maybe more grades. Remember music class? That's probably gonna be history. Remember sports? ...and the list goes on.

If this isn't important in your books, I don't even know what to say.

[Ball.J.Inder]

I think they need to pay teachers more but increase class size and get rid of alot of jobs. I think elementary school requires teachers to have a lot of 1 on 1 with their students but in high school most kids don't need the teacher to babysit them therefore a big college lecture style should be good. And from my high school experience most highschool teachers now a days are a bunch of jerk offs anyway.

In my opinion I think secondary school should be limited to grade 10 with grade 11-12 being semi-optional to do college classes or college preparation.

Let's be honest; if you are 16 or 17 you may not know what you want to do as a career but you already know if you are planning on going to University or not.

[Yodamaster]

Classes are packed enough as it is.

[Hot Karl]

if we didn't spend so much money on bullshit hippy things we'd be fine.

approve a pipeline or 7. smash out a provincial park or 2 for resources. we have enough parks sitting around doing nothing. let's log some more trees. go drive around bc. you can go hours in packed forests and that's just off of main highways.

alberta is building new hospitals. we're consolidating ours. oil sands and the like are big bad and evil but they generate stupid income for the government.

[Tone Loc]

I did not say education is the most important thing -- I said it was one of the most important things, and that means there are other things that are also very important. Law and order + healthcare readily comes to mind. A few other supportive structures will probably make the list as well.

As far as your concerns of reducing tax and increasing job numbers, education clearly plays an important role in that, although the effects are not immediate. I hope you'd have enough vision to see a bigger picture.

This. Don't really understand how increasing jobs take priority over education, if the new workforce (i.e., kids who are in school now) lacks the skills and education to fill these positions, the gov't/private companies are going to recruit foreign workers to come here instead... and that isn't good for anybody.

It's sad that this is what's happening to our education system, I remember when I was in HS, all the parent-teacher associations were against split-grade classes when it seems to be the norm now. Classes are over-crowded and children aren't getting the attention/education they deserve, ESPECIALLY "trouble kids" (family issues, violence, alcoholism/drug abuse, etc.) who will eventually grow up without the proper help and create a large drain on social services. IMO, a good, well-funded education system is integral to a functioning society.

[Lomac]

The education program is one area that should be allowed to run a deficit.

[Soundy]

I hear the teachers are planning strike action. They say it's about class sizes but for some reason their demands always include pay raises. They're so worried about budget cuts to the schools, maybe they should lay off on the salaries and instead make it a bargaining condition that that money go into the school coffers themselves.

[tonyzoomzoom]

^^^ that would be ideal; but as far as the teacher's union goes, it's all about $$ in their members' pockets.

I'm sure not all teachers feel the same way about this; but that's union thinking for you :)

[Drow]

I hear the teachers are planning strike action. They say it's about class sizes but for some reason their demands always include pay raises. They're so worried about budget cuts to the schools, maybe they should lay off on the salaries and instead make it a bargaining condition that that money go into the school coffers themselves.

when aren't the teachers planning on striking?

[Soundy]

when aren't the teachers planning on striking?
True that... more specifically then, as of about three hours ago, they HAVE served strike notice:

The BC Teachers Union will serve 72 hour "low level job action" notice. Job action targets administration and the union says students will not be affected. The job action begins Wednesday April 23rd. Talks at the table are going nowhere according to union President Jim Iker.

[iEatClams]

It's okay, we don't need to worry about educating our youths, they can just graduate to work at mcdonalds and retail jobs.

ohh wait, sorry, the Temporary Foreign Workers program already took that away.

Seriously, some of the policies our governments have made recently are just fucking stupid.

[tiger_handheld]

Budget cuts? What ?



West Vancouver Secondary School is phasing in mobile devices for its high school students, becoming the first school in the district to require iPads or similar tablet computers in the classroom.
The tablets will be requested for students in Grade 8 and 9 and encouraged for those in Grade 10, according to the school district when school starts in September.
West Vancouver Secondary is the first of three high schools in the district that will require students to use mobile tablets this September. Sentinel High School is expected to announce its plan soon, followed by Rockridge Secondary.
Steve Rauh, the principal of West Vancouver Secondary says he understands that not all families will be able to afford to send each of their child into classes with a mobile devices.
But he says the school has made provisions to help those families who can't buy tablets.
"I'm anticipating certainly that there will be families that we will support and I've set aside some money to purchase devices that we will loan them for the year."
District officials say more than 90 per cent of students in the elementary schools already have a device and access technology in classrooms.
Tracey Dignum, who has three children going to school in the district, says after seeing how her youngest son uses a device in class, her concerns about internet safety have been met.
"Can I trust it will be safe? Can I trust that he won't be gaming or doing inappropriate things on the internet? So I've had the luxury of seeing that it does work," says Dignum.



source: iPads, tablets required for West Van high school students - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ipads-tablets-required-for-west-van-high-school-students-1.2607006?cmp=rss)

[iEatClams]

^^^ that would be ideal; but as far as the teacher's union goes, it's all about $$ in their members' pockets.

I'm sure not all teachers feel the same way about this; but that's union thinking for you :)

There's a lot of uneducated union bashing in this thread. Yes there are MANY drawbacks of unions, and I'm not a fan of them. But they are a NECESSITY nowadays.

If not for unions, we'd all be working 60 + hours a week, working weekends and basically have on rights.

Unions are the reasons we have things such as "breaks", and "weekends" and an actual 40 hour work week.

I see soo many people that think Everyone should be working 60 + hours a week with no breaks and no worker rights. This isnt a 3rd world country. This isnt acceptable in the western world.


In the case of the teachers, they are only offered a 5.5% raise over 5 years, with the first few years being 0%. so it becomes effectively less than 1%.

Normally teachers want 4-5% increase a year, but lets face it, they are public servants, and realistically, should be only getting 2% a year wage increases that somewhat matches inflation.

[godwin]

Demographics have changed in BC, some places like downtown core needs more schools vs say West Van. Unfortunately once a school had been opened, it seems to be sacrilegious to close them, even if it is half full or use energy like it is the 1950s.

I would blame the pension short fall and 2008 for causing a lot of older teachers staying at their jobs longer the planners had plan. I know a teacher who is 75 just retired last year. There are a lot more teachers being churned out these days.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Ok where are the fundings going to come from? You only have so much, unless you take fundings from other areas or raise taxes.

Since all of you are saying educations are so important and it needs the fundings it needs where would you cut fundings to support the education system or would you rather raise taxes?

[twdm]

Ok where are the fundings going to come from? You only have so much, unless you take fundings from other areas or raise taxes.

Since all of you are saying educations are so important and it needs the fundings it needs where would you cut fundings to support the education system or would you rather raise taxes?

You for one, could have done with some more funding for your education. We should just add a cell phone levy. Kids nowadays all have the newest iphones etc. They might as well contribute to their own education.:troll:

[PiuYi]

why can't we import some high-paying foreign students? like what they do in universities


semi-srs.

[Tone Loc]

Ok where are the fundings going to come from? You only have so much, unless you take fundings from other areas or raise taxes.

Since all of you are saying educations are so important and it needs the fundings it needs where would you cut fundings to support the education system or would you rather raise taxes?

I personally don't agree with raising taxes again. The taxes we pay in BC, especially for things like gasoline, are already too high.

What I DO see however, are corporate bigwigs in Crown corporations taking away huge salaries and bonuses (such as Canada Post, BC Ferries, ICBC, etc.) even though many of these crown or gov't-subsidized corporations are running at a deficit, or are being ran with little to no efficiency. Seriously, Canada Post abolishing door-to-door delivery? What the hell is the point of mail then. I might as well use UPS/Fedex/Purolator.

It's not the most popular idea, but I personally would sleep easier at night knowing my future children will have a first-world education rather than some CEO not being able to afford a winter home in Tahiti...

And like someone said above, it's time to really utilize our MASSIVE, and by massive, I mean more than some developed nations, environmental resources. Log some trees, approve a pipeline, start digging for oil in BC, for BC so we can lower the prices of fuel.

You may not see where the money can be found for education, but I do... on my commute into downtown every day. Stupid things like bike lanes when we should be building more resources for inner-city and "trouble kids" like I mentioned above. Because that's who will cause the biggest drain on our social services once they come of age, and we could be nipping their problems in the bud.

[godwin]

A lot of schools at the suburbs do it like Tri Cities SD 43.. they found out the hard way that without prestige.. they lose a crap load of money.

Teachers should just stick with freaking teach.. leave the entrepreneurship to people who know what the hell they are doing.

why can't we import some high-paying foreign students? like what they do in universities


semi-srs.

[bing]

I personally don't agree with raising taxes again. The taxes we pay in BC, especially for things like gasoline, are already too high.

What I DO see however, are corporate bigwigs in Crown corporations taking away huge salaries and bonuses (such as Canada Post, BC Ferries, ICBC, etc.) even though many of these crown or gov't-subsidized corporations are running at a deficit, or are being ran with little to no efficiency. Seriously, Canada Post abolishing door-to-door delivery? What the hell is the point of mail then. I might as well use UPS/Fedex/Purolator.

It's not the most popular idea, but I personally would sleep easier at night knowing my future children will have a first-world education rather than some CEO not being able to afford a winter home in Tahiti...

And like someone said above, it's time to really utilize our MASSIVE, and by massive, I mean more than some developed nations, environmental resources. Log some trees, approve a pipeline, start digging for oil in BC, for BC so we can lower the prices of fuel.

You may not see where the money can be found for education, but I do... on my commute into downtown every day. Stupid things like bike lanes when we should be building more resources for inner-city and "trouble kids" like I mentioned above. Because that's who will cause the biggest drain on our social services once they come of age, and we could be nipping their problems in the bud.

The CEOs at the Crown corporations you mentioned have very reasonable salaries; were only talking at the mid range in the hundreds of thousands each. The average person needs to stop comparing that with their own situation and thinking "boy, does that number look big" when they have no idea what an executive even does. If you want to play comparisons, let's bring in everything from level of responsibility, experience, education, leadership abilities, skill sets, work related pressures, hours of work, travel, community involvement, etc. Then suddenly, the picture looks quite fair.

Any less pay and the CEO is making as much as a Future shop store manager lol... at that point, you might as well just work in the private sector and leave crappy talent running these companies. Tell me, what is John Chen's pay package for only ATTEMPTING to turn around Blackberry? 88 million. Case closed.

[noclue]

What I DO see however, are corporate bigwigs in Crown corporations taking away huge salaries and bonuses (such as Canada Post, BC Ferries, ICBC, etc.) even though many of these crown or gov't-subsidized corporations are running at a deficit, or are being ran with little to no efficiency. Seriously, Canada Post abolishing door-to-door delivery? What the hell is the point of mail then. I might as well use UPS/Fedex/Purolator.

It's not the most popular idea, but I personally would sleep easier at night knowing my future children will have a first-world education rather than some CEO not being able to afford a winter home in Tahiti...



Actually for a CEO managing a company the size of crown corporations they are being paid cheap, plus they have a deficit because they are not allowed to cut unprofitable ventures. If you look at translink's numbers, they are actually managed really well aside from the smart card fiasco. Also CEO's of crown corporations dont get compensated with stock options for obvious reasons

And as for unions, they were necessary back in the days but in modern times the cons outweigh the benefits. The employment standards act is really strict and does most of the concept of unions (mediations, arbitrations).

[tiger_handheld]

The CEOs at the Crown corporations you mentioned have very reasonable salaries; were only talking at the mid range in the hundreds of thousands each. The average person needs to stop comparing that with their own situation and thinking "boy, does that number look big" when they have no idea what an executive even does. If you want to play comparisons, let's bring in everything from level of responsibility, experience, education, leadership abilities, skill sets, work related pressures, hours of work, travel, community involvement, etc. Then suddenly, the picture looks quite fair.

Any less pay and the CEO is making as much as a Future shop store manager lol... at that point, you might as well just work in the private sector and leave crappy talent running these companies. Tell me, what is John Chen's pay package for only ATTEMPTING to turn around Blackberry? 88 million. Case closed.

The biggest different between Blackberry and BC Ferries ; ICBC ; CP is the gov't corporations are monopolies where Blackberry is in a competitive market. I have no problem paying the CEO of RBC a billion dollars if that is what it takes to increase market share and profits of shareholders. FOR ICBC who is the competition? BINGS insurance? Last I checked everyone in this province HAS to get basic insurance from ICBC - no ifs, no buts. Same for BC ferries, how are you going to get your Okanagan apples to Victoria? Air Freight? Canada Post is an oligopoly because of FED EX and UPS. Purolator is their sub. SO can any half witted CEO run a monopoly - you tell me why not? The travel , the "leadership" , work related pressure? (you mean 8-4 out the door mentality? unless in a criss ). So get rid of the over paying and hire someone reasonable OR privatize and see if those salaries are sustainable - the market will decide.

The whole problem is that People who make decisions get paid 10x more than the average individual. SO when making 100k a year paying $3 for a toll is a drop in the bucke, hell paying even $5 for toll is no problem, but making 40k a year it starts to matter.

[multicartual]

I really feel sorry for the kids who have learning disabilities as they are the ones who are impacted the most with all these cuts.


Why? We need Wal-Mart greeters, people who can do dishes and serve those with money

[bing]

The biggest different between Blackberry and BC Ferries ; ICBC ; CP is the gov't corporations are monopolies where Blackberry is in a competitive market. I have no problem paying the CEO of RBC a billion dollars if that is what it takes to increase market share and profits of shareholders. FOR ICBC who is the competition? BINGS insurance? Last I checked everyone in this province HAS to get basic insurance from ICBC - no ifs, no buts. Same for BC ferries, how are you going to get your Okanagan apples to Victoria? Air Freight? Canada Post is an oligopoly because of FED EX and UPS. Purolator is their sub. SO can any half witted CEO run a monopoly - you tell me why not? The travel , the "leadership" , work related pressure? (you mean 8-4 out the door mentality? unless in a criss ). So get rid of the over paying and hire someone reasonable OR privatize and see if those salaries are sustainable - the market will decide.

The whole problem is that People who make decisions get paid 10x more than the average individual. SO when making 100k a year paying $3 for a toll is a drop in the bucke, hell paying even $5 for toll is no problem, but making 40k a year it starts to matter.

Having a monopoly doesn't mean things are going to be easy as a Crown corporation. An obvious drawback is having a public mandate to provide public services even when they are unprofitable. For example, can BC ferries cancel unprofitable sailing routes?

Let me ask you, how many CEOs do you personally know? what CEO gets 8-4? LOL. My boss in middle level management doesn't even get those hours. The fact you said that makes you lose credibility. Most people think $500k salary is a lot of money because the average person makes $38k and they haven't seen big $ before. For every one qualified CEO, there are thousands of average individuals. Is this a shock that they are paid "10" times more? So can any "half-wit" run a company? Most people can't even get into middle management.

[bing]

These replies are courtesy of MindBomber back when BC Ferries was discussed on these boards in 2012, which I thought were very apt.

Originally Posted by Gridlock:
^^I thought that too, then I thought "whats that bonus structure look like?"

The government passed legislation last year to cap B.C. Ferries executives' salaries; Corrigan can earn a maximum of $563,000 next year.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business...854/story.html

For comparison, Sean Durfy, ex-CEO of WestJet , earned a base salary of $535,000, and total compensation of $2,198,422.


They are losing money on sailing a scheduled sailing even if the passengers don't show up. Well, come on guys, you've been at this for 20 years, you should know by now when people are going to be there and when they aren't.$
Following Thanksgiving weekend, 98 sailings are being dropped. Great news!

Even better news, BC Ferries was originally seeking to drop 400 sailings, which indicates to me that BC Ferries isn't being run by idiots...

...unfortunately the province is run by idiots, who instead ordered an additional $20 million a year in subsidies.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...ries-cuts.html


Originally Posted by Manic! View Post
Whats so complex? It's not like they are adding new routes or have stiff competition. They pretty much have know competition. They have been doing the exact same thing for the last 20 plus years.

The logistics involved with operating a fleet of passenger ferries is a monumental task; managing general maintenance and breakdowns without impacting the schedule; regulating a supply of everything from replacement parts to fuel to food; crewing the vessel with people capable of captaining, navigating, and maintaining a ferry, and even doing the menial tasks but with the specific safety certifications required; keeping current passengers happy; attracting new passengers.

I see a lot of similarities between the role of an airline CEO and our ferry CEO; the obvious difference being the lack of competition faced by BC Ferries easing some aspects of the job, but airlines get to pick and choose the routes they operate on where BC Ferries has a fixed set adding a pretty significant challenge. Oh, and most airlines bleed money and often go bankrupt, coincidence?

[iEatClams]

These replies are courtesy of MindBomber back when BC Ferries was discussed on these boards in 2012, which I thought were very apt.



The government passed legislation last year to cap B.C. Ferries executives' salaries; Corrigan can earn a maximum of $563,000 next year.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business...854/story.html

For comparison, Sean Durfy, ex-CEO of WestJet , earned a base salary of $535,000, and total compensation of $2,198,422.



Even better news, BC Ferries was originally seeking to drop 400 sailings, which indicates to me that BC Ferries isn't being run by idiots...

...unfortunately the province is run by idiots, who instead ordered an additional $20 million a year in subsidies.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...ries-cuts.html



The logistics involved with operating a fleet of passenger ferries is a monumental task; managing general maintenance and breakdowns without impacting the schedule; regulating a supply of everything from replacement parts to fuel to food; crewing the vessel with people capable of captaining, navigating, and maintaining a ferry, and even doing the menial tasks but with the specific safety certifications required; keeping current passengers happy; attracting new passengers.

I see a lot of similarities between the role of an airline CEO and our ferry CEO; the obvious difference being the lack of competition faced by BC Ferries easing some aspects of the job, but airlines get to pick and choose the routes they operate on where BC Ferries has a fixed set adding a pretty significant challenge. Oh, and most airlines bleed money and often go bankrupt, coincidence?

a lot of BC ferries operations are mandated by the government. if I were the CEO, i would cut all non profitable routes up north, but obviously the government doesnt want that.

I think reduced sailings for those routes are a good start. Perhaps they can restructure their bargaining so that they have more flexible - ie. seasonal - type structure where more sailings take place during peak seasons and less sailings during slow periods.

[iEatClams]

its tough to manage the teachers as there are enrollment issues, school upgrades, and even the education system in BC isnt that great. Why is there not more training towards trades and apprenticeships? I heard woodworks and mechanics / sewing / cooking etc and those type of classes are starting to get eliminated. I found those classes to be some of the most useful imo.

what about a basic financial literacy course so we dont have students going into massive debt.

I think more money into the right programs would help better future generations. By that I mean a shift in money as we dont really have "more money".

[Tone Loc]

its tough to manage the teachers as there are enrollment issues, school upgrades, and even the education system in BC isnt that great. Why is there not more training towards trades and apprenticeships? I heard woodworks and mechanics / sewing / cooking etc and those type of classes are starting to get eliminated. I found those classes to be some of the most useful imo.

what about a basic financial literacy course so we dont have students going into massive debt.

I think more money into the right programs would help better future generations. By that I mean a shift in money as we dont really have "more money".

This. IMO taking away trades programs and home-ec stuff makes no sense when it is being replaced by courses like pre-calculus. I knew by about grade 10-11 that I didn't want to get into a career involving higher-level mathematics, I personally don't think it should be mandatory coursework when I am willing to bet a large majority of HS students will not use that in post-secondary or career-type applications unless they are going into Engineering or Sciences. Obviously the counter-argument is that kids need mathematics skills to balance their budgets, plan financially, etc... but personally I think that something like financial planning, accounting, or basic economics would serve them much better.

[godwin]

Because those classes require the most capital outlay and also currently serve people are not academically inclined / with problems.. First the teaching tools are expensive. Not to mention the majority of the high school kids taking them are not the brightest (borderline remedial).. teachers get burnt out really quick and realize they can do much better actually doing a trade than to teach them, so there is always a shortage. Just compare the cost of a shop class vs say an English lit / history class, that's before the insurance etc.

its tough to manage the teachers as there are enrollment issues, school upgrades, and even the education system in BC isnt that great. Why is there not more training towards trades and apprenticeships? I heard woodworks and mechanics / sewing / cooking etc and those type of classes are starting to get eliminated. I found those classes to be some of the most useful imo.

what about a basic financial literacy course so we dont have students going into massive debt.

I think more money into the right programs would help better future generations. By that I mean a shift in money as we dont really have "more money".

[westopher]

If not for unions, we'd all be working 60 + hours a week, working weekends and basically have on rights.

You just described my life.:okay:
Unions are definitely a necessity in some circumstances, however, they often protect the wrong people. Seniority shouldn't come before results. There are people my wife works with in the nurses union that are genuine piles of shit that can never be fired because of that fucking union. Their negligence has literally killed people and they still get paid to go to work. Or look at the fucking police force. Unions need to have a little reality and common sense injected into them, as the world isn't black and white.

[iEatClams]

You just described my life.:okay:
Unions are definitely a necessity in some circumstances, however, they often protect the wrong people. Seniority shouldn't come before results. There are people my wife works with in the nurses union that are genuine piles of shit that can never be fired because of that fucking union. Their negligence has literally killed people and they still get paid to go to work. Or look at the fucking police force. Unions need to have a little reality and common sense injected into them, as the world isn't black and white.

yup I totally agree, and this is what I hate about the unions. police officers, you do something stupid and your punishment is suspension WITH pay. same goes for other unions, it protects the wrong people. There's also no accountability and too much reliance on seniority. In any other industry those individuals would be fired.

but because many companies ignore labour laws and their incentives to maximize profits and reduce wages, unions are unfortunately a necessity.

[iEatClams]

Because those classes require the most capital outlay and also currently serve people are not academically inclined / with problems.. First the teaching tools are expensive. Not to mention the majority of the high school kids taking them are not the brightest (borderline remedial).. teachers get burnt out really quick and realize they can do much better actually doing a trade than to teach them, so there is always a shortage. Just compare the cost of a shop class vs say an English lit / history class, that's before the insurance etc.

I remember when I was in highschool, we had to pay certain fees and such for some of the classes for materials. Why have some portions of it subsidized and thus make the students pay a nominal fee to offset some of these costs.

If you can teach a math 12 class you should be able to teach a basic budgeting / economics / financial literacy course.

Germany invests heavily in trades and apprenticeships and look how they're doing.

[godwin]

The school board has to supply everything for free (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/court-clamps-down-on-b-c-school-fees-1.600292), no fees allow.

Yeah, Germany also provides free education up to PhD too.. what's your point? They also have 60%+ effective tax rate on everyone.

The reality is the US is our analogy to Germany, we are France or Poland at best.

I remember when I was in highschool, we had to pay certain fees and such for some of the classes for materials. Why have some portions of it subsidized and thus make the students pay a nominal fee to offset some of these costs.

If you can teach a math 12 class you should be able to teach a basic budgeting / economics / financial literacy course.

Germany invests heavily in trades and apprenticeships and look how they're doing.

[Manic!]

A lot of wasteful spending in school districts. All administrators in Surrey got free Ipads so they could keep op with technology last year. This year they got free laptops there choice of Macs or PC's. Nanaimo is spending money on making there vehicles carbon neutral.

[tiger_handheld]

Having a monopoly doesn't mean things are going to be easy as a Crown corporation. An obvious drawback is having a public mandate to provide public services even when they are unprofitable. For example, can BC ferries cancel unprofitable sailing routes?

Let me ask you, how many CEOs do you personally know? what CEO gets 8-4? LOL. My boss in middle level management doesn't even get those hours. The fact you said that makes you lose credibility. Most people think $500k salary is a lot of money because the average person makes $38k and they haven't seen big $ before. For every one qualified CEO, there are thousands of average individuals. Is this a shock that they are paid "10" times more? So can any "half-wit" run a company? Most people can't even get into middle management.


Running ICBC is a hell of a lot easier than running an insurance company in Ontario where it's privatized. I'm sure you agree.

Ok fine the CEO 8-4 is a bit of stretch - I'll give you that. But really, the mandate of crown corps is to break even at most. Profits are a bonus.

Salaries and Wages are the biggest expense on any P&L no matter the type of business. So if your biggest expense is salary and your staff are unionized aside from renegotiating your union rates, what else is there to cut next? Management wages. Take a read about the JAL CEO. JAL is a crown corp I believe since they are the national carrier - don't quote me on that though. I think they also have ANA. Anyways, I'm not saying be that extreme, I'm saying be reasonable. Why do you think Unions want such high rates? Because the tone is set at the top -if the CEO makes 500k why can't my janitor make 50k and the cook 75? If the CEO takes 125k the rest of the wages will fall into line.

Crown corporations are the epitome of inefficiency because of all the red tape and bs.

And you say most people can't even get into middle management, that is because Unions are based on seniority not merit. All the crowns corps that are in discussion have unions for staff.

And you say having a monopoly isn't easy even as a crown corp. Damn, there must be something wrong then cuz if you run it efficiently, you have a license to print money.

[godwin]

Actually any chief and presidents are not unionized. They are likely to have law degrees. If you pay lawyer wages for the top 20 people, quarter a mill / person is not that much. Lawyer wages are 300-400/hour.

If you want top job at crown corporation, the quickest way is not to join a union, but to go to law school and build your connections there.

Running ICBC is a hell of a lot easier than running an insurance company in Ontario where it's privatized. I'm sure you agree.

Ok fine the CEO 8-4 is a bit of stretch - I'll give you that. But really, the mandate of crown corps is to break even at most. Profits are a bonus.

Salaries and Wages are the biggest expense on any P&L no matter the type of business. So if your biggest expense is salary and your staff are unionized aside from renegotiating your union rates, what else is there to cut next? Management wages. Take a read about the JAL CEO. JAL is a crown corp I believe since they are the national carrier - don't quote me on that though. I think they also have ANA. Anyways, I'm not saying be that extreme, I'm saying be reasonable. Why do you think Unions want such high rates? Because the tone is set at the top -if the CEO makes 500k why can't my janitor make 50k and the cook 75? If the CEO takes 125k the rest of the wages will fall into line.

Crown corporations are the epitome of inefficiency because of all the red tape and bs.

And you say most people can't even get into middle management, that is because Unions are based on seniority not merit. All the crowns corps that are in discussion have unions for staff.

And you say having a monopoly isn't easy even as a crown corp. Damn, there must be something wrong then cuz if you run it efficiently, you have a license to print money.

[bing]

Running ICBC is a hell of a lot easier than running an insurance company in Ontario where it's privatized. I'm sure you agree.

What exactly are you basing this assertion on?

Ok fine the CEO 8-4 is a bit of stretch - I'll give you that. But really, the mandate of crown corps is to break even at most. Profits are a bonus.

Why would someone work his ass off for years only to sit there at the top? Doing an excellent job enhances your reputation and can lead to other lucrative opportunities in the form of being headhunted to work at other companies. Being mediocre would be career suicide. How long do companies keep a shitty CEO who continually can't meet metrics? what do you report to the board? you think being a CEO once makes you entitled to be a CEO elsewhere?

Salaries and Wages are the biggest expense on any P&L no matter the type of business. So if your biggest expense is salary and your staff are unionized aside from renegotiating your union rates, what else is there to cut next? Management wages. Take a read about the JAL CEO. JAL is a crown corp I believe since they are the national carrier - don't quote me on that though. I think they also have ANA. Anyways, I'm not saying be that extreme, I'm saying be reasonable. Why do you think Unions want such high rates? Because the tone is set at the top -if the CEO makes 500k why can't my janitor make 50k and the cook 75? If the CEO takes 125k the rest of the wages will fall into line.

What exactly are management salaries as a percentage of all costs? profits? employee salaries? I think reducing executive pay at the current pay scales would be more symbolic than anything (my opinion would be different if they made millions). I'd rather we attract stronger talent to come up with better strategies to increase revenue/decrease costs. I think your focus is too narrow.

Crown corporations are the epitome of inefficiency because of all the red tape and bs.

And you say most people can't even get into middle management, that is because Unions are based on seniority not merit. All the crowns corps that are in discussion have unions for staff.

Since when are management part of unions?

And you say having a monopoly isn't easy even as a crown corp. Damn, there must be something wrong then cuz if you run it efficiently, you have a license to print money.

The reality is that these are complex issues. You make it sound simple like it is so black & white. Monopoly environment + run company efficiently = profitable

[meowjinboo]

No offense to public teachers out there, but I'm going to make sure my son goes to a private school.

I went to one of the lowest ranking highschools in the province and that should say alot about the type of teachers there.

[tiger_handheld]

What exactly are you basing this assertion on?

Why would someone work his ass off for years only to sit there at the top? Doing an excellent job enhances your reputation and can lead to other lucrative opportunities in the form of being headhunted to work at other companies. Being mediocre would be career suicide. How long do companies keep a shitty CEO who continually can't meet metrics? what do you report to the board? you think being a CEO once makes you entitled to be a CEO elsewhere?

What exactly are management salaries as a percentage of all costs? profits? employee salaries? I think reducing executive pay at the current pay scales would be more symbolic than anything (my opinion would be different if they made millions). I'd rather we attract stronger talent to come up with better strategies to increase revenue/decrease costs. I think your focus is too narrow.

Since when are management part of unions?



The reality is that these are complex issues. You make it sound simple like it is so black & white. Monopoly environment + run company efficiently = profitable


My assertion is based on the fact that ICBC is a monopoly that has no competition. I'm sure you took an economics class , when is the market in equilibrium? In perfect competition or in monopoly state? What is the goal of every single for profit corporation? To wipe out the competition and take over the world - isn't that called a monopoly?



Why are shitty CEO's still running crown corps? I'm not saying I'm an expert but using the same metric as yours, what happened to the CEO's at Blackberry - they got canned after poor results. What's happening at ICBC Ferries Can Post ; CEO's are just sitting up to cutting services that affect the public. So is that a good CEO? For Years BC Ferries has been a sinking ship - no pun intended , I have not googled but I'm sure the CEO hasn't changed in a while.

I don't have exact percentages for you, and no I wont spend my time researching.

Management isn't part of a union, but didn't you say most people can't even make middle management? Usually, in the private sector, it goes customer service, supervisor, dept manager, manger. Usually, customer service the lowest are part of the union, and are promoted within to management. In a union environment I presume it works the same but rather than on merit its based on seniority. Joes been here 15 years lets make him dept manager but the new kid has a BBA in Technology from UBC has been here 3 years he's got 4 years experience at a similar firm in China, let's leave him in the mail room and move Ronny who's been here 6 years to supervisor.


If the reality is there are more complex issues and are not so black and white, the CEO's running the show are being paid way to much to not handle the complexities and such should be replaced or have their salaries lowered.

Edit: I just googled BC Ferries CEO just for kicks and came up on this info:


-BC Ferries spends about $12 on management and administrative overhead for every $1 spent on those costs by Washington State Ferries.
-BC Ferries executives, the ferry corporation’s board of directors announced last year that the incoming CEO’s annual compensation would be set at $500,730 for 2014, down markedly from the $915,000 paid in 2012.
Compare that reduced salary to the compensation Washington State Ferries pays its top executive — $152,000 a year with no bonuses because running the system efficiently, providing adequate service and achieving results is deemed the job description.

-disclaimer: Washington State Ferries, which operates under the state highways and transportation system and carries more passengers and vehicles (although with fewer vessels on generally shorter routes than in B.C.),

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Stephen+Hume+Ferries+bloated+inefficient+recession ary+drag+province/9520800/story.html

[Gumby]

Not sure if any of the thread contributors are parents, but I am one. My son is in Kindergarten and a few days ago we received this notice:


Dear Families of Quilchena,

The VSB has a 12.34 Million dollar budget shortfall this year.
The 2014 / 2015 preliminary budget ~ IF approved will have direct impact on our children at Quilchena.

IF approved ~ Quilchena students will lose:

Band & strings program
Complete loss of the program OR be required to pay $250 fee per student participating in the program.

Track + Field / Athletic Coordinator
The VSB member who in the past organized the track meets will lose their position. The track and field activity can still remain at the school level ALL inter school meets will be left to the individual schools to organize.

Additional school calendar days
The entire week surrounding Remembrance Day ~ school will be closed.
This would save on heating and electrical costs for the district and + 5 more minutes to the day for children (either taken from lunch or recess time or added at the end of the day).

District pay parking
The VSB is also putting forward the proposal to change all the current free teacher’s parking into third party public pay parking lots. This would mean it will be a non taxable expense for teachers to park at the school. It will also put pressure on residential parking with the end result being residential permit parking in the area.

These are only a couple examples of how the proposed cutbacks will effect Quilchena.

So I will be directly affected by this budget cut.

Meanwhile, yesterday my son brought home a notice that asked for $52 to pay for the following:

Physical Education Enrichment
Gymnastics $10
Hip-hop $11

Class Room Activities
Button blanket project $9
Bookbinding project $22

I certainly cannot afford to send him to a private school, but fortunately I can pay for these "school fees"...

[Manic!]

$22 for Book binding come on now. Who the hell needs to learn how to bind a book.

[bing]

My assertion is based on the fact that ICBC is a monopoly that has no competition. I'm sure you took an economics class , when is the market in equilibrium? In perfect competition or in monopoly state? What is the goal of every single for profit corporation? To wipe out the competition and take over the world - isn't that called a monopoly?



Why are shitty CEO's still running crown corps? I'm not saying I'm an expert but using the same metric as yours, what happened to the CEO's at Blackberry - they got canned after poor results. What's happening at ICBC Ferries Can Post ; CEO's are just sitting up to cutting services that affect the public. So is that a good CEO? For Years BC Ferries has been a sinking ship - no pun intended , I have not googled but I'm sure the CEO hasn't changed in a while.

I don't have exact percentages for you, and no I wont spend my time researching.

Management isn't part of a union, but didn't you say most people can't even make middle management? Usually, in the private sector, it goes customer service, supervisor, dept manager, manger. Usually, customer service the lowest are part of the union, and are promoted within to management. In a union environment I presume it works the same but rather than on merit its based on seniority. Joes been here 15 years lets make him dept manager but the new kid has a BBA in Technology from UBC has been here 3 years he's got 4 years experience at a similar firm in China, let's leave him in the mail room and move Ronny who's been here 6 years to supervisor.


If the reality is there are more complex issues and are not so black and white, the CEO's running the show are being paid way to much to not handle the complexities and such should be replaced or have their salaries lowered.

Edit: I just googled BC Ferries CEO just for kicks and came up on this info:


-BC Ferries spends about $12 on management and administrative overhead for every $1 spent on those costs by Washington State Ferries.
-BC Ferries executives, the ferry corporation’s board of directors announced last year that the incoming CEO’s annual compensation would be set at $500,730 for 2014, down markedly from the $915,000 paid in 2012.
Compare that reduced salary to the compensation Washington State Ferries pays its top executive — $152,000 a year with no bonuses because running the system efficiently, providing adequate service and achieving results is deemed the job description.

-disclaimer: Washington State Ferries, which operates under the state highways and transportation system and carries more passengers and vehicles (although with fewer vessels on generally shorter routes than in B.C.),

Stephen Hume: BC Ferries a bloated, inefficient and recessionary drag on the province (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Stephen+Hume+Ferries+bloated+inefficient+recession ary+drag+province/9520800/story.html)

Ouch, 152k is charity. Even our police officers here make 6 figures with overtime. My buddy as a store manager makes just under that.

My uncle, President of a major market, runs a similar sized division of an American corporation in terms of revenue compared to BC Ferries and he is making much more than double that.

[Traum]

No offense to public teachers out there, but I'm going to make sure my son goes to a private school.

I hope you have big savings set aside. West Point Gray Academy charges something like $20k a year for tuition. And then there are additional fees and PTA fund raisers and stuff. (I think parents are required to contribute to the school one way or another -- either financially, or get involved with time effort and stuff.) St. Francais Xavier is one of the cheaper private schools, but the place seemed really chaotic when I visited quite a few years ago.

[CharlesInCharge]

http://img.pandawhale.com/14603-Ynneigif-g3Rw.gif

[tiger_handheld]

Ouch, 152k is charity. Even our police officers here make 6 figures with overtime. My buddy as a store manager makes just under that.

My uncle, President of a major market, runs a similar sized division of an American corporation in terms of revenue compared to BC Ferries and he is making much more than double that.

Good for your uncle. Like Cubes said, you gotta work as if someone out there is working 24/7 take everything away from you. That is the private sector mentality and again why the wages are so damn high but also justified.

Based on your reply I presume you see where I was coming from regarding crown corps.

[twitchyzero]

ouch wage rollbacks for walkouts

Government responds with lockout and salary reductions to BC teacher?s strike escalation | Globalnews.ca (http://globalnews.ca/news/1346196/government-responds-with-lockout-and-salary-reductions-to-bc-teachers-strike-escalation/)

[Traum]

First it was Bill 28, then Bill 22, and now this?! Hasn't the stupid BC Liberals government learned anything from previous court rulings?

The January decision from the BC Supreme Court has pretty much ruled that the provincial government can't unilaterally change the terms of the teacher's CBA through legislation. And here they are trying the same (or at least, similar) thing again?! Just how fxxking much of our tax dollars and legislative resources does the BC Liberals government want to waste on legal fees when precedence has already shown us that there is a good chance they will get their a$$ sued and lose?

I am going to keep iterating the same thing over and over and over again -- to those who have voted the BC Liberals back in for yet another 4 years, look what you have brought onto us... :yuno:

[CRS]

To be fair, I think both the Libs and teacher union negotiated in bad faith.

The teachers union thought that the NDP was going to go in power and so they'd get everything they wanted in 1 year and the Libs wanted things to end.

They both gambled and the teachers were on the losing end.

[quasi]

I am going to keep iterating the same thing over and over and over again -- to those who have voted the BC Liberals back in for yet another 4 years, look what you have brought onto us... :yuno:

The only reason the Liberals got back in is because Adrian Dix couldn't lead a gangbang in a whorehouse. The NDP probably could have had a Pet Rock as the head of the party and done better, that's on them. I'm ok with the Government not giving public sector unions an open cheque book, I'll take my licks.

[Traum]

^^ True, Adrian Dix was as useless as an NDP leader could possibly be.
:facepalm:

[4444]

most important part of education is at home, not in the classroom.

don't get me wrong, teachers and infrastructure is really important... BUT i think parents are failing their kids.

as a kid, i remember my parents being interested in my school work, my development, my education - testing me, pushing me (healthily, as they knew i was very smart) - and because of this, i have continued my education through to age 31 and have a very fulfilling career... i was not pushed like that by teachers.

a teacher is a tool to be used, but nothing more. let's not lose the tool, but equally, i won't lose sleep over this

[underscore]

Budget cuts? What ?

Tablets? What the ever loving fuck? The last thing a school should be wasting money on is "keeping up with technology". The tech needs of schools are very basic, they should spend money of teaching kids how to properly file taxes, not how to play Angry Birds.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Tablets? What the ever loving fuck? The last thing a school should be wasting money on is "keeping up with technology". The tech needs of schools are very basic, they should spend money of teaching kids how to properly file taxes, not how to play Angry Birds.

Still don't get why kids needs tablets to learn. I read a reports that kids these days can swipe fine but can't use building blocks to build anything. Also it seems to me kids these days can't write very well (seems their hand writing is very bad). My aunts basically limit her son to only 2 hours of ipad/computer a week now vs the tenants who let her sons play with their ipad all day long.

I notice my aunt's son is more active, love to go outside and play sports and have more to talk about while tenants' sons just sit there and doesn't talk to you and keep playing with his ipad........

[underscore]

Spoiler alert: They don't. Grade school has nothing to do with technology aside from some specialty highschool classes (but even for those, you can build a pretty solid computer for the price of one POS tablet). Basic PC's with Word, Excel, Powerpoint are all you need for 95+% of school education. Shit I graduated in 2007 and I still remember teachers booking time in the library computer labs for a class to do research the odd time it was needed.

[Nabatron]

^thats exactly how my relative kid is! He's only 2 and kid plays on the iphone all day and when you try and take it away from him he cries and throws a temper tantrum...I just shake my head...

[inv4zn]

I remember I threw a tantrum when my dad turned off my video game because I went over my time limit...

He threw the thing away in front of my eyes (he didn't really, it turns out, he pretended to and then hid it for 6 months or something before giving it back to me) - never threw a tantrum again.

/offtopic.

[quasi]

Still don't get why kids needs tablets to learn. I read a reports that kids these days can swipe fine but can't use building blocks to build anything. Also it seems to me kids these days can't write very well (seems their hand writing is very bad). My aunts basically limit her son to only 2 hours of ipad/computer a week now vs the tenants who let her sons play with their ipad all day long.

I notice my aunt's son is more active, love to go outside and play sports and have more to talk about while tenants' sons just sit there and doesn't talk to you and keep playing with his ipad........

It's all about balance I don't really think there is anything wrong with kids and technology as long as it doesn't run their lives. My son has his own computer and consoles, plays video games as well as an ipod but the time is monitored.

He also plays football 2 hours, 4 days a week during July-Oct, Laccross 1.5 hours 3 days a week Feb-June and swims in between. Above that he has to read to either my wife or myself every single night, because of this he can read at a high level above his age.

You have to keep on kids or they'll take the path of least resistance. My kid loves video games and he plays them I would say almost everyday but it's balanced out with exercise and other things to stimulate his mind.

[freakshow]

Kids should definitely not be deprived of technology, but I certainly don't think an elementary school (or high school) needs to buy iPads just so they are 'up to date'

[iEatClams]

^thats exactly how my relative kid is! He's only 2 and kid plays on the iphone all day and when you try and take it away from him he cries and throws a temper tantrum...I just shake my head...

I remember I threw a tantrum when my dad turned off my video game because I went over my time limit...

He threw the thing away in front of my eyes (he didn't really, it turns out, he pretended to and then hid it for 6 months or something before giving it back to me) - never threw a tantrum again.

/offtopic.

Yes this is off topic, but I think I blame this on blame parenting.

Actually, I blame a lot of today's problems on bad parenting. What does the kid know? It's the parents that enable the kids and buy them iphones and ipads when they are 5-6 years old.

When I was a kid, if I threw a tantrum, I would get my ass kicked. or the equivalent of what happened to inv4zn.


- I think it's because parents didnt grew up with all these goods and want the best for their kids, ie. so they spoil them. but this in fact might be harming their kids as it makes them spoiled brats.

- also I think parents these days also want their kids to grow up doing white collar jobs, and thus persuade them to do such work, but they dont know that there's LOTS of money to be made in the trades and that trade work is actually a lot easier than in the past due to safety regulations, technology, more set hours, or unions.

overall, I think we should be getting more kids into trades and such instead of "psychology" and "philosophy" majors. just my two cents.

[shenmecar]

I support teachers. They're probably one of the lowest paid professions out there that require a degree. Not a lot of people will know this but teachers put a lot of overtime in preparing lesson plans, marking assignments/test and whatnot. Teachers don't become a teacher for money, they do so because they enjoy teaching. Like the posts above have said, some parents these days DEPEND on teachers to do parenting for them. Imagine having to be a parent to 30 kids simultaneously..........

I don't think frivolous spending on tablets are justified, but neither is cutting back on teachers' salaries and laying off teachers that run extracurricular programs.

[meme405]

Having access to the latest technology is important in the classroom. Maybe not so much in elementary school but most definitely in high school.

I am a testament to the fact that technological prowess is an immediate advantage over other people when hunting for a job or to simplify daily tasks at work. The amount of automation I build into my daily routines thanks to my computer and technology increases my productivity greatly. This is directly stemming from the fact that I started using computers and tech so early on, and always had the latest gear at my disposal.

Someone above stated the most key point though, the classroom is one thing, but learning in the household is certainly just as important, if not more so.

And parents today are failing their children. I remember getting my ass whooped, or at least guilt tripped when I would bring home garbage grades. My parents were always on me about HW, or school stuff, or education. Without them being there, I wouldn't have had the motivation to do half of it.

EDIT: And inv4zn, my dad did the same thing. I played this one game a bunch, and I remember I did something bad one day, and my dad pulled the game out of the computer and broke the CD in front of my face. That probably straightened my ass out for a few months.

[quasi]

^^

To that point, if the technology is useful I really don't see a problem with it either. Even in construction we give our foreman Ipads, you would be surprised how much they've helped. Can't work on an area because someone is holding you up you can snap a photo or take a video of it, date it and link it to a set of drawings on the Ipod. You see another trade damaging or undoing your work, same deal. A site meeting down the road when you're getting blamed for holding up the job or maybe looking for an extra for some additional work you had to do no fault of your own you have the ammo to go battle for it. They have other uses as well, those are just a few off the top of my head.

[meme405]

^^

To that point, if the technology is useful I really don't see a problem with it either. Even in construction we give our foreman Ipads, you would be surprised how much they've helped. Can't work on an area because someone is holding you up you can snap a photo or take a video of it, date it and link it to a set of drawings on the Ipod. You see another trade damaging or undoing your work, same deal. A site meeting down the road when you're getting blamed for holding up the job or maybe looking for an extra for some additional work you had to do no fault of your own you have the ammo to go battle for it. They have other uses as well, those are just a few off the top of my head.

Thats only a few of the great things about it.

It greatly reduces the amount of paperwork for clerical people, your document controllers job becomes a breeze, you always have the assurance you are working from the most current drawings, etc.

The more I think about it, the more I think introducing tech to kids as young as possible is a good idea, being current and capable is a huge asset.

Of course this comes with certain provisions, for example the technology cannot replace other things, like physical education, and being active, or learning basic mental math, etc.

I think you need everything in balance, but to outright say, iPads are not helpful to give to kids, is almost as wrong as proclaiming "Unions are fucking useless".

[underscore]

I think you need everything in balance, but to outright say, iPads are not helpful to give to kids, is almost as wrong as proclaiming "Unions are fucking useless".

At >$500 a pop there are a lot better things to spend money on than ipads. With 250k high school aged students in BC, assuming a bit of a bulk discount that's $125 million into hardware that can't even perform any major functions and becomes obsolete at a stupidly fast rate.

Yes they can be useful to certain people, but for general highschool education they're horrible value for money. Generally tech-savvy kids will talk classes based around tech where they can get some extra exposure to technology so we don't need to give every kid a device.

And lets be honest here, just because someone is exposed to tech doesn't mean they're any good at using it. The vast majority of users these days are dumb as a post when it comes to their devices capabilities.

[4444]

I support teachers. They're probably one of the lowest paid professions out there that require a degree. Not a lot of people will know this but teachers put a lot of overtime in preparing lesson plans, marking assignments/test and whatnot. Teachers don't become a teacher for money, they do so because they enjoy teaching. Like the posts above have said, some parents these days DEPEND on teachers to do parenting for them. Imagine having to be a parent to 30 kids simultaneously..........

I don't think frivolous spending on tablets are justified, but neither is cutting back on teachers' salaries and laying off teachers that run extracurricular programs.
i'm not disagreeing with you, HOWEVER, in general terms, they may be willing to take lesser pay (relatively, and to be honest, a degree gets you shit these days, so i'm not sure how true your statement is, i know i got paid $35K in my first job, with 2 very good degrees, i assume teachers get more than this) for job security, a full pension, summers off, etc.

you can't look at pay in isolation, you have to consider the whole package - guaranteed pay raises with seniority, job security, hours worked/vacation, benefits, and also some of the softer items like stress - i by no means am saying being a teacher isn't stressful, but it's a different type of pressure when compared to being in the corporate world and having a boss breathing down your neck - also, with experience, could one not say that the stress decreases as the issues are generally the same year in, year out, but you would have dealt with them before.

again, not saying i disagree with your point - i don't know enough to disagree, but i certainly think everything has to be taken into perspective with respects to their compensation package and hours on/off the job

[freakshow]

I support teachers. They're probably one of the lowest paid professions out there that require a degree. Not a lot of people will know this but teachers put a lot of overtime in preparing lesson plans, marking assignments/test and whatnot. Teachers don't become a teacher for money, they do so because they enjoy teaching. Like the posts above have said, some parents these days DEPEND on teachers to do parenting for them. Imagine having to be a parent to 30 kids simultaneously..........

I don't think frivolous spending on tablets are justified, but neither is cutting back on teachers' salaries and laying off teachers that run extracurricular programs.
I disagree with you almost entirely. And my wife is a teacher.

Pay: I don't think they're one of the lowest paid professions. They get a very reasonable salary in their first year, and can go up to (I believe) high 70s without any further education. Masters gets you more.

Work Ethic: Most teacher's work HARD. No doubt about it. There are extra-ciricular activities, marking, homework, tests, etc. HOWEVER, teachers think that they're the only ones putting in overtime.. as just one example, in software, I used to work 10-10 regularly, and during crunch time, 1AM wasn't unusual.
The difference? Teachers also get 2 months of summer, 2 week spring break and 2 week winter break. That's ludicrous. So they do work hard, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, but get huge vacation benefits.

Motivation: You think all teachers teach because they enjoy it? Some do, and some do it because it's easy with a direct career path. Spend 5 minutes in a teacher's lounge at any school, and you'll know that they're certainly not there for the joy of education. They're probably browsing teen gang bangs on pornhub during lunch time.

And lastly, if you, as a parent, depend on someone who did a random degree with a B.Ed on top, with probably a completely different set of cultural and moral values to you to do your parenting, you're screwed. Enjoy the extra dollar you made at work while sacrificing time with your kids.

edit: I should note that I'm not saying teachers are useless, or ALL teachers are like this. There are exceptions, but they certainly don't need to be put on some moral pedestal for taking this supposedly low paying, hard working job, just for the love of educating future generations.

[Traum]

^^ Dude, I'd have to disagree with many of your points here.

Pay
A newbie teacher's salary is only decent *if* they can find a secure and on-going teaching position, but how often does that happen? Before that, they are basically on-call workers -- praying and waiting for that phone call at some ungodly 5 or 6am so that they can be told where in the city they are to be "teaching" for the day. It also means they may or may not get any work, and guess what? No work = no pay. I don't have a very good grasp of the general wait time before somebody build up enough seniority to transition into a full time position, but I've known people that took anywhere between 4 -7 years to settle down with a full time gig. And even then, many continue with the hire in September, fired in June mantra for several more years.

Also, teachers are technically only paid 10 months of the year. You can arrange to have your pay spread over 12 months instead of 10, but that is a personal decision. So don't look at those 2 summer months as vacation. It might be more appropriate to call it unpaid leave.

Work Ethic
Yes, teachers get their 2 months summer break, 2 week spring break and 2 week winter break. But don't forget that it also means they are pretty much tied down for the rest of the year with little flexibility. Regular employees in other industries don't have anything nearly as rigid. Certainly there are crunch times where you aren't allowed any time off, but for the most part, it still isn't quite as rigid.

And that 10-10 work schedule that you spoke of for s/w developers? I'd have to say, software companies that require their employees to work that many hours seems like something isn't quite right. More typically, my experience with folks in the s/w development industry seems to suggest something closer to a 9-10 hour regular work day, but that is also punctuated by some 5-6 hour days in the slow season (or typically for a while after a product is released), and some insane 14-16 hour days during crunch time. Teachers, on the other hand, regularly put in their 7-8 hours worth of classroom time, and on top of that, prep, marking, admin duties, and extra-curricular activity time. This happens pretty much everyday except for during those breaks we mentioned earlier.

[Tapioca]

The province has to find a way to get out of the negotiation business. Its role should be limited to establishing baseline standards and providing funding for school boards. The boards should be free to set standards for pay, benefits, etc. They may not even want to negotiate with the BCTF at all in some cases.

[Traum]

Oh man... watching this interview video just fxxking boils me up. This is with the government's chief negotiator, Peter Cameron:

Raw: BCPSEA chief negotiator responds to BCTF | Watch News Videos Online (http://globalnews.ca/video/1348629/raw-bcpsea-chief-negotiator-responds-to-bctf)

Starting at the 7 min mark, in particular, I am just absolutely floored and enraged by how unscrupulous someone can be, especially in front of media.

1. The BCPSEA (government's representing agent) proposes to lock out secondary teachers on June 25 and 26. The English 10 and Social Studies 11 government exams would be written on June 24. With the teachers locked out June 25 and 26, and June 27 being an admin day, these graduation-requirement exams cannot be marked. So how is the BCPSEA (and the provincial government by extension) not doing something that interferes with exams getting marked, and students receiving their grades?!

2. Teachers will be forced to leave the school building 45 minutes after class ends. However, Mr. Cameron believes teachers, when kicked out of the school building, can continue to volunteer their time in athletics (which takes place on school grounds) and in graduation ceremonies. "The government can't lock people out from volunteer work" is what Cameron said. So the government does recognize that the extra-curricular activities teachers do are "work," but teachers are not compensated for them (and teachers aren't asking to be compensated for such un-paid work), and teachers should continue to volunteer their time when they are being locked out, and their salaries are being deducted?

Way to go, Mr. Cameron, BCPSEA, and the provincial government! If this isn't bullying and negotiation in bad faith, I dunno what they could possibly be.

[Tapioca]

As someone who was raised in the public school system, I will continue to support public education. However, whenever a labour dispute emerges, what irks me is that teachers think that they're the only workers under siege. The reality is that, these days, every worker is under siege. The BCTF has done a poor job of getting public opinion on its side - it shouldn't be chatising politicians and their salaries - it should be relating its working conditions to those of regular taxpayers. Maybe the problem is is that they can't because they know what teachers have is actually pretty good.

[inv4zn]

I have great respect for the majority of teachers. Yes, there are always a few "bad" ones, but that goes to any circle of any level in any society.

And as with any real problem, there's no real answer.

A few things I note now thinking back to highschool, and what I observe now that I'm "grown up":

Teacher salary aside, the occupation of Teacher is more onerous than before, simply because society now has higher standards. It's not too long ago that poorly performing, or even disabled students were labelled as dunce, and essentially ignored by the teacher. We can't do that anymore (rightfully so), and there are special programs and special educators, etc. These things cost money (more teachers, higher education, etc.) . Should parents of children with disabilities be burdened with special requirements? I dunno, honestly.

That being said, there are lots of teachers (more recent ones) that became teachers because it was an easy career path. Hence the oversaturation of teachers, which inevitably leads to more being on-call, etc.

All things said, I don't have any kids yet...I wonder what public education will look like when I have kids old enough to attend school.

[freakshow]

Pay
A newbie teacher's salary is only decent *if* they can find a secure and on-going teaching position, but how often does that happen? Before that, they are basically on-call workers -- praying and waiting for that phone call at some ungodly 5 or 6am so that they can be told where in the city they are to be "teaching" for the day. It also means they may or may not get any work, and guess what? No work = no pay. I don't have a very good grasp of the general wait time before somebody build up enough seniority to transition into a full time position, but I've known people that took anywhere between 4 -7 years to settle down with a full time gig. And even then, many continue with the hire in September, fired in June mantra for several more years.Maybe times have changed.. I have a few friends who are teachers, in addition to my wife, and I think the longest I heard someone had to be on-call (which definitely sucks) was 2 years. If 4-7 is the new average.. that would be really crappy.
Also, teachers are technically only paid 10 months of the year. You can arrange to have your pay spread over 12 months instead of 10, but that is a personal decision. So don't look at those 2 summer months as vacation. It might be more appropriate to call it unpaid leave.Yeah, lot's of teachers try to use this argument. The problem is that admitting that they only work 9-10 months out of the year means that they shouldn't complain about their salary because they should find a summer job each year (they will go bonkers if you bring that up). Then they resort to how hard they work during the other 9 months, but I already told you, many people work equally as hard, if not harder, sometimes for less pay.

Work Ethic
Yes, teachers get their 2 months summer break, 2 week spring break and 2 week winter break. But don't forget that it also means they are pretty much tied down for the rest of the year with little flexibility. Regular employees in other industries don't have anything nearly as rigid. Certainly there are crunch times where you aren't allowed any time off, but for the most part, it still isn't quite as rigid.This is true. My wife and I can't take vacation outside of peak seasons.. and it sucks. However, if you have kids, you're only taking vacation during those times anyways, so it's not as bad as you make it seem.

And that 10-10 work schedule that you spoke of for s/w developers? I'd have to say, software companies that require their employees to work that many hours seems like something isn't quite right. More typically, my experience with folks in the s/w development industry seems to suggest something closer to a 9-10 hour regular work day, but that is also punctuated by some 5-6 hour days in the slow season (or typically for a while after a product is released), and some insane 14-16 hour days during crunch time. Teachers, on the other hand, regularly put in their 7-8 hours worth of classroom time, and on top of that, prep, marking, admin duties, and extra-curricular activity time. This happens pretty much everyday except for during those breaks we mentioned earlier.I agree here, 10-10 was a bit extreme, but 9 hours is definitely normal, and 10-11 isn't abnormal. Also, most teachers work more in their early years as their getting their curriculum in place, but to assume that most teachers work MORE than 10 hours a day, I think, would be incorrect. Which makes them equal to many other industries.

[ntan]

Also, teachers are technically only paid 10 months of the year. You can arrange to have your pay spread over 12 months instead of 10, but that is a personal decision. So don't look at those 2 summer months as vacation. It might be more appropriate to call it unpaid leave.


Yeah, lot's of teachers try to use this argument. The problem is that admitting that they only work 9-10 months out of the year means that they shouldn't complain about their salary because they should find a summer job each year (they will go bonkers if you bring that up). Then they resort to how hard they work during the other 9 months, but I already told you, many people work equally as hard, if not harder, sometimes for less pay.


As freakshow mentioned, shouldn't you view this as a benefit instead? Say, if teacher makes 50K annually, but only work for 9-10 months, their per-hour wage is effectively higher (20%+ more).

I'm not too familiar with the employment benefits of teachers, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought teachers have a relatively safe career once they're settled in. I work in the private sector (software), and layoffs are common, even for sr. engineers (10+).

[Traum]

^^ I don't necessarily view this as a benefit, and I think it would vary depending on the person. For some, it'll be good because they are free to pursue other things they might want to do, whether it is paid or not. For others (esp those who aren't quite as good in managing their finances), this could be the leanest months precisely during the time when everyone is more prone to spending.

[underscore]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there is any difficulty a teacher faces that ONLY teachers have to deal with.

Work Ethic
Yes, teachers get their 2 months summer break, 2 week spring break and 2 week winter break. But don't forget that it also means they are pretty much tied down for the rest of the year with little flexibility.

Teachers can and do take time off during the school year, but I think most of them choose to take their vacations during the standard vacation periods because it's easier. They also aren't the only ones who have to work vacations around a schedule, lots of people working in accounting have a hard time taking time off at certain times of the month, etc.

[ntan]

^^ I don't necessarily view this as a benefit, and I think it would vary depending on the person. For some, it'll be good because they are free to pursue other things they might want to do, whether it is paid or not. For others (esp those who aren't quite as good in managing their finances), this could be the leanest months precisely during the time when everyone is more prone to spending.

As you mentioned, this would vary depending on the person, regardless of career choice. However, the fact is, teachers are paid higher per-hour (and arguably higher than many other careers), albeit with less workable hours.

[quasi]

Exactly, I work 9+ hours everyday plus additional whenever I have to hit a closing date it's part of the job I knew that coming in. Same goes for my vacation, I've had to postpone planned vacations because closing dates got pushed up on me and collided with my time off. It's happened to everyone I work with as well. Last year one of my coworkers was in the Shuswaps he had to work on his project during the day for 3 days well his family is at the beach, drive back for 1 day to close it and drive back and finish his vacation with his family. Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining but it's hard for me to feel bad for the Teachers when they use it an excuse as why they're so hard done by. People deal with shit like that all the time, they aren't that special.

[shenmecar]

Maybe times have changed.. I have a few friends who are teachers, in addition to my wife, and I think the longest I heard someone had to be on-call (which definitely sucks) was 2 years. If 4-7 is the new average.. that would be really crappy.


Its also damn near impossible to land a TOC job. Especially in the lower mainland. Your wife and your friends must've been teachers for awhile because the scarcity of jobs in the lower mainland has been around for a few years now.

[Timpo]

This is going to make Canadian kids DUMB! Japan already made this mistake and they had to fix their education system
They should just learn from Japan this is not going to end well.

Yutori education - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :suspicious:
http://asiasociety.org/education/learning-world/japan-recent-trends-education-reform
http://www.hyogo-u.ac.jp/files/wj_lecture_20050100.pdf

[Jmac]

Love the race to the bottom attitude some people have. As a society, we should be supporting better wages, better working conditions, and better services, IMO. Seems some people won't be happy until we all have sweatshop conditions, sweatshop wages, and still have shit for social services.

[Traum]

I don't even know where to begin applauding. Everything with this letter from a grade 7 teach is just so right, but I will just highlight a couple of points that I thought was especially spot on.

Again, I will ask everyone to consider themselves as voters as they read this. If you voted for the BC Liberals in the last election, you are partially responsible for this as well. Please keep that in mind. (For the record, I have voted for BC Liberals in 2005 and 2009, but gave my vote to the NDP instead last year.)

Letter from B.C. teacher to Christy Clark goes viral (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/story.html?id=9876692)


Letter from B.C. teacher to Christy Clark goes viral
Vancouver Sun May 27, 2014 9:24 AM


Ok, Christy Clark, I’m going to need some help understanding this one.

Starting Monday, you will not let me help my students at recess and lunch? It is rare that a day goes by that I don’t have students in during that time who desperately need help. With all the cutbacks with student support and with no regard to my class composition and the needs of the students in my class, how will they learn if I can’t go over concepts with them during my break? And if I do help them, I will be disciplined?

In fact, starting Monday, you insist that we all leave the school property at recess and lunch? Do you have any idea what happens in a school when that bell goes? You want the building to be free of teachers while hundreds of children are transitioning in the hallway? Have you considered the safety factor in that one? So I’m not allowed to use the washroom on my breaks? If I can’t leave my students during class, and I’m not allowed to be in the building during my breaks, are you suggesting that I must go the entire day without using the washroom?

Starting Monday, you’re also telling me that I am only allowed to work 45 minutes prior to the bell and 45 minutes after. I can’t take my work home, I can’t mark at home, I can’t do my report cards at home and I can’t prepare my lessons at home yet you still insist that I do all of these things? Does that mean you will be giving us money finally to buy resources so I don’t have to build all my units from scratch? For every hour in my class, I’m putting in an hour outside of it developing lessons, making resources, planning units and writing report cards. I have no idea how I am supposed to do all of that in 90 minutes a day outside of direct teaching time. Perhaps you want me to do that while the students are in my class? I just can’t, Christy. I want them to learn.

Starting Monday, you will not let me help organize students into classes for next year? So if I know that a child is intimidated by another in my class, or does not work well with someone, I am not able to do anything about that? Have you been in a classroom? There’s a very fine art to separating children who simply are unable to get along, and yet another art to finding children to put together to build new friendships and find a sense of belonging. At my school alone, our teachers invested at least 15 hours last year fine tuning the classrooms, making sure we could make the best of our situation of kids with learning disabilities, with behaviour problems, with IEPs, with social difficulties. I know our school administrators are capable individuals, but they simply do not know how best to place my students, and are not aware of the specifics of the 11 students I have this year who have higher needs.

And, Christy, I’m absolutely crushed that you won’t let me go to my daughter’s grade 7 leaving ceremony at her school. I don’t even work at her school, but you refuse to let me on public school property. Funny thing is, the teacher that is spending countless hours organizing that ‘grad’ also has a child in that class, and she won’t be able to attend it either. I expect we will both be standing outside of school grounds trying to maintain composure. Right now, not that you care, I’m not maintaining composure. I didn’t very well in class today when I told my own grade 7s that I wasn’t allowed to attend their grade 7 leaving. They saw the tears in my eyes.

I know that you will tell me BC teachers started this strike business. We could argue about the logistics of that for quite some time. Do you realize that we chose rotating strikes so we could still volunteer our time on the other days of the week? We were still going on field trips, organizing grad ceremonies, doing extra-curricular, and giving whatever we could to the students in our schools. And now you won’t let us? I look forward to my year end activities with my students. I am not looking forward to telling them that you won’t let me take them.

Do I need a raise? Yes, I truly do. I believe I deserve the 18% you gave your administration, but I’d be happy with keeping up with the cost of living. 4 straight years of 0% is catching up with me. 2 more years of 0% just might break me. Everything is going up, and my paycheque is actually getting smaller. That just doesn’t seem right to me. I just don't understand why I don't deserve the cost of living.


Oh and as long as I’m trying to understand all of this, why is privatization so important to you? You are starving education and healthcare. It seems your plan is to continue to do this so you can say to the public, “Look. The school system is not working! We need to do something different!” At that point, I expect you’ll push your two-tiered education system a little harder, and your next course of business will be a two-tiered health care system. That might work well for you and your well-paid staff, but not for the majority of us. What will most of us do in a two-tiered health care system? Do you just not care because it just does not affect you?

By the way, we DO need to do something different; we need you to start funding education again. I was thinking that in my children’s neighbourhood high school, if you funded just to the national average, they would have $1 000 000 more each year. My own children and I had fun mentally spending that for their school. It was kind of like going through the Sears Wishbook when we were kids, but, like the Wishbook, when someone else is holding the chequebook, it’s all just a dream.

By the way, why is your chequebook out for the private school system? I’m a little confused why you were able to increase funding for those schools but not public schools. Is that because your son attends a private school?

On your Facebook page, you recently said that you are “acknowledging historical wrongs,” but do you realize you’re creating one right now? And you’re right, we can’t undo the past. Take some time to do some research in what investing in our children now will do for our future. And look into what happens if we don’t. It will cost us all a great deal more in the generations to come. I also know you are aware that BC has the highest child poverty rate in Canada, and yet you still have no plan for those children either. All of this is so incomprehensible to me.

You broke the law. Twice. You’ve been told that your tactics with BC Teachers are unconstitutional. To me, that’s not much different than your predecessor who thought it okay to drink and drive and that saying sorry made it all better.

I have so many more questions, Christy, but I expect you’ve long stopped reading. Just on another note, I have to tell you that my 16 year old said to me today that he thought maybe people had to be hurt in some way to be able to really empathize with others. How profound. On that wisdom, I assume you’ve had a brilliant life, as you have no empathy for those you perceive to be below you. I wish all of our citizens of BC could have the same opportunity.

I have never been afraid of a politician before, Christy, but I am afraid of you. I love my province. I’m proud of my province. But I’m afraid there won’t be much left of it when you’re done.

[meme405]

Just to fuel the debate furthur, and admitedly I searched a bit for information but I am kind of looking for someone to aware me here, cause I couldn't find much.

I remember hearing a long time ago, how after a teacher retires after 25 years of teaching, they were more or less entitled to their entire salary as a pension.

If this still holds true then, making 60k a year isn't bad considering that after you retire after only 25 years you will still make 60k. There are many people who work for 40 years now and don't end up making their entire salary as a pension after they retire.

Looking at the BCTF stats on their pension fund it looks to be in pretty good health compared to other systems such as CPP and even some private funds.

On top of all this I know a few accountants and others who work in finance and a lot of them claim that teachers are some of the most reckless people with their money. This is of course just hearsay, and obviously is not representative of all teachers, but if you think about it, it kind of makes sense, you have 2 months off during the summer, instead of getting a job during that period I can imagine a lot of teachers just burning through cash on vacations and activities.

Also when I hear about all this "Pre-planning" and late nights marking and all that shit, thats just procrastination by teachers, kids are only in school for 6 hours a day, any real adult works 9+ hours in a day, so wtf. They should have plenty of time to mark crappy assignments and tests.

Not to mention once a teacher has their course plan and stuff built rarely do they alter it much from year to year, maybe a few new point here, or a couple tweaks there, but they more or less use the exact same format for YEARS.

Realistically I don't believe teachers have a very tasking job. Does that mean I think what we pay them is fair? Meh, I have no idea. Havnt looked into it much, but when people start telling me how hard a teachers life is, I just laugh, cause it ain't.

[westopher]

Maybe times have changed.. I have a few friends who are teachers, in addition to my wife, and I think the longest I heard someone had to be on-call (which definitely sucks) was 2 years. If 4-7 is the new average.. that would be really crappy.

The thing is, thats because an education in anything doesn't GUARANTEE you a full time job in any field. The world is changing, bachelor degrees are a dime a dozen, and if you try and enter a field that has less jobs than qualified candidates, thats your own fault. Someone with an arts institute diploma in culinary arts can't just walk into a restaurant and have a 90k a year exec chef job at a hotel, so why would anyone think that their education degree is any different. The teachers are not immune to a poor canadian economy. I agree it sucks, but if they don't like it, find a new field.

I hope it ends quickly. The kids suffer from this. I was in gr 12 during a 4 week teacher strike in Alberta, and I can assure you it made the last year of my schooling a lot more difficult than it needed to be.

[Traum]

meme405, the pension thing you wrote about is absolutely not true. Currently, even the best paid public pension very roughly works something along the following lines:

retirement pay = (avg salary from the best 5 years) x (years of service, capped at 35 years max) x 2%

Essentially, the most a public pension will pay is 70% of your avg salary from your best (ie. highest paying) 5 years, but if you tap into your pension early (ie. before 65), there are deductions to your pension payout so you won't get 70%. For most people, that means you really have to be doing 35 years' worth of time and hold of on drawing into your pension until you are 65 to get back that much. I have a feeling that the vast majority of public pension earners don't even break the 30 year mark when it comes to pension contribution, and most people will probably want to retire before 65. Also, the years of service calculation depends on the actual amount of time that you worked, not the duration of time you are in the system. Say, if you only teach at 50% workload (probably not atypical for new teachers who are only substituting when they first start?), you only accumulate 1/2 year's worth of service towards your pension calculation.

The exception to the rule, IIRC, are police and firefighters. They earn 3% instead of 2% because of their occupational hazard, but I think their max pension payout is still capped at 70% of their avg salary from their best 5 years.

For teachers, let's say he gets right into the system after ugrad and 1 year's worth of B.Ed. He is 23 when he first starts. Let's say he was working only 50% at first, but is really lucky and finds a full time gig after 2 years. If he works for the next 30 years and retires, he would have accumulated 31 years worth of service, and make 62% of his avg salary from his highest-earning 5 years -- but only if he waits until he is 65. Currently, I think the most a regular teacher earns is somewhere between the low to mid $70k? So roughly speaking, this hypothetical teacher we looked at will be taking ~$45k/yr of pension home after working 30+ years.

So meme405, does that seem like a reasonable amount to you?

[Hehe]

First, full disclosure as my wife's sorta in education field (teaching children with autism), so, I might be a bit biased. But I think BC govt should get their shit together.

Education is not a luxury, but one of the most basic thing govt can provide to make our overall society a better place, which is in the interest of every resident. By cutting corners to our future generations' education, we are basically stealing what they deserved.

Our parents provided us the opportunity to be educated and they paid their share to have a better future for the society. I believe it's our responsibility to at least give that much back to our children.

When hard times come, we should cut on luxuries such as park maintenance, money losing but non-vital ferry routes, sponsorship and/or bonuses/subsidies to crown corps. Are residents going to be affected? sure. But that's the way it is. We can reestablish those luxuries once we have more money, but something gotta give.

[freakshow]

For teachers, let's say he gets right into the system after ugrad and 1 year's worth of B.Ed. He is 23 when he first starts. Let's say he was working only 50% at first, but is really lucky and finds a full time gig after 2 years. If he works for the next 30 years and retires, he would have accumulated 31 years worth of service, and make 62% of his avg salary from his highest-earning 5 years -- but only if he waits until he is 65. Currently, I think the most a regular teacher earns is somewhere between the low to mid $70k? So roughly speaking, this hypothetical teacher we looked at will be taking ~$45k/yr of pension home after working 30+ years.

So meme405, does that seem like a reasonable amount to you?
First of all, your math is a little bit crazy.. BEd@23, FT @ 25, Retire @55? Most people HOPE to retire at 65 and have enough money in the bank. So If he retires at 65, he's at 40 years of service.

So yes, yes it does seem MORE than reasonable. You'll be paid 50K a year TILL YOU DIE for doing nothing. Am I reading that wrong? You know what a software developer gets after they retire? CPP. gl hf.

[Traum]

^ Yes, yes it does. You'll be paid 50K a year TILL YOU DIE for doing nothing. Am I reading that wrong? You know what a software developer gets after they retire? CPP. gl hf.
Conveniently, you have neglected to mention how much software developers get while they are working. I know a lot that are in the $85k+ to sub-$100k range, and I know a few who are up to the $140k range. With such a front-loaded salary stream, the extra money that could be earned from investment and compound interest will easily outpace the steady stream earnings from a pension. If someone didn't do their homework on their own retirement planning, should I feel any sympathy towards their demise when they get old?

FYI, the BC average life expectancy is currently 82 years old.

[freakshow]

Conveniently, you have neglected to mention how much software developers get while they are working. I know a lot that are in the $85k+ to sub-$100k range, and I know a few who are up to the $140k range. With such a front-loaded salary stream, the extra money that could be earned from investment and compound interest will easily outpace the steady stream earnings from a pension. If someone didn't do their homework on their own retirement planning, should I feel any sympathy towards their demise when they get old?

FYI, the BC average life expectancy is currently 82 years old.
I'm not saying that being a teacher is financially way better or way worse, but that their pension certainly sounds very 'reasonable'.
And FYI, you can't bring up the financial planning argument if you say that the summer is the 'leanest' time for teachers. They can choose to have their salary over 12 months, OR they can use a little bit of financial planning.

[Great68]

Just curious why so many think it's acceptable to have people working in contrary of the employment standards act with respect to working hours, without proper compensation...

I do it too, but:
A) I am management
B) I make a lot more money than the average teacher
C) I make up for it by taking additional time off for the additional hours worked (My boss expects and ensures I do this). If I really wanted, I could be paid out for the extra time but the time off is more valuable to me.

From what I understand, teachers are not management, nor is there a method for them to be compensated for after hours work.

Rather than commenting that "everyone does it, suck it up", should we not be pushing to bring up the working standards for EVERYONE?

I am fortunate to work for an employer that treats their employees well.

Why shouldn't we be pushing all other employers have to elevate their game to the same level rather than setting an expectation that 9+ hour work days without compensation is "Normal"?

[meme405]

Thanks for the explanation Traum, without looking at your calculations and stuff as that wasn't really my point I understand much more.

I guess it does sound pretty fair.

I guess my problem with all of that has nothing to do with teachers whatsoever, it just has to do with societies romantic notion of retirement. The retirement age of 65 is altogether too low.

In the words of daniel tosh:

"65 was an age that was set when people died at 66, or 66 and a half. The problem today is that people LIVE FOREVER, and the economy can't afford it... You want me to fix the economy? Cause I can, you need to be prepared to work reallly, really hard, and then eventually die".

[meme405]

Why shouldn't we be pushing all other employers have to elevate their game to the same level rather than setting an expectation that 9+ hour work days without compensation is "Normal"?

Unless you are willing to work hard, and sacrifice, why should you be entitled to higher pay?

The teachers currently make a middle of the road salary for what I would consider middle of the road effort.

It's fine to work 8.5 hours a day and get paid 8 hour of that, but don't expect someone to come along and offer you 150k a year for that type of bullshit effort.

Money doesn't grow on trees, nobody is going to pay some lazy fuck 100k a year for menial effort.

[BrRsn]

Unless you are willing to work hard, and sacrifice, why should you be entitled to higher pay?

The teachers currently make a middle of the road salary for what I would consider middle of the road effort.

It's fine to work 8.5 hours a day and get paid 8 hour of that, but don't expect someone to come along and offer you 150k a year for that type of bullshit effort.

Money doesn't grow on trees, nobody is going to pay some lazy fuck 100k a year for menial effort.

maybe you don't know anyone that's a teacher, but the road to becoming a teacher is difficult enough (university degree), then if you want to become a teacher you're on call for x-amount of years getting phone calls at 5am saying "come into work". That's a terrible life but people live it because they want the job. Then after getting a job teaching x-amount of classes their pay isn't even guaranteed because its dependent upon enrollment, and since they have little or no seniority they can be laid off just as quick as they were hired. Ontop of that, there's tons of teachers that are at school at 7am and don't leave until 4 or 5pm everyday -- they don't get paid for that, same thing with the teachers doing extra-curricular activities and volunteering their time so kids can play sports or whatever

Oh, and to max out their pay scale they have to get a masters degree, which isn't cheap either.

I have family who are teachers / are trying to become teachers and even the full-time teachers still maintain a second job at 20-30 hours a week because they know how unstable their job can be. So, I don't think they are putting in a middle of the road effort -- working 2 jobs, commuting between the jobs, being out of the house 16+ hours a day .. doesn't sound like its fun or easy

Back OT:
Christy Clark is screwing teachers pretty damn hard -- before she got her current position as the Premier of BC she was Education Minister and as education minister she used her power to force teachers back to work + prevent collective bargaining ... this whole thing just seems like she's got her own personal motives against teachers and now that's she's premier she has more power against them. Oh yeah, she increased funding to private schools too!

[Great68]

The teachers currently make a middle of the road salary for what I would consider middle of the road effort.


So who died and made you an expert on factors which constitute a teacher's performance?

Do you work in education and have any qualifications to support your statement?

Or do you just think your opinion is valid simply because you're a taxpayer?

[Traum]

FYI, the BC average life expectancy is currently 82 years old.
One additional thing that I have just thought of:

With the BC avg life expectancy being 82, and the no pension reduction age being 65, the average pension payout amounts to ~17 years. That means 17 years at $45k/yr, for a total of $765k. If we spread this sum back over the 31 years worth of our hypothetical teacher's career, effectively, that means his total pension payout amounts to an annual $24.6k bonus during his regular working years, bringing their max annual salary to roughly $95k to sub-$100k.

To me, paying our longest serving public school teachers this much seem generally reasonable.

[meme405]

So who died and made you an expert on factors which constitute a teacher's performance?

Do you work in education and have any qualifications to support your statement?

Or do you just think your opinion is valid simply because you're a taxpayer?

Thats why I said "what I consider".

Look I have explained it before, I also have my bachelors degree, on top of that I do many courses a year to maintain my designations as a soon to be PMP, RICS, with CWB and the trades services.

I have struggled just as much as any teacher has to get where I am, the difference is I still work 80 hours a week, and I in turn am paid handsomely for that effort.

Look I am not trying to downplay the benefits of having appropriately paid education workers, nor am I downplaying the work they do. What I am saying is that in my opinion I do not believe they deserve 100k a year.

maybe you don't know anyone that's a teacher, but the road to becoming a teacher is difficult enough (university degree)


Please keep telling me how hard it is to get a university degree...

then if you want to become a teacher you're on call for x-amount of years getting phone calls at 5am saying "come into work". That's a terrible life but people live it because they want the job.

I wouldn't know about that, I just get up at 5am and go to work...


Then after getting a job teaching x-amount of classes their pay isn't even guaranteed because its dependent upon enrollment, and since they have little or no seniority they can be laid off just as quick as they were hired.

And you think my job would be secure if I wasn't such an asset to the company I work for? Hell even though I am such an asset, if the work dries up i'm on the fucking curb.


Oh, and to max out their pay scale they have to get a masters degree, which isn't cheap either.


Refer to my response above, you think maintaining my trades and professional designations is cheap? On top of that, a masters degree could propel me even further as well, so realistically a moot point.


Before people give me fails understand this: I am not against the teachers here. I'm just saying some people need to re-evaluate their expectations for remuneration. 100k a year for a teacher is simply not going to happen.

[Great68]

Thats why I said "what I consider".



Look I am not trying to downplay the benefits of having appropriately paid education workers, nor am I downplaying the work they do. What I am saying is that in my opinion I do not believe they deserve 100k a year.

So basically your opinion means shit.

[meme405]

So basically your opinion means shit.

Good attitude, I sincerely hope you are not in an education role.

[freakshow]

We're definitely getting off track (no thanks to me either) talking about what teachers 'should' be able to make or how much effort they put in.

Can anyone give an unbiased summary of what the teachers are asking for vs the govt?

I hate unions about as much as I hate Christy Clark..

[ntan]

I don't see how you can compare the salary of a software developer to a teacher. You're purposely focusing on a career path which generally has a higher pay. Can you really equate the two (teachers and software developers)? Are the job requirements the same? How about the competitiveness and/or the difficulties of entry? And you're also overlooking the many (and possibly majority) software developers who do not earn $85K+/yr, (I have many friends who earn $40K-$50K/yr as software developers/engineers). Why don't we look at the salary of social workers then? From my knowledge (and for those who I know in that field), they all have bachelors degree, work with people, and they're paid a very modest amount. Why don't we use that as a comparison then?

[capt_slo]

The following link allows people to search out all public sector salaries (over 75k, I believe). It's searchable by type and by school district. Public Sector Salaries - Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/public-sector-salaries/basic.html)

There are quite a few teachers in the 80k to 97k pay range. If you consider the 2 months of off time in the summer that could potentially be used to supplement incomes, their earning potential is quite high for a job that produces zero financial profit.

The salary doesn't reflect the "hidden" income built into these union jobs, such as above average holiday time, which is usually bankable for multiple years, sick day allotments (not always easy to find in many private sector professions) and added pensions. There is a lot of value there. So when a teacher complains about a salary being too low, the face value of that number cannot be all you consider.

There was an article last year that stated that the VSB got hit for $20M in cost from its own members due to absenteeism and abuse of the sick day allowances. The BCTF doesn't mention that or how they will curb it in their ads. The sick day scam - Macleans.ca (http://www.macleans.ca/politics/the-sick-day-scam/)

I agree that cost of living raises are fair but the numbers the BCTF have come to the table with are excessive. There are millions of potential dollars that could be found from within. But remember, lower membership numbers or lower mean salary = lower union-due revenue, and that's counterintuitive to some agendas.

When a union of that size starts to run itself with more fiscal responsibility, they may be able to gain my support.

[gars]

I also know plenty of software developers that work more than 8 hours a day, because BC's labour laws have a clause that exempts tech companies from paying overtime.

[Traum]

From what I remember (which means it is probably not complete)

Teacher demands:
- CBA renewal. I don't remember the exact number of years they are asking for, but I seem to think they recently shifted from demanding a 3 years long CBA to a 4 year long one.
- Salary raises as part of the CBA, but I don't remember how much. Bear in mind that the teachers have been seeing 0% increases for the last 4 years, and minimal increases (probably 1-2% per year at most) in the 2 years before that. 2% is almost certainly below general inflation rates.
- Government compliance on current and existing class size and special needs legislations. The provincial supreme court has already ruled against the government on this.

Provincial gov demands:
- Currently pushing for a 6 year CBA, with 0% salary increases in the first 2 (?) years, and minimal increases afterwards (1 - 2% per year). This is down from the 10 year CBA that they tried very hard to push.
- The government insists that the current class size legislations are unaffordable, and is seeking concession on those terms. Again, the provincial supreme court has already ruled in favour of the BCTF and against the government on this issue. I don't know the exact details of what concessions the government wants.

- Currently, the teachers have staged rotating 1 day strike across different school districts in the province.
- Teachers have stopped spending time on extracurricular activities at school. Work on grad ceremonies have probably stopped as well.

- The government has legislated (?) that teachers can only be at school 45 min before and 45 min after class starts, and they cannot be on school property during their breaks or outside of school hours. School-related work (marking, prep, admin work, etc.) is also not to be done outside of school hours.
- The government continues to encourage teachers to volunteer their free time towards extracurricular activities, including but not limited to sports and grad activities.

[added, cuz I forgot when I initially wrote this]
- The provincial government has also unilaterally imposed a 10% wage cut on the teachers starting Mon, May 26 as the rotating 1 day strike took place.

Those are the "facts" as I know them, and I have refrained from adding in my own comments even though I have plenty.

[capt_slo]

The BCTF has asked for 13% in increases over 3 years.

The GOV has offered 7.25% over 6 years of a proposed 10-year deal.

B.C. teachers negotiations heading for stalemate - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-negotiations-heading-for-stalemate-1.2622257)

From what I've seen, the inflation rate for 2013 in BC was 0.1%.

[meme405]

2% is almost certainly below general inflation rates.


While 2% is a generally accepted rate for inflation in a healthy level economy, it has been quite a long time since we have actually seen a 2% increase when you average out across an entire year.

[Traum]

^^ Yes, it seems like while the overall Canadian economy has been seeing inflations rates of roughly 2% (sometimes higher, sometimes lower), BC inflation has been lower than the national average. Of course, if you ask me, I only notice how a lot of regular consumer goods have been slowly (or quickly) climbing in price...:pokerface:

[multicartual]

if you ask me, I only notice how a lot of regular consumer goods have been slowly (or quickly) climbing in price...:pokerface:


Illegal shit has remained the same price for soooooo long, or even gone DOWN in price!!!

[multicartual]

I only notice how a lot of regular consumer goods have been slowly (or quickly) climbing in price...:pokerface:


When I was 20, 16 years ago, you could get a Subway round 4" sandwich for .99 cents. For $2.13 or so you could have 2 sandwiches with water and feel full. It was like $10 or less to eat per day. I remember buying everything I needed to make Tacos, with leftovers, for about $12. INCLUDING CHEESE. Look at how much one block of cheese costs today!


It used to be a much easier life, women were less picky, we weren't as envious of each other because we didn't have The Internet Jealousy Engines like Instagram or Facebook.


I remember paying something like $40 an hour for car repair as well, now? Good luck finding a shop for less than $100 an hour!


Life has got MUCH more expensive, it is no wonder women are more hypergamous than ever before. Living in downtown Vancouver if you're making only 100k you're basically close to the poverty line and probably not saving too much money living on your own in a nice place.


I heard The Cedar Party in Vancouver basically said that Mayor Moonbeam has been allowing the developers to get away with making so much money and that they should be taxed more. Maybe everyone just needs to stop having kids?

[GLOW]

what were you doing eating at subway? that's food for 9-5'ers

[PeanutButter]

I just found out that senior teaches in Ontario make over $100k...
That is CRAZY!!!

I think BC Teachers get paid amoungst the least in least in Canada. Can anyone confirm?

EDIT: nm. found a PDF from BCTF.
http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/TeacherSalaryRankings2013-14brief.pdf

If you have your masters you are Category 6 I believe, most teachers will be category 5

North West Territories = $115k Cat 5, $120k Cat 6
I guess that's the price you pay to live up North!

[PeanutButter]

The BCTF has asked for 13% in increases over 3 years.

The GOV has offered 7.25% over 6 years of a proposed 10-year deal.

B.C. teachers negotiations heading for stalemate - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-teachers-negotiations-heading-for-stalemate-1.2622257)

From what I've seen, the inflation rate for 2013 in BC was 0.1%.

I would like to see data on other governemnt collective bargaining agreements. Because if the nurses only got around 7.25%, I don't see the teachers getting anymore than that.

[meme405]

I just found out that senior teaches in Ontario make over $100k...
That is CRAZY!!!

I think BC Teachers get paid amoungst the least in least in Canada. Can anyone confirm?

EDIT: nm. found a PDF from BCTF.
http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/TeacherSalaryRankings2013-14brief.pdf

If you have your masters you are Category 6 I believe, most teachers will be category 5

North West Territories = $115k Cat 5, $120k Cat 6
I guess that's the price you pay to live up North!

Everyone makes more up north....:lawl:

[Vulgate]

The blocked text in bold. I am not a fan of unions, but wtf is wrong with the government saying you can't be in school but you still have to get your work done? Seriously?

It's like telling a game developer that you can only work from 9 to 5, but you are not allowed in the office during coffee break or lunch time. But the game requires at least 10 hours of development time per day. You also cannot work from home. However the government still expect the game to be completed on time given the ridiculous restrictions.

There is a letter in the Vancouver Sun that elaborates on the restrictions
Letter from B.C. teacher to Christy Clark goes viral (http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Letter+from+teacher+Christy+Clark+goes+viral/9876692/story.html)

From what I remember (which means it is probably not complete)
...

- The government has legislated (?) that teachers can only be at school 45 min before and 45 min after class starts, and they cannot be on school property during their breaks or outside of school hours. School-related work (marking, prep, admin work, etc.) is also not to be done outside of school hours.
- The government continues to encourage teachers to volunteer their free time towards extracurricular activities, including but not limited to sports and grad activities.

Those are the "facts" as I know them, and I have refrained from adding in my own comments even though I have plenty.

[Jmac]

First of all, your math is a little bit crazy.. BEd@23, FT @ 25, Retire @55? Most people HOPE to retire at 65 and have enough money in the bank. So If he retires at 65, he's at 40 years of service.

So yes, yes it does seem MORE than reasonable. You'll be paid 50K a year TILL YOU DIE for doing nothing. Am I reading that wrong? You know what a software developer gets after they retire? CPP. gl hf.
What does a retail employee get? Or a fast food employee?

Why is a computer programmer the baseline for how everyone should be treated?

Also, I know quite a few computer programmers. The more talented ones make a shit ton more money and have way fucking better working conditions plus boatloads of extras that you could only dream of as a teacher.

One of my best friends who is a programmer was moved to Europe (at his company's expense), was given a condo, makes 60000 Euro per year ($90k CAD), gets 6 weeks of paid vacation per year PLUS the company does a 2-week all inclusive to a tropical destination every winter plus all of his meals are paid for plus a living allowance plus free haircuts (at their desks no less). Oh and pension, stock options, health, dental, etc.

[snowball]

I just found out that senior teaches in Ontario make over $100k...
That is CRAZY!!!

I think BC Teachers get paid amoungst the least in least in Canada. Can anyone confirm?

EDIT: nm. found a PDF from BCTF.
http://www.bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/BargainingContracts/TeacherSalaryRankings2013-14brief.pdf

If you have your masters you are Category 6 I believe, most teachers will be category 5

North West Territories = $115k Cat 5, $120k Cat 6
I guess that's the price you pay to live up North!

Forget about the BCTF or government sources.

Unbiased salary data here for each metro district: Teaching Salaries in BC's Metro Region | Make a Future (http://www.makeafuture.ca/career-resources/salary-finder/metro-salary-finder/)

Most teachers are Cat5

[multicartual]

what were you doing eating at subway? that's food for 9-5'ers


I worked on a farm back then and drove an '82 Rx-7 before I got my '88 5.0 'vert

[freakshow]

What does a retail employee get? Or a fast food employee?

Why is a computer programmer the baseline for how everyone should be treated?It's definitely not a good standard. It's just an example I was using. If anything, it's a high watermark. As you pointed out, plenty of industries get way less than teachers, and plenty work way harder.

[m3thods]

What does a retail employee get? Or a fast food employee?

Why is a computer programmer the baseline for how everyone should be treated?

Also, I know quite a few computer programmers. The more talented ones make a shit ton more money and have way fucking better working conditions plus boatloads of extras that you could only dream of as a teacher.

One of my best friends who is a programmer was moved to Europe (at his company's expense), was given a condo, makes 60000 Euro per year ($90k CAD), gets 6 weeks of paid vacation per year PLUS the company does a 2-week all inclusive to a tropical destination every winter plus all of his meals are paid for plus a living allowance plus free haircuts (at their desks no less). Oh and pension, stock options, health, dental, etc.

You're right programmers should definitely not be used as a baseline. Given the market conditions, there's a huge market for programmers around the globe given our reliance on technology. You can even be "unemployed" and make it big as a programmer. It's such a unique occupation/job market that it's almost in a league of it's own.

Teachers are in a reverse situation, where there are so many teachers but not as many openings.

What worries me is how this seems to be an ongoing issue every few years here in BC (I'm ignorant to the situations in other provinces, so bear with me). As a student a while back I never remembered this many school-day cuts or days off. It's going to be really apparent in the near future when most of these kids have to fend for themselves against students who are likely more prepared for the real world.

[iEatClams]

if it was just about money:

BC inflation is 1.5%

B.C. sees biggest jump in inflation rate as Canadian gas prices balloon in April (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/With+prices+ballooning+inflation+rate+climbs+cent+ April/9870546/story.html)

the BC government is offering too litter, 7.25% over 6 years. with most of it being back ended, the raises are near the end, so the effective raise is less than 1% a year.

it's negotiation. teachers want 4%+ a year.
this whole thing can end if they just sign right now. BC's inflation at 1.5%, and it's expected to climb, Canada Inflation is 2.%, somewhere along those lines.

1.5% - 2% per year for next 5 years. done deal.


but there's other factors such as classroom size etc.

[Nocardia]

Forget about the BCTF or government sources.

Unbiased salary data here for each metro district: Teaching Salaries in BC's Metro Region | Make a Future (http://www.makeafuture.ca/career-resources/salary-finder/metro-salary-finder/)

Most teachers are Cat5

Thanks for this!
I used the Vancouver Sun public sector salaries looking specifically in Coquitlam: Public Sector Salaries - Vancouver Sun (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/public-sector-salaries/basic.html)

There are 100's of teachers over the supposed maximum (3500 employees in SD43, which I assume include custodial, administrators, aids and such, so maybe 1500 teachers?) and that is from 2012-2013 year but I don't think they have gotten a raise. It says ~1100 of the 3500 employees in SD-43 (BC School District 43: Coquitlam | Metro | Make a Future (http://www.makeafuture.ca/bc-school-districts/regions/metro/43-coquitlam/)) make >$75000 which, in my opinion is quite good money.


I just am unsure how you can make more than the maximum (>$10,000 in many cases). Does anyone know (can't be from being "acting" principal for a few days)?

Anyways, this topic comes up every few years and I think my ideals are the same as before. $80,000 is A LOT of money to make as a teacher considering the benefits (2 months summer, winter/spring breaks, good health benefits, Pro-D days) but the fact that it takes 10 years is UNFAIR, especially considering how little the bottom end is. Everyone complaining they haven't gotten a raise is probably making ~$80,000/year whereas the new teachers are making, in my opinion, to little.

What I think should be the focus of the BCTF:
1. Create a 6 year salary differential (take 6 years to get to the maximum)
2. Keep the top salary the same for another 2-3 years, increase the base salary by at least 10%

[meme405]

considering the benefits (2 months summer, winter/spring breaks, good health benefits, Pro-D days)

I thought teachers are supposed to work and develop themselves professionally on Pro-D days? :suspicious:

Anyway thats not the point, I pretty much agree with your point.

I think the teachers seriously need to move away from these short term negotiations and move to 5+ year terms. I hate how this topic is continuously coming up. Negotiate a fair 6 year deal and live by it.

Every 4 fucking years we deal with this.

EDIT: Just one thing though, wouldn't the 10 year time to get into the full time role just simply be due to supply and demand?

I mean if its such a tasking job and such shit pay, why are there so many qualified people trying to get in on this industry, and please don't start telling me because its such a fulfilling profession. If it weren't for the money 99% of people would not be working.

If anything maybe they should lower the pay until all the qualified people who want to be teachers are doing so, and all the people who want the big money will pursue other career paths....:pokerface:

[Nocardia]

I thought teachers are supposed to work and develop themselves professionally on Pro-D days? :suspicious:

Anyway thats not the point, I pretty much agree with your point.

Yeah I put Pro-Ds in there because in other professions keeping up to date and develop professionally is usually on the person's own time AND expense and is NOT tax deductible. In their case, which is a great thing / benefit, they have a days pay and free education.


EDIT: Just one thing though, wouldn't the 10 year time to get into the full time role just simply be due to supply and demand?

I mean if its such a tasking job and such shit pay, why are there so many qualified people trying to get in on this industry, and please don't start telling me because its such a fulfilling profession. If it weren't for the money 99% of people would not be working.

If anything maybe they should lower the pay until all the qualified people who want to be teachers are doing so, and all the people who want the big money will pursue other career paths....:pokerface:
I don't often hear new grads complaining that much about the salary compared to actually finding a job. The problem is, people are completely oblivious to look into supply/demand and how much the teachers make before doing the program. Perhaps something that should be taught in school? If I could make $80k and have guaranteed summers, spring break, christmas and all other holidays off, I would be a fool to say no.

I think most public sectors are around 6 years (I actually don't know but in my career and a few others it is). And logistically, the young teachers are usually the ones doing the extra-curricular (not always!) and the ones who get thrown around so it shouldn't take 10 years to get to be considered "experienced", probably ~4 years should suffice.

Anyways, beating a dead horse now I suppose.

[meme405]

Yeah I put Pro-Ds in there because in other professions keeping up to date and develop professionally is usually on the person's own time AND expense and is NOT tax deductible. In their case, which is a great thing / benefit, they have a days pay and free education.



Thats a good point, the number of my own days off I have spent at conferences and day long courses in the name of development is pretty high. Just a couple weeks ago I spent 6 hours of my saturday at some bullshit conference.


Anyways, beating a dead horse now I suppose.

It's okay, its a horse we beat every 3-4 years.

[tiger_handheld]

I don't get the mentality of teachers.

They are requesting 13% increase over 3 years because they feel they work more (lesson prep, committee participation etc). The last time I checked each and every teacher CHOSE the profession for a variety of reasons:

- the pension
- the benefits
- 2 months off in the summer
- reasonable job security
- best job available with an arts degree

Notice how 'for the kids' is not a part of it? Don't believe me? Ask any of your teacher friends or English or History majors what they plan to do after UBC and they will say "teacher". Ask them why?and if the first answer isn't listed above.. well then you have proved me wrong.. congratulations!

I highly doubt any of these teachers did it "for the kids". Lets cut the bullshit... seriously.

If you really care "for the kids" and want to keep up with cost of living ask for a 2-3% raise each year. Yes the governments are fucktards for not giving a cost of living adjustment for the past X years. However, my point is, Christy Clarke nor Mr. Campbell forced you into the profession, each and every teacher chose it on their own. As such they must live with what the job entails.

Example, I'm an accountant - I chose it for my own reasons but I also knew going in that if I end up in public practice I'll have no time for anyone from Jan - June. If I end up in industry, I'll probably be management so no OT. I will still have the same deadlines that I'll need to meet. If I don't like the inherent characteristics of my profession, I can chose to leave and become a burger flipper or electrician.

Same goes for the teachers. If you don't like the inherent characteristics of being a teacher, chose another profession- but oh wait the benefits and pension are too good. Anyone in HR will know this is called "Golden Handcuffs"...

I also wonder, some teachers complain about budget cuts and so on, but they have the tenacity to ask for 14% raise. WTF? I guess they didn't teach math in that arts program..

[snowball]

So which one is it? I see a bunch of numbers being thrown around from 13% over 3, 10.75% over 4, and 15% over 3. Maybe we should get our facts straight before putting out an argument.

[iEatClams]

^ it's called collective bargaining, they ask for 13% over 3, the government is offering 7.25% over 6.

They both know they have to meet in the middle, right now it's determining that middle ground.

Like I said in an earlier post, something like 1.5-2% a year for next 6 years and I'm sure there will be a deal.

and this shouldn't be a race to the bottom, that's how the corporate world mentality is becoming these days, everybody is working longer hours for less pay. and if you complain it's "if you dont do it, someone else will". it's already becoming like that for most CAs/ CPAs.

as time progress, the rate that incomes rise will be less than inflation, and we are working long hours, so effectively our real wage is lower.

as you get older, you see why and how unions form and get their powers, because without them, it is a race to the bottom. it's unfortunate because I hate the union mentality, just as I hate the corporate mentality.

[snowball]

^ I am familiar with bargaining. The reason I posted that above was because they BCTF is not asking for 13% hoping for 10.75% It's all the Premier's fault - so says the BCTF about disruptions to schools | (CKNW AM) AM980 (http://www.cknw.com/2014/05/22/bctf-blames-premier-for-disruptions-to-schools/). They are actively asking for 10.75% over 4 years which means the 13% over 3 years is outdated information.

[meme405]

as you get older, you see why and how unions form and get their powers, because without them, it is a race to the bottom. it's unfortunate because I hate the union mentality, just as I hate the corporate mentality.

Again I disagree about this "race to the bottom".

Like everything else in life the price of an employee to a company is determined by supply and demand. Like it or not employees are just a commodity to every company, they may smear family and all that bullshit in your face, but at the end of the day its just smoke and mirrors.

As the need for a particular type of employee goes up, the price employers are willing to pay for a person of that skill set will also go up. We see this happening in the trades industry right now.

As the need for a certain type of worker goes down, the price a company is willing to pay in salary to that employee will also go down.

Now the example for that second one is a little complex, part of it is because I rather not offend people, the other part is due to the fact that in our current day and age there are a lot of factors influencing this "market" price.

#1 - Decline of workers, with the baby boomers retiring and the decline in the general working force, demand is going up for workers, especially skilled ones.

#2 - The demand caused by number 1 is unequal, the baby boomers did a solid job of spreading the workforce across all different types of necessary workers. Whereas today there is a lot of white collar 9-5, bachelors degree type people being churned out all across the country.

So what we are seeing is, in some industries the price for workers is greatly increasing while, in other industries it is remaining stagnant because the number of people available to occupy that job is high. Hence why it is so difficult to break into some professions (I.e. Teaching).

Going back to your "race to the bottom" idealism, realistically unless you want to try and promote communism, you must realize that this world will always have winners and losers. There will always be a 1% and a 99%. The goal for everyone should be to make it to the 1%. Now I understand some people have different priorities and becoming part of the 1% falls far down on the list, for that debate I will spoiler my thoughts below, as it does not necessarily apply to the teachers situation.

This notion of 1% and 99% does not apply whatsoever to teaching as the teachers have more or less chosen ahead of time to be part of that 99%. Might sound harsh, but I mean come on, nobody goes into teaching thinking they are going to be making millions.

The teachers rely on the need for their services and the taxes paid by everyone else to dictate their salary. They rely on their collective power to bargain a better deal for themselves but at the end of the day the base price of their salary is still determined by that "market" price. They might be able to influence it a few percentage here and there, but by and large it will be a locked within a few points to that "market" price.

I hope this kind of makes sense on how I see it. It's late and I just finished working, so my mind is wandering a bunch thinking about this.

Now I guess I should go back to my thoughts on the general working population and this "race to the bottom". If you don't want to work and be the 1%, be it because you want a family, or you value your sanity, or you simply enjoy your life, then that's absolutely fine. At that point you simply rely again on that "market" price. After all the 1% can't do shit without you, they need your work to build a business.

Now you are probably thinking, "hey well since they need me, if I join forces with all the other workers they need we can force their hand, and demand more pay". Okay so you want to make a union. Good move. You will probably get your better working conditions, and you will probably get your extra days off, and you might even get a few more bucks.

I see two paths forward:

#1: Now all of a sudden that 1% boss of yours who was building up all that cheddar off the sweat of your brow, isn't making fuck all, infact hes making less profit than what he is paying some of his own workers. He decides he has had a good run, closes down shop, moves to Italy with his model wife and leads a happy ever after life. What happens to you? well you are now unemployed.

#2: Your boss starts to falter, but its okay because the government starts giving him tax breaks to keep him from shutting down his business which employs so many people. Now they start to tax the general population further to make up for all the expenses (like teachers) that they need to pay for. Now the next round of bargaining, the union still wants more money, and on top of that they don't want to work such long hours anymore, so the boss has to higher even more people to make up for lost productivity. He starts to cut back expenses, stuff like your free coffee are cut and his business investment start to suffer. Now he is again making even less money. Again the government lowers his taxes and raises yours, and so this goes on for years and years, until a breaking point is eventually reached.

And yes these are vast generalizations, but I think they kind of prove some sort of delirious point I am trying to make. That point is this:

There will always be a middle ground, this middle ground is quite simply the end all, be all. You can influence it like you can pull a rubber band but at some point that rubber band is just going to snap and hit you in the eye, or its going to break in half, and you will have to get a new one.

TL;DR - Salaries are all about supply and demand. Want to be a teacher? You will make mediocre money. Want to make good money? Go be a dumb fucking tradesperson, so few people want to do it that you will be rich in no time...:thumbs:

[Timpo]

I don't get the mentality of teachers.

They are requesting 13% increase over 3 years because they feel they work more (lesson prep, committee participation etc). The last time I checked each and every teacher CHOSE the profession for a variety of reasons:

- the pension
- the benefits
- 2 months off in the summer
- reasonable job security
- best job available with an arts degree

Notice how 'for the kids' is not a part of it? Don't believe me? Ask any of your teacher friends or English or History majors what they plan to do after UBC and they will say "teacher". Ask them why?and if the first answer isn't listed above.. well then you have proved me wrong.. congratulations!

I highly doubt any of these teachers did it "for the kids". Lets cut the bullshit... seriously.

If you really care "for the kids" and want to keep up with cost of living ask for a 2-3% raise each year. Yes the governments are fucktards for not giving a cost of living adjustment for the past X years. However, my point is, Christy Clarke nor Mr. Campbell forced you into the profession, each and every teacher chose it on their own. As such they must live with what the job entails.

Example, I'm an accountant - I chose it for my own reasons but I also knew going in that if I end up in public practice I'll have no time for anyone from Jan - June. If I end up in industry, I'll probably be management so no OT. I will still have the same deadlines that I'll need to meet. If I don't like the inherent characteristics of my profession, I can chose to leave and become a burger flipper or electrician.

Same goes for the teachers. If you don't like the inherent characteristics of being a teacher, chose another profession- but oh wait the benefits and pension are too good. Anyone in HR will know this is called "Golden Handcuffs"...

I also wonder, some teachers complain about budget cuts and so on, but they have the tenacity to ask for 14% raise. WTF? I guess they didn't teach math in that arts program..Teachers are complaining about their wage?

Although they're not making Corporate Executive territory, I don't find it miserably low either.
Their salaries range from $43,790 to $81,489...and don't forget all the benefits mentioned above.

Teaching Salaries in BC's Metro Region | Make a Future (http://www.makeafuture.ca/career-resources/salary-finder/metro-salary-finder/)

Step Cat 4 Cat 5 Cat 6/PA Cat 6/M
0 $43,790 $48,083 $52,019 $52,823
1 $45,981 $50,494 $54,663 $55,467
2 $48,172 $52,904 $57,307 $58,111
3 $50,363 $55,315 $59,950 $60,754
4 $52,554 $57,725 $62,594 $63,398
5 $54,745 $60,135 $65,237 $66,041
6 $56,935 $62,546 $67,881 $68,685
7 $59,126 $64,956 $70,525 $71,328
8 $61,317 $67,367 $73,168 $73,972
9 $65,414 $69,777 $75,812 $76,616
10 N/A $74,353 $80,417 $81,489

[AWDTurboLuvr]

I think the flaw in the argument from the BCTF side is that the issue at the beginning was class sizes (smaller class size = more teachers, which is what the union ultimately wants) and now it's also wage/salary increases. The last CBA with the BC Nurses had a 3% wage increase and I can't see the BCTF getting much more than that.

From a funding side, there's no way to really have both at the moment, without increasing sales tax or income tax. I'm all for raising taxes to fund education, but it seems the majority of the public wouldn't want that.

What is the average class size these days? Is it 25, 27 or 30? The BCTF would have you believe that class size is the issue, so that they can raise membership numbers. However the real issue is class composition, with more children with learning disabilities or other special needs being taught in the same classroom. I think the biggest impact would be additional funding towards support teachers and assistants for children with special needs.

[GLOW]

The last CBA with the BC Nurses had a 3% wage increase and I can't see the BCTF getting much more than that.


just curious - i remember the nurses wanted more staff as hospitals were understaffed as well, did they get that in the end?

[hud 91gt]

just curious - i remember the nurses wanted more staff as hospitals were understaffed as well, did they get that in the end?
If they didn't they should have. Every nurse I know racks it in with overtime!

[AWDTurboLuvr]

If they didn't they should have. Every nurse I know racks it in with overtime!

They did end up with more staff and the required hours went up to 37.5 hours a week.

[GLOW]

If they didn't they should have. Every nurse I know racks it in with overtime!

haha i was thinking more of the lines that not enough nurses on the floor eg. certain patients requiring 1 to 1 care but due to lack of nurses on the shift you'd see 1 to 2 or more care.

[Vulgate]

I totally agree with you that if there is a special needs child, having an assistance or support teacher looking after him/her will alleviate the teacher from being bogged down by that student. I would think class size and class composition goes hand-in-hand.

Having to deal with a special needs child almost takes exponentially amount of time. However, as for class size, I can see the argument for both sides. As an example, a class of 40 well behave kids, while very high and probably not ideal, may be fine but as a class of 20 dumbfucks or even 10 dumbfucks would be much to handle. Given no one knows how kids behave, they would need to make an average assumption. What that class limit should be is is probably arguable for both sides.

I want to mention that often times we tend to discard issues that do not directly affect us. I mean, like a special needs child. Unless you have a specially needs child, this issue is hard to understand for most people. Another example is peanut butter allergy. It is a huge issue for parents who have kids with this issue as the worse case is death. But to some parents whose child doesn't have this issue, they don't care or do think about other children who does. Their thinking is, well, my child is not allergic to peanut butter, so why shouldn't my child eat peanut butter? If everyone is more open minded and if their children doesn't have any issues, just be glad but not everyone is so lucky. People just need to put themselves in others shoes sometimes and think, and be less selfish.



What is the average class size these days? Is it 25, 27 or 30? The BCTF would have you believe that class size is the issue, so that they can raise membership numbers. However the real issue is class composition, with more children with learning disabilities or other special needs being taught in the same classroom. I think the biggest impact would be additional funding towards support teachers and assistants for children with special needs.

[gars]

it's the 10/90 rule. 10% of your kids take up 90% of your time.

[adambomb]

I was driving westbound on Hastings street in Burnaby this morning and saw teachers on strike. I got to thinking... How much sympathy/support do teachers expect by waving to people who are on their way to work. It's almost insulting. Especially when are fair percentage of the people they are waving to, in hopes of support, are heading to a job that does not include the salary, benefits or summer options that teachers are entitled to.

Last few strikes (cause they happen so often) there were plenty of honks of support. I did not hear a single honk of support as I drove by. I guess everybody had to get to work. :concentrate:

It doesn't matter what side you are on. The media loves a good strike or job action to divide the people. :hotbaby:

[Traum]

Came across this great read:

Dear Parent Of The Average Child: One B.C. Teacher's Confession | Genevieve Hawtree (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/genevieve-hawtree/bc-teachers-strike-2014_b_5387643.html)

and from chatting with the few elementary / high school teacher friends that I have, the general impression I got is that the recounts in the article are quite true, although at different grades, the problems / mini crisis the teacher faces are naturally somewhat different.

Before anyone jumps in to say that we all face difficulties and challenges in our own jobs on a daily basis, and how the teacher isn't the only one struggling in their profession, I want to bring up this cliche one more time -- as good or as bad as they may be, our children today are our future tomorrow, and that makes our public education system the backbone of our future. Can we really afford to allow it (our public education) to fester due to insufficient funding? (Notice how I said funding, not necessarily teachers' salaries.) As any loving and responsible parent will probably tell you, they would 110% be willing to sacrifice their own needs to fulfill the needs of their own children. As a whole, why is the province unwilling to channel more resources into our children and the public education system when we are giving pay raises to politicians, crown corp senior and middle management, already wealthy corp and the like?

[dachinesedude]

As a whole, why is the province unwilling to channel more resources into our children and the public education system when we are giving pay raises to politicians, crown corp senior and middle management, already wealthy corp and the like?

because investing in children does not make them money presently

[falcon]

Seriously fuck all those striking bitches. Seriously makes my blood boil driving by schools and seeing them sitting on their lazy asses with signs around their neck. IF they really cared about students they wouldn't use them as pawns in a game that everyone ends up losing. It's the same shit over and over again every time they go to the bargaining table. I want the Govn't to full on say screw you to them so they don't feel they can do this every time they want a raise. When the Govn't gives in, it's reinforcing the fact they know they can always get what they want (or close). Teachers deserve a raise, that I agree with. But what they are asking for is ridiculous and not on par with other public sector employees.

[tiger_handheld]

rather interesting comment from a teacher... I wonder how many feel this way but have to stand in support for something they dont want to participate because of union solidarity..
--

All good issues.
The (my) BCTF needs to take salary off the table, go on strike on ONE issue being class size/composition. When the government legislates the teachers back to work, stay on strike until the ONE issue is fixed. Teachers: we get paid well. Get over it. Our issue should be the students in our classrooms. Parents and students need to take a break as well. The tied for first cause of grief a teacher faces today is the shite attitude of many students and MANY MORE parents.

Malcolm Chrystal
Teacher since 1992.
Currently TOC in SD37

[Lomac]

Meant to post this earlier, but oh well.

What started as an idea by a couple of Vancouver teens has spread to Kamloops — and it could see students walking out of school on Wednesday, June 4.

Students at Valleyview and NorKam secondaries have signed onto a Facebook page created to promote the walkout.

On the page, Victoria Barker and Mackenzie Timko of Vancouver write that many students have experienced the labour disputes between teachers and the provincial government “for our entire schooling.

“For some of us, that means our entire 13 years of education.

“The two sides are like parents who are divorcing and have stuck their children in the middle for the last 13 years.”

The pair has asked students to walk out on Wednesday at 9 a.m. and carry signs that speak from the student’s perspective and not the B.C. Teachers’ Federation or the B.C. Public School Employers’ Association (BCPSEA).

Jason Karpuk, president of the Kamloops Thompson Teachers’ Association (KTTA), said he’s heard rumours of the walkout, but hopes students don’t do it.

“This is between the teachers and the government and I don’t think they [students] should take more time from instruction,” he said.

Karpuk encouraged students who support teachers to join them as the second week of rotating strikes hits Kamloops on Thursday, June 5.

For students who do not support the teachers’ stance, Karpuk urged them to visit picket lines and discuss issues with teachers.

Kamloops-Thompson school district Supt. Terry Sullivan agreed with Karpuk in encouraging students to not walk out.

He said parents will receive a phone call from the district asking them to speak to their children about not leaving school.

Sullivan said this is particularly important for students preparing to write provincial exams or doing other assessments.

Sullivan said the automated phone message worked well last week when he sent out an update to parents.

Meanwhile, Karpuk said he planned to speak with South Kamloops secondary student Rylee Elfert, who has started a petition demanding teachers be allowed to attend the school’s graduation ceremonies.

Karpuk said the BCTF has told teachers they can attend as observers, but not as participants.

The BCPSEA maintains teachers can take part in graduations and Sullivan said he cannot see why they wouldn’t also be allowed at graduation banquets, which are not school functions, but organized by parents.

Elfert said by noon on Monday, June 2, more than 150 of South Kam’s 260 graduating students had signed her petition.

She said graduation “isn’t just for students, it’s for teachers, too,” noting students are unhappy teachers can’t hand out their certificates or take part in pre-ceremony banquets.

Students had voted for two of their teachers — Don Wilson and Blake Buemann — to give speeches at the banquet.

Elfert said she was taking the petition to the KTTA office at the end of the day in hopes the list of students might spark “some resolution.”

Karpuk said a grievance will likely be filed dealing with the pay reductions ordered by the BPSEA for teachers’ job actions.

He said he had received complaints from teachers that the five and 10 per cent reductions tied to the level of job action had been applied to benefits as well as gross pay.

The BCPSEA has already said only base wages will be reduced and all other costs, including benefits and sick days, “are to be provided/paid as usual and in full.”

The document outlining these provisions notes that positions will be reviewed if the BCTF calls for a full strike.

The pay reduction went into effect on May 26, the day the BCTF started its rotating strikes.

Sullivan acknowledged there were bound to be some mistakes that will need to be corrected later.

“Our computer system isn’t set up to make [this kind of] reduction,” he said, noting it’s likely teachers away on field trips, on medical leave or who work part-time might have had the wrong amounts deducted.

Karpuk said he was also looking into reports of security guards at Aberdeen and Juniper Ridge elementary schools in the evening.

Sullivan also expressed surprise when told of the reports.

“News to me,” he said. “I’d suggest people not get their information from social media.”
Students urged not to walk out | Kamloops This Week (http://www.kamloopsthisweek.com/students-urged-not-to-walk-out/)

Thoughts? One side of me thinks that students should get the most of the time they have with their teachers, but the other feels that it's pretty damn hypocritical of teachers to pull the "Do as I say, not as I do" card.

As much as I support proper wages and decent class sizes for teachers, I hate that they're pulling this shit at the end of the school year. This is the time when students need help the most, what with final exams coming up.

[stewie]

about 11 years ago when i was in grade 12, some stupid shit with them was happening..

we ended up doing a student walk out.

honestly...it does/did shit all except get us out of class...

(cant say it'll do nothing for them, but who knows...)

[4444]

about 11 years ago when i was in grade 12, some stupid shit with them was happening..

we ended up doing a student walk out.

honestly...it does/did shit all except get us out of class...

(cant say it'll do nothing for them, but who knows...)

sad thing is, i was involved in a teach strike (was it in 2000? i can't recall)

doesn't this all strike you as odd, that probably >50% of us has seen a strike whilst at school, not to mention the bus strikes, port strikes, etc.

i'm not from canada, and have lived in 4 different countries - canada, by far, is the most strike prone place i've ever lived, and that tells me something is inherently wrong with either the government and/or our union structures/powers.

fundamentally, the big losers here are the tax paying citizens.

i'm sick of seeing shit like that

[GLOW]

about 11 years ago when i was in grade 12, some stupid shit with them was happening..

we ended up doing a student walk out.

honestly...it does/did shit all except get us out of class...

(cant say it'll do nothing for them, but who knows...)

this happened when i was in HS as well. all the schools in the city walked out and marched on city hall. really all it did was cause damage (some convenient stores were looted and bush shelters smashed, and time out of school.

[ntan]

BCTF President Jim Iker is threatening a full-scale teachers’ strike within the next two weeks if the government doesn’t put more money on the table.

Iker says teachers will take a strike vote on Monday, June 9 and Tuesday, June 10 to get a mandate for escalated job action.


Rotating strikes will also continue next week, with the schedule released Thursday.

“The time has come to apply even more pressure — it’s time to exert the maximum pressure,” says Iker. “Taking job action is never easy and these decisions are not made lightly. The rotating strikes show that parents understand what we are fighting for, and why we must take it forward.”

Iker says there’s still time for the province to avert a full-scale strike.

He says the government remains unwilling to move on key issues including class size and composition, and the number of specialist teachers for students with special needs.

“There are more than 16,000 classes in BC with four or more children with special needs,” says Iker. “Christy Clark’s lock out has created a lot of chaos in B.C. schools. We remain focused at the bargaining table and continue to persuade this government for a fair deal for teachers and better supports for our students.”

Education Minister Peter Fassbender says the government wants to get an agreement “by the end of June.”

“A full strike is only going to keep more students out of their classrooms, create more disruption for parents, while teachers and support workers caught in the middle will lose even more in wages. There is no bottomless pit of money, and the rotating strikes are certainly not going to help teachers’ and support workers’ pocketbooks,” said Fassbender in a statement.

Earlier today, the Labour Relations Board has ruled that the government’s 10 per cent wage to teachers during rotating strikes is not illegal, and can proceed.

Iker says the BCTF will be looking at all of its legal options in response to the decision.

The province says the wage cut saves them more than one million dollars per school day, but teachers argue it is just a tactic to escalate the dispute.

The province countered the rotating strikes with a partial lockout and docking teachers’ pay by 10 per cent starting May 26.

The government contends teachers shouldn’t expect full salary when they’re no longer fulfilling all their duties.

But the union’s lawyers argue employers have no authority to refuse wages.

Meanwhile, more than 10,000 B.C. students say they will walkout today in protest of the ongoing dispute between the BCTF and the provincial government.

Today is the only day this week the BCTF is not holding rotating strikes in B.C. The strikes will resume tomorrow.

The full schedule of rotating strikes this week can be found here.

READ MORE: Wage Comparison: how B.C. teachers compare to others in Canada

With files from the Canadian Press


BCTF threatens full-scale teachers? strike in next two weeks - BC | Globalnews.ca (http://globalnews.ca/news/1373684/ruling-on-legality-of-wage-cuts-for-teachers-expected-today/)

[Graeme S]

Bumping this to the top, gonna make two separate posts in order to organise my thoughts a bit better.

New update from the government:
Province moves to make exams, report cards essential services (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/story.html?id=9916083)

Province moves to make exams, report cards essential services

Application to LRB asks for ruling to prevent ‘serious and immediate danger’ to affected students
The B.C. Public School Employers Association has applied to the Labour Relations Board to designate Grade 10 to 12 exams and report cards for secondary students as essential services.

Earlier this week, Education Minister Peter Fassbender promised parents that exams and final marks would go ahead, but he said he wasn’t sure how he would make it happen.

Friday’s letter of application to vary the existing essential service order asks the board to designate supervising and marking exams and recording final marks as essential services.

“The basis for this application is the serious and immediate damage which would be caused to the education programs of secondary students if they are not able to complete end of year examinations (both provincial and school based), to have these examinations marked, and to ensure that final grades be compiled and entered into the relevant systems,” the letter states.

The results for Grade 12 students are necessary to enable graduation, to complete registration of students into post-secondary schools, to determine scholarship eligibility or to enter the workforce, the letter states. For Grade 10 and 11 students, the assessments are necessary to determine if students are ready to move to the next grade and “final grades based only on work to date may skew grade results unfairly, resulting in potentially inaccurate, and unfair assessments of student progress.”

The application also asks the board to say that designating new special needs students and getting payrolls ready on time are essential services.

The essential services order governing the teachers’ job action says any decision on variance will be made within 48 hours of referral to the board. The order defines as essential those services that prevent serious danger to the health, safety or welfare of people or that immediately and seriously disrupt the provision of educational programs.

Teachers have been on rotating strikes, closing schools one day each week in each district, since May 26. Parents and students should know by about 8 p.m. Tuesday evening whether teachers will be on a full strike the following week.

Voting will take place Monday and Tuesday, although some advance polls were already open on Friday. Teachers will be voting whether to strike knowing they will not be paid for any days they walk the picket line. As The Vancouver Sun reported yesterday, the union told its members its strike pay fund is running dry.

“The impact on the (Collective Bargaining Defence Fund) after 12 years of defending teachers’ rights on so many fronts, and such a prolonged struggle to make gains since the contract stripping in 2002 has been significant,” the BCTF said in an memo to its members. “The CBDF is able to finance up to three days of strike pay (as of June sixth we have already incurred two days of strike pay), after which the CBDF will not have the necessary funds to cover additional strike pay days that may well be necessary in order to achieve a collective agreement.”

A BCTF memo seen by The Vancouver Sun Friday says that teachers were asked at the BCTF’s annual general meeting to change its strike pay formula to give a lower amount at first, increasing with the number of days on strike, but that plan was not approved. At that meeting teachers also agreed to increase the portion of their dues that goes to this fund for next year to build the fund up again. In response to the rotating strikes, the employer instituted a partial lockout, which restricts teachers from working during recess or lunch hours, or from arriving at school any earlier than 45 minutes before classes start, or staying 45 minutes after they end and includes a 10-per-cent pay cut. The LRB ruled Wednesday that the lockout is legal, and teachers have not yet decided if they will appeal the decision or refer it to arbitration. The employer is offering a 7.3-per-cent wage increase over six years. Teachers on Tuesday reduced their wage demand by one per cent, now calling for 9.75 plus a portion of cost of living over four years.

So having previously said that the government would lock teachers out on the days when the teachers would be marking the graduating tests and that they would 'ensure that the work was done' regardless, we now know that the default move is not to find a compromise, but instead to simply pass a law saying 'you have to do this regardless'.

As much as I understand the resistance that people feel to negotiating with the Teachers, given the demands which people perceive as 'extreme', defaulting to legislating in contracts is very much not a sign of good faith for anyone.

[Traum]

So having previously said that the government would lock teachers out on the days when the teachers would be marking the graduating tests and that they would 'ensure that the work was done' regardless, we now know that the default move is not to find a compromise, but instead to simply pass a law saying 'you have to do this regardless'.

As much as I understand the resistance that people feel to negotiating with the Teachers, given the demands which people perceive as 'extreme', defaulting to legislating in contracts is very much not a sign of good faith for anyone.
The few teacher friends that I have talked to pretty much expected this right from the start -- they were totally expecting the BC Liberals government to not take the negotiations seriously, and simply legislate them back to work, and perhaps even forcing a CBA down their throats once again. Legislating school teaching as "essential service" has already happened in the past with this government -- I forgot when, and I am too lazy to look it up. The BCTF as well as the teachers have pointed this out many times in the past -- they have repeatedly claim that the government is negotiating in bad faith.

[Graeme S]

A lot of people have focused on the fact that teachers are asking for more money, and a lot of it. In order to understand the entirety of what's happening between the teachers and the province, I'd like to go back to just after I graduated high school.

Fifteen years ago, BC teachers felt as though they needed additional resources: class sizes were beginning to get stretched. Teachers were having to face the decision of whether to sign a waiver to their class size limits (25 elem/28 high) or to reject students in their catchment area and send them to other schools nowhere near where they lived. As a result, they decided to make the sacrifice and sign a 3-year CBA which gave them a 0/0/0 wage increase. In exchange, the government was to take that money and invest it into additional jobs in the districts. In some, for more teachers at various levels and positions. In others, aid workers (counsellors, disability workers, special needs instructors and the like).

However, once the contract was signed, the government essentially expressed an opinion which I'll translate into the colloquial.

Oh, yeah. That thing where we said we'd take your raise money and just use it to hire more people. Well, we actually don't really have the money for that, so we're just not gonna do it. Yeah. Sorry about that.

Teachers, as you've no doubt guessed, were pissed. I, as a young impressionable youth, joined my mother on the picket lines on my days off from working at Starbucks when the teachers went on strike at the end of the CBA. The teachers insisted that since they had not gotten the conditions which they had previously bargained for, that they should be given raises which would essentially have covered what the government had offered in the last round of CBA as well as what they should receive for that round.

So when looked at as a single data point, what the teachers were asking for was outrageous. It was essentially a 4/4/4 over three years; which actually was 12 over 6, which is a much more reasonable 2/2/2/2/2/2. And yet, because nobody really goes deep when it comes to media matters this way...nobody saw it that way.

Oh, and also: Conrad Black.

Conrad Black used to own most of the newspapers in Canada. He was also fiercely anti-union, and was quoted as saying to the editors of the Vancouver Sun and the Province: "As long as I own these newspapers, there will not be one positive story about the teachers while they are on strike."

How's that for media manipulation?

So because the teachers were asking for an 'outrageous' sum, and the government was unwilling to give them the resources they had asked for in order to reduce class sizes, there was no deal or settlement in sight. What happens now, you might ask?

The government decides to legislate that class sizes and composition are not actually part of a teacher's pay/working conditions/benefits package. Now, this is in spite of years of precedent, and the fact that it is part of the working conditions and CBA negotiations in (I believe) EVERY OTHER JURISDICTION IN NORTH AMERICA.

Well...I shouldn't be so cruel. The wording said that administrators would have to consult with a teacher before modifying the size or composition of a class size. It didn't say the teachers could refuse what an administrator was suggesting...but it did say there was consultation. A friend of mine who was teaching in Victoria for awhile told me about one consultation that she had with an Administrator. She sat opposite her principal, and he said, "So this coming year, you'll have one class that has two students on the autism spectrum, one who is not diagnosed with any learning disorders but is believed to have some, as well as at least four ESL students of various levels. Alright, that's done. Can you just sign here that says we sat down and had this consultation?"

So the teachers are now limited to negotiating only for pay and are even MORE pissed. So they file a lawsuit that asks the justice system to decide whether or not that was illegal. That takes almost ten years to get through the justice system, so I'll leave that here as a sort of starting point for later.

So the incredibly pissed teachers, who have just filed a lawsuit and are on strike, are understandably unhappy and are not at all interested in signing a contract unless it's on something at least closely resembling their terms. And the government is just really not interested in that. So they legislate a 'back to work' contract, and say "there you go: we made a contract through law and not negotiation, so start working again."

This happens for the next two or so contracts, rinsing and repeating.

However, there are some other things that are happening within the teaching body that might not be noticeable to most people--and even some within the BC Teachers' Union.

First: the boomers are retiring.
The boomers, fiercely pro-union and pro-teachers are slowly retiring. As they age out, and younger teachers move in there comes a sharp decrease in the number of teachers who knew what it was like to teach to smaller classes, and to be able to negotiate for things like class size and prep time and all that. More and more young teachers come up from the bottom and simply look at the situation as it is: "The law says we can't negotiate for anything but money, and we're really overworked, so we need more money!"

A lot of the people who talk a lot about money are the younger teachers, the ones who haven't been around for ten or fifteen or more years. They never knew a time when they could get their class size down below 30 or 35. Nor do they know what it's like to not have to worry about special needs students. When I was a kid, special needs (formerly 'mentally challenged' formerly 'mentally retarded') kids who were incapable of caring for themselves were put in classes separate from the other students, where they would have several full-time caretakers who would teach them important (and I'm not joking here, I don't want you to think I'm being sarcastic because I am dead serious) skills like not hitting people when they're angry, and in knowing when to go to the bathroom, and how to use busses to get around the city.

My stepmother is a teacher. She was recently reminded of a former student and his class. She remembers him very clearly, and had taken a shining to him. Yet as much as she wanted to give him attention, she also had no less than three recent immigrants to the country, two students diagnosed with different learning disorders, one student with Oppositional Defiance Disorder, and one student who was quite deep on the Autism Spectrum.

Because of budget cutbacks, this child with Autism was only budged a part-time caretaker by the province. Somehow, the district managed to find money for a full-time care worker--likely depriving someone else of a part-time one. My stepmother teaches late-elementary students, and if my estimates are correct is approximately 5'2. Her Autistic student was easily taller than 5'8 and more than 180 pounds. Because the caretaker was even more needed during recess and lunch times (which the student shared with his schoolmates), she needed to take her break times during class. What does this mean? My 5'2 stepmother would be tasked not only with teaching her already-challenging class, but ensuring that her Autistic student did not lose control and/or try to escape the classroom.


Ah, but I digress.

Second: TOCing is quickly becoming a way of life.

Earlier on in the thread, a discussion opened up about how long it takes to move from TOC to fulltime teacher. There are nuances of course, but it is not atypical at the moment for a newly minted teacher to languish on the list for three or more years. Remember that because teaching is unionised it's based on seniority. So you sign up for a district's TOC list, and pray that everyone above you gets jobs or turns them down, so that you can have a shot at it. Then you have to hope that your style is appreciated by the teacher you replaced, so that they'll call and specifically ask for you (teachers are allowed to do this, and if they don't request a specific teacher or the one they want isn't available it goes out to the general list).

So let's assume I'm a good teacher, but I don't use the lesson plans in the way the classroom teacher wanted, or teach them in a style that isn't appreciated: no callback. Hope to slowly crawl up the seniority list and get more calls and one day land a contract.

In the meantime, of course, finding some source of income that allows infinite ditching flexibility, or is outside classroom hours...which means graveyard work. Joys.

And even then, once you secure a contract, that's not a guaranteed job.

632 Coquitlam teachers getting layoff notices - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/632-coquitlam-teachers-getting-layoff-notices-1.2636861)

In many districts, teachers are hired at the beginning of the year, and then fired at the end. This is to avoid continuing costs, and because registration is often uncertain. Many teachers are rehired at the beginning of September but there are no guarantees. Two of my friends are working contract jobs at the moment, but are literally unsure whether they will have jobs in September.

So much for job security, eh?

That having been said, once you're a teacher and have seniority, you absolutely have security. But this is not like the heyday of teaching. it can often take up to a decade after graduation (by the way, minimum of FIVE YEARS university--two degrees--to teach in BC) to really get to where you want to be. And if you graduated at 24 (six years, give a bit of leeway) then finally get fulltime at 34, and you have to work 35 years to get a full pension...you're retiring just shy of seventy.

Thirdly: the boomers are retiring...mostly.

Remember how I said above that the boomers are retiring and that's altering the way the contracts are negotiated? Well...that's mostly true. Except for one small part. And it really fucks up the TOC thing. Previously, teachers who retired just retired. They went on to bigger and better things like raising their grandkids or moving to Florida. But now, there are many teachers who are retired but TOCing. Despite having full pensions, they want to 'keep busy' and 'keep involved' and they 'miss the kids'. So if you're a fulltime teacher and you're looking for someone to teach your kids when you're off for a week with the flu, would you rather get a kid who's still wet behind the ears to watch your class, or a teacher with basically your lifetime of experience under their belt?

This is one of the other reasons it's harder for the new teachers to move up. The TOC pool is getting deeper rather than shallower, despite all the retirements of older teachers and the hiring of younger ones.

So that's what's going on within the Teachers themselves. And then a few years ago, something else happened that resulted in tighter budgets all around: Summer school was declared essential.

When I was in grade 11, I failed math. I had to take it again in order to graduate. I could have retaken it when I was in grade 12 as I had a couple spare blocks, but my mother chose to enrol me in summer school. She paid the few-hundred dollars it cost to get me in that class, and I attended a much smaller, much more intensive (yet less intense) class with an extremely passionate woodworking teacher. Who, strangely enough, managed to help me to understand grade eleven math much better than my previous teacher had. Enough so that I more than doubled my mark.

However, at some point it was decided (and I'm fuzzy here, I can't remember if it's a court decision or a school board one or a provincial one) that any class offered in summer school is basically part of your education and therefore school boards were not allowed to charge for them.

Not a big deal, right? Well, suddenly summer school enrolment spiked. Students who previously would have taken classes during the regular year were flooding the summer school system, requiring that more classes be open at more schools; a cost that had to be carried entirely by the existing budget of the board, and could not be subsidised by user fees as they had been previously.

A similar situation happened not too long ago. The last time the CUPE support staff (secretaries, administrative aides and the like) negotiated with the government, they were granted decent raises. Something like 2.x% per year. And then the province said, “School boards will not be granted additional funds to cover the increase in pay to their CUPE employees.” Is the school board's budget shrinking? In actual dollars, no. In spendable dollars, yes.

Let's come back to the lawsuit that the teachers filed. Oh, did you forget about that? Most people have, it's been almost a decade now.

The supreme court of BC has said that the parts of the legislation which stripped out class size/composition were illegal and that you cannot simply mandate out sections of collective bargaining, especially when they heavily impact the effectiveness of a worker. There were other implications in the ruling, but those aren't relevant here. Now there were two different viewpoints on the ruling.

Teachers' view:
Now that we know the class size/composition is part of our bargaining and always should have been, we think that the contracts should return class size and composition to what it was when the legislation was first introduced in the early 2000s. This would give us a fair starting point to begin renegotiating them both, if that is what is to happen.

Government's view:
We understand that the courts have made a decision though we disagree with its findings. It is not possible to accede to the teachers' suggestion that we return to early-2000s levels, because it would cost between one and two billion dollars in the next contract cycle to satisfy the amount of hiring the province would have to do; this amounts to an unacceptable cost and is equivalent to an unacceptable increase in wage spending that is unprecedented in any other negotiation with BCGEU members.


Now, I understand where the government is coming from in that regard. That's a lot of money, and especially when the government's been facing hard times. I should say that while I generally support the teachers, I was cringing during their negotiation post-2008 crash, because as much as I wanted to support higher wages, I knew that it was literally impossible and that pushing harder would only hurt the image of teachers and unions. They absolutely were deserving, especially having gotten little or no increases before. It's a question of bad and worse timing.

All that having been said, I'd like to examine that number--and let's use the smaller one. A billion dollars is still a fucktonne of money. The province says that to return us to the staffing levels of nearly 15 years ago, they'd have to spend about a billion dollars on hiring.

What that statement says to me is that they've stripped more than a billion dollars a year from education spending from when I was in the education system. And as I recall, times were not that great. I recall sharing handouts with my classmates because the teacher didn't have enough paper allotted to print them all out. "Okay guys, sheets back to the front of the class, I'll need these for my next block."



Do I think teachers are being unfairly vilified? Yes. Do I think that the province is the only one at fault? No. Do I think that the negotiations are being held in a manner which could be considered fair? Absolutely not. When are negotiations fair when the other side can say, “Alright, we'll wait for you to disagree to what we want to give to you, and then we'll just pass a law that says that's the best you'll get.”

When I see a strike, I don't see an entitlement. I see a group of people trying to fight for what they believe they deserve. When I see teachers getting a 70% pension and other people saying “Why the hell should they get so much?” I say “Why the hell aren't we fighting to get the same?”. Earlier, I saw people say that it's a race to the bottom. I don't entirely agree, but at the same time I don't understand why we're not fighting to haul ourselves up rather than others down.

“They get such fat pensions and so many sick days! Why don't I get the same?” is a cry I hear never. The second phrase is always “They should be grateful for what they have!” or “I'd be kicking everyone's asses if I was there with them.” Someone said it earlier: without unions we'd all be working 10 hours seven days a week, rather than the typical 8 hours 5 days. We wouldn't get breaks, have minimum wage, have an LRB or worker's comp. All those things came from workers that were fed up and wanted MORE, not others to have less.

Do I think teachers are well paid? Yes. Absolutely. Do I think that means they should have all the shit piled on them that they do? No. Do I think more pay will compensate for the shit they have to put up with? No. But with the current system and setup of negotiation, that's really all they can hope for. With luck, something will change.

[Traum]

^^ Dude, I can't thank you enough for taking the time to write this awesome post. :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:

[Graeme S]

I started writing it and then worried I'd hit F5 or something and lose it...and then realised it was five pages in Word.


...Then I kept writing so I could finish.

[hypediss]

I started writing it and then worried I'd hit F5 or something and lose it...and then realised it was five pages in Word.


...Then I kept writing so I could finish.

excellent piece sir, e x c e l l e n t.


http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6odkq8jNo1qbolbn.gif

[Gumby]

A lot of people have focused on the fact that teachers are asking for more money, and a lot of it. In order to understand the entirety of what's happening between the teachers and the province, I'd like to go back to just after I graduated high school.

Despite having a 6-week old newborn who sleeps for no more than 3 hours at a time who is currently asleep (i.e. I should be sleeping now), I am glad I took the time to read your post. Thank you!

Is this the longest post in the history of Revscene?

Disclaimer: I also have a 6 yr old currently in Kindergarten, and I've signed him up for summer school too. So this strike has affected me negatively, and may continue to be a PITA. I think I'm on the teachers' side.

Edit: Great - baby just woke up.

[MG1]

Graeme, you are the man. I was wAndering when someone on RS would actually stop the typical dumbass comments and actually say something constructive, and from a different viewpoint.

This thread has been saved. Up until this time, it was nothing more than people posting their shit through their eyes when they were in school.

Anyway, thanks, Greame.

[Vulgate]

An article from the Vancover Sun
VICTORIA — A short history of the B.C. Liberals’ botched dealings with the B.C. Teachers’ Federation: ...

Vaughn Palmer: A history of bad faith in B.C. Liberals' dealings with teachers (http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Vaughn+Palmer+history+faith+Liberals+dealings+with/9912106/story.html)

[capt_slo]

Bargaining with unions s always a polarizing issue and it is very easy for both sides to share their own sympathy story and paint the other side as the villains.

I'm more interested in the numbers.

From what I've read, the class size & composition issue is the most expensive item on the table. It's been "estimated" at $1B to $2.5B per year, depending on the source. Meanwhile the BCTF claims the resolution would be $300M per year. Now that seems way too low so let's shoot for somewhere on the high side of the middle and call it $800M per year.

The original wage increase was calculated out to $576M per year. Now it's been reduced and may roughly work out to $454M per year.

All tolled, we're facing at least $1.25B per year added to a $4.7B yearly budget. And it's all up to the "evil" government to find that money. The side demanding the money makes no effort to source it. Where does the BCTF think this funding will come from? Honestly, I want to know.

When the government looks to make money through ideas like the HST or LNG or pipelines, the protestors come out in droves looking to shoot them down.

So you're left with taxes.

Your 2.00-2.25% raise won't go very far when your income tax or the PST has to go up just to pay for it.

Something to think about the next time you hear the issue of class composition thrown out there casually by a picketing worker.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Bargaining with unions s always a polarizing issue and it is very easy for both sides to share their own sympathy story and paint the other side as the villains.

I'm more interested in the numbers.

From what I've read, the class size & composition issue is the most expensive item on the table. It's been "estimated" at $1B to $2.5B per year, depending on the source. Meanwhile the BCTF claims the resolution would be $300M per year. Now that seems way too low so let's shoot for somewhere on the high side of the middle and call it $800M per year.

The original wage increase was calculated out to $576M per year. Now it's been reduced and may roughly work out to $454M per year.

All tolled, we're facing at least $1.25B per year added to a $4.7B yearly budget. And it's all up to the "evil" government to find that money. The side demanding the money makes no effort to source it. Where does the BCTF think this funding will come from? Honestly, I want to know.

When the government looks to make money through ideas like the HST or LNG or pipelines, the protestors come out in droves looking to shoot them down.

So you're left with taxes.

Your 2.00-2.25% raise won't go very far when your income tax or the PST has to go up just to pay for it.

Something to think about the next time you hear the issue of class composition thrown out there casually by a picketing worker.

They could always add a new tax "hippie tax" tax all the those hippies in DT or another beer tax (like what they did to gas)

[MG1]

Maybe stop funding private schools? Then, put the money back into the public schools. In BC, private schools are funded by up to 50%. I guess it's better than in Ontario, where catholic schools (only) are funded 100%. I also hear Alberta is in a similar situation. Funding certain private schools, but not all.

Public schools are for people who cannot afford private schools for their children. Maybe, the government should just privatize all schools in the province and see where that goes. I wonder what will happen to the kids with learning difficulties and other issues.


Just my two bits.

[Traum]

Something to think about the next time you hear the issue of class composition thrown out there casually by a picketing worker.
As a first step / lead-by-example type of thing, how about if the Liberals government roll back their 18% wage increase that Crusty Cunt gave to her ministers? I am 1000% certain that the move will receive wide-ranging support from the public.

I recently read that Crusty Cunt has been quietly providing a lot of funding to independent schools (ie. private schools). I don't remember what that number is, but whatever amount it was, it was HUGE. It baffles me that public funding could be given to private schools for spending, especially when the majority of private schools are already totally LOADED and backed by well-heeled parents. Seriously, WTF?!

I'm sure there are tons of other ways where we can cough up more money to keep our public education system healthy. But we can always start with these two.

[MG1]

Private schools are for the wealthy (or catholics in some places), while the rest of us have to deal with schools full of kids who don't want to be there or kids of parents who don't give two fucks about their kids' education or well-being. Public education deals with everyone, 'cause there are no chocies........ they have to take in all the rejects. Funny thing is, the public system still produces some of the best despite the odds being against them.

And yes, the cream always rises to the top, but still....................


I wAnder how Chrity's little darling would fair in a public school.......... let's say Templeton, Britannia, or Van Tech. Yeah, eaten alive and pasted all over the walls of the school.

[capt_slo]

The last published number of money provided to private schools was 2011-2012 for $245M. Congrats! You still have to raise a BILLION dollars to pay for the rest of the BCTF demands.

Funding private schools allows families who are just on the cusp of affording the tuition to get their kids in. If it's "all about what's best for the kids" then don't be a spiteful hater when it comes to people with resources wanting "better" for their kids. Knowing how to save money for things does not equal rich.

Remove funding to private schools and brace yourselves for MORE portables being built at the local publics.

I'm all for pay cuts to government ministers. (the Libs aren't the only party to ever do that you know...)

[quasi]

Yeah, don't understand the private school argument. These are tax payers that are paying taxes towards schools through their income tax and through their property taxes (probably more money then the average parents who has there kid in the public school system). If they take the kids out and put them in public schools it would be even more of a drain the public system.

The only way to compare would be dollar per kid, as long as the same amount of money per child is going into private school as public school I see no issue at all. Now if the numbers are totally out of whack and the private schools are getting more per kid then there is an argument to be made.

[MG1]

As far as I know, most private schools specialize in something. Whether it be religious, cultural, or ?????

If you want your kids to be in a bible thumping school, then hooray! Do it, but at your own expense.

My kids are long out of the system. They went to public schools and I wouldn't have it any other way. Their education didn't stop at school......... it started at home.

[gars]

Yeah, don't understand the private school argument. These are tax payers that are paying taxes towards schools through their income tax and through their property taxes (probably more money then the average parents who has there kid in the public school system). If they take the kids out and put them in public schools it would be even more of a drain the public system.

The only way to compare would be dollar per kid, as long as the same amount of money per child is going into private school as public school I see no issue at all. Now if the numbers are totally out of whack and the private schools are getting more per kid then there is an argument to be made.

This

Private and Religious schools only get up to 50% of the regular funding that Public schools get. Imagine if they cut that funding and a good 50,000 kids now join the public schools - we would not be able to afford it.

[quasi]

As far as I know, most private schools specialize in something. Whether it be religious, cultural, or ?????

If you want your kids to be in a bible thumping school, then hooray! Do it, but at your own expense.

My kids are long out of the system. They went to public schools and I wouldn't have it any other way. Their education didn't stop at school......... it started at home.



I agree with you about the public school, I've went to both, my wife was strictly private and my kids in Public school I'd have it no other way.

I still don't see a problem with giving "X" amount of dollars to every kid no matter what school they go to. Private schools are heavily subsidized through the parents, they do pay for that privilege. I don't have the figure so if Private Schools are getting more then there fair share that's fucked up and should be fixed.

[Traum]

The real question is -- how did we manage to afford it in the past? Bear in mind that there has already been a lot of cuts to public education funding, and the teachers haven't really had a real wage increase in a very long time.

[MG1]

Education is way more expensive now than it used to. Not only because of increased wages, but due to rising cost of everything else. Plus, as mentioned earlier, more and more damaged kids in the system. One of my dearest friends is a long time principal and some of the stories he's told me............... man, our society is totally messed up. And, it's not getting any better.

[falcon]

[QUOTE=MG1;8484254]Private schools are for the wealthy (or catholics in some places), while the rest of us have to deal with schools full of kids who don't want to be there or kids of parents who don't give two fucks about their kids' education or well-being. Public education deals with everyone, 'cause there are no chocies........ they have to take in all the rejects. Funny thing is, the public system still produces some of the best despite the odds being against them.

And yes, the cream always rises to the top, but still....................


I wAnder how Chrity's little darling would fair in a public school.......... let's say Templeton, Britannia, or Van Tech. Yeah, eaten alive and pasted all over the walls of the school.[/QUOTE

I went to private school and my family was far from "wealthy" or "rich." We cut out a lot of other things in life to be able to afford it including vacations, nice clothes, eating out etc. While some people might think that sounds stupid, I'm glad my parents did it.

[meme405]

Graeme, your post is well written, and it does succinctly explain some of the history behind the entire process.

I'm not going to harp on a few other items too much, but I do think its odd how the BCTF seems to get fucked consistently. Maybe BCTF needs smarter representative or management in order to prevent them from taking their own contracts up the ass every time.

What I will point out is this:


That having been said, once you're a teacher and have seniority, you absolutely have security. But this is not like the heyday of teaching. it can often take up to a decade after graduation (by the way, minimum of FIVE YEARS university--two degrees--to teach in BC) to really get to where you want to be. And if you graduated at 24 (six years, give a bit of leeway) then finally get fulltime at 34, and you have to work 35 years to get a full pension...you're retiring just shy of seventy.


I said this earlier in the thread as well. This point means absolutely nothing. Its hard out here for any profession; engineering, or accounting, being a lawyer, etc. You think these are easy professions to break into?

They all require Degrees as well. And in many of these professions you will be into your early 30's before you are making any sort of "good" money as well.

True those that become successful can go much farther than any teacher in terms of income, but that's not their fault, but those that are mediocre, will average a salary very similar to that of a teacher.

Like I said before, if there are so many people applying for teaching positions that there is a waitlist for the job, maybe we should consider cutting the pay of the teachers, and using those funds to hire more teachers.

I'm not saying that from a perspective of societal degradation, im saying that from a "look there ain't anymore money in the budget, so we better find another fucking way to make this work" perspective.

There is plenty of other industries who have downturns and people are forced to take pay cuts or leave their jobs for other positions because the money simply isn't there anymore. Why should teachers be immune to this?

Look at 2008, how many people lost their shirts when that happened, I mean an entire fucking industry lost their jobs, and countless others were dragged to the bottom right along side them.

What happened to the teachers, absolutely fucking nothing, they just maintained their salaries like it ain't even a thing.

The real question is -- how did we manage to afford it in the past? Bear in mind that there has already been a lot of cuts to public education funding, and the teachers haven't really had a real wage increase in a very long time.

And yet according to Graeme (and yourself since you praised his post so highly), they shouldn't be receiving a pay increase. Their pay is fair. See Look here:


Do I think teachers are well paid? Yes. ... Do I think more pay will compensate for the shit they have to put up with? No.

So the answer here is not to pay them more, the answer here is to search for other solutions that solve all the other problems teachers face.

[Traum]

True those that become successful can go much farther than any teacher in terms of income, but that's not their fault, but those that are mediocre, will average a salary very similar to that of a teacher.

...<snipped>

There is plenty of other industries who have downturns and people are forced to take pay cuts or leave their jobs for other positions because the money simply isn't there anymore. Why should teachers be immune to this?

Look at 2008, how many people lost their shirts when that happened, I mean an entire fucking industry lost their jobs, and countless others were dragged to the bottom right along side them.

What happened to the teachers, absolutely fucking nothing, they just maintained their salaries like it ain't even a thing.
From a market perspective, that's the trade off between getting a secure job that pays less versus a less secure job that pays more. You even pointed it out youself that "those that become successful can go much farther than any teacher in terms of income". During good times, the BCTF (and probably some teachers) will bxtch that the economy is good and that they want in on some nicely padded salary increases as well, but people will just tell them to fxxk off. Then during bad times, teachers are the ones (among other secure careers) that feel relieved because they are the ones that didn't have to deal with too much job insecurity. On the whole, I'd say that system is quite fair.


And yet according to Graeme (and yourself since you praised his post so highly), they shouldn't be receiving a pay increase. Their pay is fair. See Look here:

So the answer here is not to pay them more, the answer here is to search for other solutions that solve all the other problems teachers face.

I agree that the teachers' salary was fair. But after 4 years of 0% increase (with another 2 years of 0% increase to go), it is no longer at the level where it was reasonable. The 2013 inflation rates might not have been much, but in the years prior to that, there were definitely some noticeable price increases, and their salaries have not kept up.

The more pressing issue, however, has always been looking for solutions to solve all the other problems teachers face, and I have mentioned that many times in the past as well. Class size and special needs kids, in particular, are 2 of the biggest issues that I have repeatedly pointed out. I feel strongly that if the provincial government will concede on those 2 issues alone -- meaning that they simply follow the law as the BC Supreme Court has ruled -- a good bunch of teachers will be satisfied. More importantly, support for the BCTF to continue with job action will drop significantly among the general public, and this will likely force the BCTF to re-draw their salary demands, and perhaps even accept yet another token salary increase.

But no, the Liberals government just has to flat out say no...

[meme405]

From a market perspective, that's the trade off between getting a secure job that pays less versus a less secure job that pays more. You even pointed it out youself that "those that become successful can go much farther than any teacher in terms of income". During good times, the BCTF (and probably some teachers) will bxtch that the economy is good and that they want in on some nicely padded salary increases as well, but people will just tell them to fxxk off. Then during bad times, teachers are the ones (among other secure careers) that feel relieved because they are the ones that didn't have to deal with too much job insecurity. On the whole, I'd say that system is quite fair.

Okay and how about those countless masses that work for 60k a year in these fluctuating markets?

They are still making about the same as the teachers, and they have no security.

Is that just their problem they don't make more and they chose the wrong industry?

Like I said, maybe its time to slash the rates of teachers until we can fund the system. There are way too many people qualified and willing to do the work, that maybe its time for the market to be redistributed.

It goes right back to supply and demand, lots of people available and willing to do the work, and not enough demand for those people. Market price dips.

[Traum]

Left on its own accord, the market will always find its own equilibrium. There is no doubt about that at all. However, I think it is fair to say that even a lot of economists will agree that the market solution is not always the best solution. In the case of public education, I think a purely market-based supply-and-demand type of solution is going to turn out very poorly. With the current over-supply of available teachers, any quick and/or major reductions will piss off the vast majority of teachers. Some will undoubtedly quit, but those who remain in the system will likely either be extremely pissed off, or they might be incompetent. With public education being a rather important part of modern society, I think it is a very bad idea to have teachers that are even more pissed off than they are now, or if they are utterly incompetent.

If over-supply is the current problem, a more appropriate approach should be measures that reduce the number of new entrants into the system. Perhaps the provincial government should just work with the universities to churn out fewer teachers? BCTF might also need to be given a quota on how many new teaching licences they can add annually. The results from this would almost certain be very slow, and it may set the stage for a future situation where there would be too few teachers around. But we can worry about those later down the road.

Maybe the BC government is already trying to achieve this by refusing to give the teachers any meaningful salary increase?

[meme405]

I agree (and I actually foresaw that argument as it is 100% correct).

But the line gets muddy after awhile, because here is the circle:

-There is a lot of people trying to break into teaching.
-It takes them a long time to gain secure employment teaching.
-They argue that they should be paid more because its so hard to become a teacher and they struggled for so many years.
-Now the pay for teachers goes up.
-EVEN MORE people want to become teachers.
-The difficulty of becoming a teacher goes up EVEN HIGHER.

Do you see the vicious circle?

At what point do others start saying "Hey wtf, im an average accountant working in a cut throat industry. I make the same pay as a teacher, but at any turn I could be fired. Maybe I should just take my CPA, and Bachelors, and go teach instead, atleast there I have secure employment."

[hypediss]

^ on a related note:

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

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

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

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

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

[meme405]

^ on a related note:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Left on its own accord, the market will always find its own equilibrium.

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

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

[Vulgate]

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

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

There is a limit to what you can do effectively.

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

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

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

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

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


Interesting thought, but you will never see a day of free work out of anyone today.
...
I'd argue that teachers are trying to force something that the market cannot sustain.

[4444]

how wild would this be:

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

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

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

[quasi]

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

[Mr.HappySilp]

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

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

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

[falcon]

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

[meme405]

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

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

There is a limit to what you can do effectively.

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

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

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

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

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

Okay.

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

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

There are now two options:

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

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

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

[Traum]

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

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

[Mr.HappySilp]

Okay.

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

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

There are now two options:

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

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

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

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

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

[meme405]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[adambomb]

:ohgodwhy:


VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) - BC teachers have unanimously voted to walk off the job.

Three days’ notice must be given before a full walkout is launched, meaning students could be out of school two weeks before summer break.

BC teachers vote in favour of full-scale strike | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2014/06/10/bc-teachers-vote-in-favour-of-full-scale-strike/)

[tiger_handheld]

:ohgodwhy:




BC teachers vote in favour of full-scale strike | News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2014/06/10/bc-teachers-vote-in-favour-of-full-scale-strike/)


For OUR KIDS they said.


Support OUR KIDS they said.


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

[willystyle]

For OUR KIDS they said.


Support OUR KIDS they said.


Goes and cancels classes two weeks before grad, final exams, and other important days that affect OUR KIDS.
It's no coincidence that they've chosen to strike now. It was all part of the plan.

[meme405]

It has nothing to do with the kids.

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

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

[noclue]

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

[PiuYi]

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

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

There is a limit to what you can do effectively.

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

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

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

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

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

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


jk. but srsly, it's loaf

[bing]

As a first step / lead-by-example type of thing, how about if the Liberals government roll back their 18% wage increase that Crusty Cunt gave to her ministers? I am 1000% certain that the move will receive wide-ranging support from the public.

I recently read that Crusty Cunt has been quietly providing a lot of funding to independent schools (ie. private schools). I don't remember what that number is, but whatever amount it was, it was HUGE. It baffles me that public funding could be given to private schools for spending, especially when the majority of private schools are already totally LOADED and backed by well-heeled parents. Seriously, WTF?!

I'm sure there are tons of other ways where we can cough up more money to keep our public education system healthy. But we can always start with these two.

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

As far as I know, most private schools specialize in something. Whether it be religious, cultural, or ?????

If you want your kids to be in a bible thumping school, then hooray! Do it, but at your own expense.

My kids are long out of the system. They went to public schools and I wouldn't have it any other way. Their education didn't stop at school......... it started at home.

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

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

[Timpo]

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

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

[Timpo]

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

University class sizes: Smaller isn't always better - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/university-class-sizes-smaller-isnt-always-better/article620700/)

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

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

[The_AK]

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

*edit*
Just answered my own question: http://www.bcpsea.bc.ca/bc-teachers/collective-agreements/teacher-salary-grids.aspx

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

[sekin67835]

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

*edit*
Just answered my own question: BC Teachers' Salary Grid, BC Teacher Salaries | BCPSEA (http://www.bcpsea.bc.ca/bc-teachers/collective-agreements/teacher-salary-grids.aspx)

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

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

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

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

[Timpo]

^ it's $43k at 2010 rate

Teaching Salaries in BC's Metro Region | Make a Future (http://www.makeafuture.ca/career-resources/salary-finder/metro-salary-finder/)

[Timpo]

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

[4444]

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

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

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

starting salary. STARTING.

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

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

[7seven]

I'm glad the government is sticking to their guns as I personally I think the majority of teachers are overpaid and their wages should be scaled backed. Most of the teachers I've come across in social settings have said that they're only a teacher because they really didn't know what else to do with a BA and having summers off is a nice perk, while going through the motions.

I'm finding very few teachers these days get into it because they truly love kids or educating, and this is the big problem, while there are a few dedicated, awesome teachers that perhaps deserve a raise, the majority don't and in my opinion deserve a wage rollback or to be fired, but the union environment doesn't really allow that. Couple that with declining enrollment numbers overall in BC, I cannot side at all with the teachers in this situation.

With the 10% rollback in wages already and now them deciding to strike, even if the government concedes a bit of a raise, the teachers will never make that money back, so overall, this is already a win for the government. I think the last news item I saw said the government would be saving about $26 million a week with the rotating strike action and will save $82 million a week if a full scale strike happened. Put some money back into the system for supplies and maybe infrastructure upgrades, but I personally wouldn't want to give teachers a penny more for wages.

[H.Specter]

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

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

You do realize those are just inherent characteristics of the job right?

brb for the kids
brb complaining about job description
brb asking for more money
brb brb

[FS1992EG]

I'm going to unload on these teacher right now.

1st They do get 3 months off so they work a total of 9 months.

2nd They get paid starting 43k, ending at 83k. That's a great wage for 9 months work.

3rd Private School teachers are much better at teaching children than public school
teachers. But public school teachers believe there should be more equality.

4th They don't have have an incentive to teach more to students than in a guideline. So if the students if don't learn the subject matter, there are no consequences for the teachers of those students who learn in different ways.

5th Student suffer more than teachers do with class sizes and asking for more money per teacher is not going to help student learn the subject matter quicker. It makes teachers have less stress at work by having more money in their pockets and the government is handicapped in there budget. So the teachers asking for raises hurts students by having fewer and fewer teachers.

[dat_steve]

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



I agree with the guy above saying these are inherent characteristics of the job. Actually these are inherent characteristics of many professionals in any service based industry with multiple stakeholders. For example, I'm an accountant, and to reword you bit about teachers:

"Not to mention accounting standards change every few years, so the accountants have to change their plans and have lots of prep work. Accountants are not only there to do accounting but support clients after hours when they have financial troubles, offer guidance, etc. Accountants also have to review client business practices and give feedback back to stakeholders, or meet with auditors/CRA to discuss a client's issue. I feel like many of us may have not been in business for a while, so we feel like accountants only account."

(didn't fix grammar btw)

The context is surely different but you get the gist. I just don't think it's fair to keep pushing the "children" card.

[hypediss]

i get the feeling that this thread is getting into the direction where we focus on discrediting teacher's claims rather than having a discussion on how a compromise could be developed - not that it matters, as we don't have control to the end result at all

my take: fault is on both sides: government and union

the way union is set up is that it rewards seniority and not performance (i think that's where some of our gripe is at) and because of this, many under performing and lethargic teachers get paid more money than they should.

children cannot be compared to adults - the individuals that we work with, whilst abysmal, arrogant, or immature at times, does not require us to care for their well being and growth. clients comes to us with a problem and we work to solve it.

we face our own challenges for sure but i don't think we would be as emotionally involved to our clients compared to the passionate teacher and his/her kids. ofcourse, there are the teachers who are in it just for the paycheque - which is why i pointed out to be the fault of the union but hopefully these guys are not the representative majority.

but back to the problem: finding a fair compensation in the eyes of both the government (the public) and the union (the teachers)

finding a fair solution that works for both parties is basically like squeezing blood from a stone. but i would think the ideal solution would require the union to fix their fundamental problems and start weeding out teachers who under perform, are lethargic, or have retired. on the government's side, they essentially need to be more efficient with the money they spend and allocate to public services; stop giving themselves raises, stop giving money to programs who could not use it all or have no use for it. doing so, would prevent us taxpayers from forking more money whenever a public services group demands more money and providing the opportunity to improve class room conditions when demanded.



just my opinion and attempt to take on the perspective of both parties.

[Timpo]

I'm finding very few teachers these days get into it because they truly love kids or educating, and this is the big problem, while there are a few dedicated, awesome teachers that perhaps deserve a raise, the majority don't and in my opinion deserve a wage rollback or to be fired, but the union environment doesn't really allow that. Couple that with declining enrollment numbers overall in BC, I cannot side at all with the teachers in this situation.


This kind of shit happens everywhere though. Not just teachers.

I've met a lot of police officers who keep their job just because they need a job.
How many police officers out there are actually truly passionate about making a world better place? And serve for community and genuinely want to help people?

Same goes with doctors, many of them get into it just for social status, money or ego.
This happens to any job, I would say. Lawyers, bus drivers, carpenters, fitness instructors, McDonald's managers, anything.

[SpeedStars]

This kind of shit happens everywhere though. Not just teachers.

I've met a lot of police officers who keep their job just because they need a job.
How many police officers out there are actually truly passionate about making a world better place? And serve for community and genuinely want to help people?

Same goes with doctors, many of them get into it just for social status, money or ego.
This happens to any job, I would say. Lawyers, bus drivers, carpenters, fitness instructors, McDonald's managers, anything.
13 dolla ballas yo
heard that teachers will likely strike for next week possibly beginning as early as Monday or Tuesday thus meaning this week may be the last week of classes for those still in school. Wonder how they're going to finish provincials and finals..

[Timpo]

are kids gonna have a summer break or what?

[fliptuner]

So rotating strikes continue tomorrow and Monday. Tuesday the provincial strike starts.

I feel bad for parents that have to rearrange schedules and take time off work and kids who have provincial exams and graduation events.

[MG1]

Article by Peter Mansbridge.

By Peter Mansbridge

Anyone familiar with my educational background will know that my relationship with teachers was cool. Not cool as in hip and trendy. But cool as in frigid and icy. The fact that I didn't finish high school is my fault. I had teachers who tried to get through to me. Mr. Bank, Ms. Bruce and Mr. Westinghouse were among those who tried, oh how they tried. But some challenges, like me, were just too much.

I put that on the record to make it clear that although a lot of people trace their success to a teacher who provided a spark, I don't. Still, I cringe when I hear and read all the teacher-bashing that's out there. I live in Ontario where the provincial government and the teacher unions have been locked in serious battle for several months. I'm not taking sides in the dispute. Not at all.

But my goodness, the things some people say about teachers. Based on what I hear on radio talk shows, and comments on the internet, there are way too many people who truly believe that teachers are grossly overpaid and under-worked.

What a strange attitude. Never mind that teachers are grooming the next generation of Canadians, the ones who will grow up to support our pensions in our old age. Maybe we can't think big-picture. The little-picture is pretty simple. Teachers are grooming our children. Yours and mine. Do we really want to trust the most precious parts of our lives to underpaid and overworked drones?

I keep seeing comparisons to what teachers make to the average industrial wage. And guess what? Teachers make more than the average. Of course they do. They've gone to school for at least four years of post-secondary education. The average teacher has been working for 11 years. They should be making reasonably good money. They're raising families too.

Then there's the under-worked part. That argument usually starts with July and August. Teachers get the whole summer off. No doubt about it; that's nice. But they need the break. I know there are lazy teachers. Just as there are lazy bankers, letter carriers, doctors, and yes, lazy journalists. But overwhelmingly, teachers are not lazy. In Ontario, the teachers stopped participating in extracurricular activities as part of their fight with the government. What an uproar that caused. School plays, sports teams, newspapers, chess clubs, fashion shows, and on and on. None of them possible without teachers freely giving their time. Critics are anxious to count the summer against the teachers, but they never count all those extra hours in their favour.

And sure, classes go from about 9am to 330pm, but anyone who thinks a teacher works six and a half hours a day, doesn't know many teachers. Preparing for class takes time. Talking to kids after school takes time. Meeting with parents takes time. Marking takes time. I can't imagine reading through 60 essays on why Hamlet is so sad and writing helpful comments in the margins.

We send teachers children from broken homes, from abusive homes, from negligent homes. We send teachers children from homes where both parents work, or where the only parent works, or where no parent works.

We send teachers children who leave home without breakfast and whose grasp of mathematics is grounded in the reality that welfare money sometimes runs out in 28 days or 29 days, and can't be stretched to cover 30 or 31.

We send teachers children who are new to Canada, children who stare blankly ahead unable to understand a single word that is being spoken.

And we ask that those teachers turn each of those children, each of our children, into productive little citizens. We ask that even though there are 28 or 29 other students in the classroom, even though there are students misbehaving, even though some parents don't support teachers by re-enforcing lessons or by making sure homework is done, or even by insisting that the student listen to or respect the teacher.

So argue the fine points of teacher contracts all you like. I'm not saying teacher unions are always right. I'm just saying running down teachers is wrong.

[hypediss]

^

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9QjARWd5a84/T3OXHJJbe1I/AAAAAAAAA34/OVtLNvwpMvI/s190/nod-of-approval.gif

[quasi]

So rotating strikes continue tomorrow and Monday. Tuesday the provincial strike starts.

I feel bad for parents that have to rearrange schedules and take time off work and kids who have provincial exams and graduation events.

My son came home with all his stuff, school year is over as far as I can tell. I can send him to daycare for another $30 a day on top of the $450 I've already paid this month for after school care or I can keep him home and find alternate arrangements. Thankfully my sister in law is going to help us out with watching him during the day and save some of the costs.

My prediction is they get mandated back to work second week of Sept. as nothing will happen during the summer.

[meme405]

I have all the respect in the world for Peter Mansbridge, and he makes some great points about the poor job many parents do, and the difference a good teacher can make in that child's life.

BUT:


I keep seeing comparisons to what teachers make to the average industrial wage. And guess what? Teachers make more than the average. Of course they do. They've gone to school for at least four years of post-secondary education. The average teacher has been working for 11 years. They should be making reasonably good money. They're raising families too.

It has gotten to the point that we aren't comparing teachers to industrial employees we can compare a teacher to other jobs which take just as much school, and teachers still make a lot more. Jobs like accounting, and technologists.

And we ask that those teachers turn each of those children, each of our children, into productive little citizens.

Yes, the importance their job has on our future is immense, but the world revolves around TODAY, not tomorrow. Without us here today, tomorrow looks pretty fucking bleak.

You cannot say that other professions, like the ones who generate our food, the ones who build our infrastructure, the ones who manage our countries and safety. You cannot honestly try to tell me that these jobs are less important than that of the teachers just because the children are the future.

I always joke about how for my work I facilitate the raping and pillaging of the earths natural resources, but without companies like us the world as we know it ceases to exist; computers gone, infrastructure gone, cars gone, electricity gone, etc.

So I am here to say that I am just as important a member of society as any teacher, and those that tell me otherwise can pound sand.

[FS1992EG]

I'm going add another 2 points.

There should be a base salary and a bonus structure so there are incentives for teachers to have high achieving students.

Teachers should use all the resources of their classrooms sizes to their advantage. There are going to be the students that are high achievers and require little attention and those students who don't understand the material at good enough rate to keep up with tests and exams. Pairing high achieving one's with low achieving ones with keep everyone at an more even playing field.

Using the weakness that are in the school system, teachers can flip the script and use them to their advantage.

[acrophobia]

I'm going add another 2 points.

There should be a base salary and a bonus structure so there are incentives for teachers to have high achieving students.

Teachers should use all the resources of their classrooms sizes to their advantage. There are going to be the students that are high achievers and require little attention and those students who don't understand the material at good enough rate to keep up with tests and exams. Pairing high achieving one's with low achieving ones with keep everyone at an more even playing field.

Using the weakness that are in the school system, teachers can flip the script and use them to their advantage.

There can never be parity if pay is based on student achievement. A physics 12 teacher with motivated students would make more than any grade 9/10 teacher. Also, with the ministry of education ditching most provincial exams there is no standard to compare one class to another. If the was a standard test that determined teachers' pay then teachers would spend 100% of their time teaching to the test instead of having the flexibility to focus on current events or the interests of the class.

As for mixing high and low achieving students, welcome to every classroom in the province. I can tell you from experience that 1) high achieving students are unlikely to have any positive effect on the grades of struggling students, and 2) it is unfair to those high achieving students to ignore them and spend all of your time on the struggling students (although this is inevitable to some degree).

[Tapioca]

It has gotten to the point that we aren't comparing teachers to industrial employees we can compare a teacher to other jobs which take just as much school, and teachers still make a lot more. Jobs like accounting, and technologists.


This is pretty off-base. If you're accountant that makes the peak salary of a teacher, you're a pretty shitty accountant. If you're any good, you should be making 80K after four years. The only accountants who don't make that work for the government, or they're not accountants at all (e.g. bookkeepers).


You cannot say that other professions, like the ones who generate our food, the ones who build our infrastructure, the ones who manage our countries and safety. You cannot honestly try to tell me that these jobs are less important than that of the teachers just because the children are the future.



And who do you think taught those people the skills they needed to become farmers, engineers, and business people? Teachers.

[MG1]

At $225.00 an hour and a $10,000.00 expense account, why the hell would the negotiator for the province want this to end? On top of that, everyday the teachers strike, millions are saved by the government.

The teachers will never make up the lost wages, so the government wins in the end. Public will just shit on teachers like RS members do here already and nobody will give two shits when it's all over.

The union leaders are happy in a way, too. What would they do if this kind of shit never happens?

If I were in charge, I'd tell Peter Cameron, the appointed negotiator, that he has until June 30th to get a deal done and that he will receive a bonus of $2000.00 for every day he's done earlier. Until then, he will receive 14 dolla an hour. A little incentive, lol.

The government doesn't give two shits about working people. They do whatever gets them re-elected. They just pit people against each other and play games.

Just tongue in cheek comments, so don't get knickers in a knot. I luv RS so muchee.........

[4444]

This is pretty off-base. If you're accountant that makes the peak salary of a teacher, you're a pretty shitty accountant. If you're any good, you should be making 80K after four years. The only accountants who don't make that work for the government, or they're not accountants at all (e.g. bookkeepers).



And who do you think taught those people the skills they needed to become farmers, engineers, and business people? Teachers.

not in vancouver.

working for KPMG, getting the top performance rating (as a CA), i made $66K there (now, this was a good number of years ago) in my 4th year. bonuses suck. I make way over double this now, thankfully, but this also required me to get the hell out of dodge. it should also be noted that i don't think there has been much salary inflation at the accounting firms in vancouver - their employees continue to get the shaft

please don't throw income numbers around without some solid support. i know a lot of people with more years than that earning less than $80K as CAs in industry because the job market sucks in vancouver (i also know a bunch that make more).

[meme405]

This is pretty off-base. If you're accountant that makes the peak salary of a teacher, you're a pretty shitty accountant. If you're any good, you should be making 80K after four years. The only accountants who don't make that work for the government, or they're not accountants at all (e.g. bookkeepers).


Maybe just like some of these teachers, many of these accountants value family, and spending time with loved ones. Not every accountant is going to grind 70 hours a week, to make 100k a year.

There are plenty of people with accounting degrees working for 60k or 80k a year in banks all over. Believe me I know, my family is full of bankers.

It was pointed out to me in another thread by Ulic, how difficult it is to break into high salary positions for those that aren't willing to grind out 80 hours a week. I never really paid attention, because I was willing to do whatever it took to make the cash. But now when I look at it the amount of truly intelligent people who have great educations but work for less money in order to have some flexibility or so they don't have to grind is immense. These people are working in industries where they have no security that the teachers do, yet they make very similar money, and they all have very similar levels of education.



And who do you think taught those people the skills they needed to become farmers, engineers, and business people? Teachers.


Yes your right, but a world full of teachers doesn't put food on my fucking table.

If you start paying teachers as much as an average engineer, that engineer no longer will go to work as an engineer, he will just say "fuck it, I want security of union working as a teacher, I want 3 months off a year"

Teachers are important, but do not try and elevate them above other professions. Other professions which are making the exact same money as them now. Other professions which do not get 3 months off a year, and do not have the security the teachers have.

[meme405]

I just want one fucking person in this thread to explain to me this:

If we are not paying teachers enough, and we need to be paying them more, why in the fuck are there so many wannabe teachers?

Someone just please fucking answer me this^.

[iEatClams]

I'm going add another 2 points.

There should be a base salary and a bonus structure so there are incentives for teachers to have high achieving students.

Teachers should use all the resources of their classrooms sizes to their advantage. There are going to be the students that are high achievers and require little attention and those students who don't understand the material at good enough rate to keep up with tests and exams. Pairing high achieving one's with low achieving ones with keep everyone at an more even playing field.

Using the weakness that are in the school system, teachers can flip the script and use them to their advantage.

Man, you post this like it’s so black and white. I'd like to say I'm one of the more objective members on this board, and not some that take a teachers are wrong, government is right stance and don’t use any logic at all.

There are reasons why private schools tend to have so called "better" teachers.

By better, most believe in the fact that private school students achieve better grades, and go on to go into university at a higher rate than public schools. The highest ranking schools are usually expensive private schools or schools on the west side or in more affluent neighbourhoods.

I think it has more to do with the fact that their parents are more educated and spend more time assisting them as well as the students being surrounded by other students that are “keeners”, rather than the skill of the teacher.
Due to a variety of reasons it’s also much tougher to teach a student from say “east van” or “whalley” than to teach someone from point grey.
I know someone that works as a teacher in coquitlam and they are going to reshuffle which schools and some of the teachers from the nicer school are worried they may have to now teach in a poorer/ less attractive neighbourhood.

As a person whose been poor for most of my childhood until I graduated and rode the real estate boom and am now better off - not rich, just better off - and had certain type of friends, I remembered going to UBC and meeting a whole new different type of social class and having them become my friends, most of them grew up on the west side and drive new bmws purchased by their parents and really have no clue about how a lot of other people live. They are usually all for lowered taxes and think public servants are overpaid and like policies that would increase their bottom line. This is fine as everybody is entitled to their own ideas and opinions and they must act in the best interest of their parents companies etc. but it negatively affects many others – usually the less fortunate ones.

I really think some members are just not fully educated on all the issues or just don’t care about how our society is going to turn out. Right now it seems like the wealth gap between the rich and the poor is ever growing and when there’s a higher population of poor and unhappy people, more social problems will arise and things like riots start happening. Also I truly believe that if us commoners have better wages, we would in turn demand more goods and thus that would drive the demand for companies to produce and sell those goods. Now I don’t want this to turn into a political thread so I will revert back to the teachers.

Base on how the market is with the number of people who want to be teachers and the amount of graduates being pumped out of universities is much greater than the amount of positions available (supply and demand) - indicates that teachers are probably paid more than they should be.
Yes, one of the main cons about unions is that it’s difficult to fire bad teachers. Yes I know it’s hard to develop proper performance metrics but there are some employees in unions that just ABUSE the system and they need to be let go.
But overall I don’t want a race to the bottom in terms of wages.


http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1350600524599_8121033.png

[MG1]

I just want one fucking person in this thread to explain to me this:

If we are not paying teachers enough, and we need to be paying them more, why in the fuck are there so many wannabe teachers?

Someone just please fucking answer me this^.

I'll give it a shot.

Let's go back in time, shall we?

Back in the old days, teachers were paid next to nothing. One became a teacher back then because they loved what they did. It was a shitty job, albeit prestigious, but very few people wanted to become a teacher - the pay sucked and you needed a bit of schooling yourself. Back then well educated people were few and far between.

By WWII there was a shortage of teachers. Teachers resigned in droves for better paying jobs at factories. After the war, the easy solution to the shortage was to get those who served for their country to become a teacher. Since then, teachers had to have some post secondary training/degree. First it was two years, then four, and now five.

Pay for teachers kept going up. Today, the teaching profession is more about the pay, benefits, and time off and less about the kids and the joy of teaching. Today, that's all most people think about - the bottom line. It's too bad it has come to this, but the requirements for becoming a teacher is a step away for those who already have a degree and can't find a job in their field. "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach!" That was written way way back when teaching was uber simplistic and has been irrelevent for ages until now. How sad.

In other countries, teachers are held in high regard. It is an honourable profession. Pay is never good, but being a teacher means a lot. Over here, it's the opposite.

Another North American trait - There are a lot more fucked up teachers than there are good. The unions are to blame on that one. Like in any profession where unions are involved, it's the lazy and ineffective workers who are the big supporters of unions. They are the ones who need the union to protect them.

Anyway, there needs to be a way to ensure the right people get the jobs - not the ones who are in it for the pay and benefits. There is no easy solution, because it is complicated. Don't get me wrong. There are some really good teachers out there making a difference. The ones who connect with kids. The ones who sponser extra-curricular teams and clubs. The ones who are first at school and last to leave. They are the ones who get lost in all of this.

On a side note, the teachers union should never strike over class size and composition. Just negotiate wages and benefits. Then, it's simple. Let the parents and the community decide what class sizes and composition is acceptable.

On yet another side note, the ones who are sitting back and watching with a bag of popcorn are the private school teachers. I have a catholic friend (yes, I actually have a catholic friend) who is a teacher at a private school and he's like, "Dude, I get paid almost the same as a public school teacher and I pay no union dues. And, to boot, I'm still working this week."

Christy Crunch is a cunning one. It's a balancing act. Save enough money by prolonging the strike, but don't let it go on too long....... her last words, "I'm hopeful that an agreement will be reached." Of course it will. It's already been decided when and how much, long ago.

[Traum]

I just want one fucking person in this thread to explain to me this:

If we are not paying teachers enough, and we need to be paying them more, why in the fuck are there so many wannabe teachers?

Someone just please fucking answer me this^.
I'll give it a shot as well.

For better or for worse, a lot people (I dare say the majority?) are nearly clueless about the daily realities of a prospective job. They certainly have some clues about it, but they don't really know what it is like until the day when they really get into the grind. So here we have a bunch of people who thinks teaching is a good career path because of all the common reasons that people think teaching is a good job -- stable and above average pay, 2+ months (or really, ~3 now) worth of holidays, 9-to-3 work schedule (plus a bit of homework/prep work), aspirations to teach the future generation and enlightened them, etc.

Note that not all of the above is true. As a matter of fact, a lot of it isn't. But hey, before they are actually out in the trenches teaching kids, they won't really know what it is like, and they only focus on the good aspects of the job. But then you get sucked into the B.Ed. program. You are paying all that tution for your professional designation. You are spending all that time to go to class for the degree. Are you really gonna back out now?

[MG1]

If you start paying teachers as much as an average engineer, that engineer no longer will go to work as an engineer, he will just say "fuck it, I want security of union working as a teacher, I want 3 months off a year"

There's nothing stopping an engineer or an accountant from becoming a teacher.

Except for one thing and it's a big one.

Getting up in front of 30 children and speaky their language. I guarantee you very few engineers, let alone accountants, will have the attention of the kids for more than three nanoseconds. They will be chewed up and spit out into 1001 pieces onto the wall of the classroom. I've had many friends try to become teachers only to give up or fail their first practicum. Kids can reduce the toughest person to a sobbing, bumbling idiot. And, they will point and laugh for good measure.

Another weird thing I've noticed from my days as a PAC (parent advisory council) member at my kids' schools is that a lot of teachers are not very smart. More than a few, lol, but one thing they have over brain power is control over kids. You can be the smartest person on earth, but getting your message across to those little darlings is a whole new ball of wax.

[meme405]

Another North American trait - There are a lot more fucked up teachers than there are good. The unions are to blame on that one. Like in any profession where unions are involved, it's the lazy and ineffective workers who are the big supporters of unions. They are the ones who need the union to protect them.

Anyway, there needs to be a way to ensure the right people get the jobs - not the ones who are in it for the pay and benefits. There is no easy solution, because it is complicated. Don't get me wrong. There are some really good teachers out there making a difference. The ones who connect with kids. The ones who sponser extra-curricular teams and clubs. The ones who are first at school and last to leave. They are the ones who get lost in all of this.

On a side note, the teachers union should never strike over class size and composition. Just negotiate wages and benefits. Then, it's simple. Let the parents and the community decide what class sizes and composition is acceptable.

On yet another side note, the ones who are sitting back and watching with a bag of popcorn are the private school teachers. I have a catholic friend (yes, I actually have a catholic friend) who is a teacher at a private school and he's like, "Dude, I get paid almost the same as a public school teacher and I pay no union dues. And, to boot, I'm still working this week."

Christy Crunch is a cunning one. It's a balancing act. Save enough money by prolonging the strike, but don't let it go on too long....... her last words, "I'm hopeful that an agreement will be reached." Of course it will. It's already been decided when and how much, long ago.

This is pretty well what I have been saying all along.

Yet when I bring up the fact that unions aren't helping the teachers in this case, people start saying how without unions employment is a "race to the bottom".

Case and point go back to this thread:

http://www.revscene.net/forums/683899-richmond-ikea-employees-locked-out-5.html

I said almost exactly what you have said here:


If you are a good worker, your job is secure and your pay will increase and you will move up through the company.

All unions do is help the weak, useless workers.

They equalize everyone doing a given task or job, when clearly not everyone is equal, there are always those who don't work hard, or they dog fuck, or w/e it may be. Unions protect these useless fucking people and put them on a level field with the productive workers and those who truly work hard. That takes away the incentive for the hard workers to work hard and in turn makes them a part of those useless fucking idiots.

And then to top it all off because their unionized its almost impossible to fire their asses because you'll get yourself in hot water really fast.

[meme405]

But overall I don’t want a race to the bottom in terms of wages.

Who the FUCK do you work for, and what do you do?

This is the umpteenth time you have stated this "race to the bottom" without unions. Does your employer whip you that you need a union to defend you?

[MG1]

This is pretty well what I have been saying all along.

Yet when I bring up the fact that unions aren't helping the teachers in this case, people start saying how without unions employment is a "race to the bottom".

Case and point go back to this thread:

http://www.revscene.net/forums/683899-richmond-ikea-employees-locked-out-5.html

I said almost exactly what you have said here:And I've said the same thing years ago before that in another thread.

Unions do play an important role, but times have changed and they are slow to react. They have a mandate to follow, but more often than not, they fail to see the big picture. The Ikea saga is a classic case of unions being stupid. Those poor workers. It's always the workers who get screwed over. Someone at the Richmond location had the bright idea to unionize. I wAnder how stupid they feel now. The Coquitlam workers are well paid and working conditions are pretty good, from what they tell me.

[MG1]

Who the FUCK do you work for, and what do you do?

This is the umpteenth time you have stated this "race to the bottom" without unions. Does your employer whip you that you need a union to defend you?

He might have meant "race to the bottom" as in compared to teachers in other provinces?

[iEatClams]

Who the FUCK do you work for, and what do you do?

This is the umpteenth time you have stated this "race to the bottom" without unions. Does your employer whip you that you need a union to defend you?

What I mean a race to the bottom is that I feel that for the majority of the people, real income is diminishing due to inflation. Unions due try and fight for higher wages. There's tonnes of money from corporate lobbyists compared to money from unions to act for their own interests. I just feel like the pro capitalistic, money before everything else crowd is more prominent in today's society and it will have negative consequences.

As to what do I do? Idont want to state exactly where I work but basically I do kinda a commercial real estate analysis for a property management firm/ developer.

I have previously worked in the financial side and as well as for union setting in the past where I was a union rep. I see where they are coming from. And no I'm not hiding behind them for poor performance. I use to be the type that worked 70 hours a week.

[Tapioca]

Maybe just like some of these teachers, many of these accountants value family, and spending time with loved ones. Not every accountant is going to grind 70 hours a week, to make 100k a year.

There are plenty of people with accounting degrees working for 60k or 80k a year in banks all over. Believe me I know, my family is full of bankers.

It was pointed out to me in another thread by Ulic, how difficult it is to break into high salary positions for those that aren't willing to grind out 80 hours a week. I never really paid attention, because I was willing to do whatever it took to make the cash. But now when I look at it the amount of truly intelligent people who have great educations but work for less money in order to have some flexibility or so they don't have to grind is immense. These people are working in industries where they have no security that the teachers do, yet they make very similar money, and they all have very similar levels of education.

Well, everyone has choices in life. What's your issue with the choice that teachers made to teach? Because they make more money than you? People on this forum talk about making choices and being responsible for those choices. It sounds like you're upset because you made the choice not to enter into a profession that has 3 months of vacation per year.

What I don't get is that if the grass is greener on the other side, what's stopping one from becoming a teacher? Because it is beneath you? Because you have to pay union dues for a union you don't support? Because of your principles - whatever they may be?

With that said, I personally feel that teachers make too much right now, or at the very least, they need a reality check in terms of place among other public servants. Quite frankly, their union is doing a poor job in terms of public relations.

[bing]

Where exactly do the teachers think the money is coming from? last I checked the province and federal government are broke.

I'm against this strike. Teacher's make decent money and I blame the unions for protecting lazy and ineffective teachers. If it were up to me I would take advantage of the new supply of grads every year and use them on a trial basis to replace the crappy teachers and only end up keeping the good ones.

[FS1992EG]

Where exactly do the teachers think the money is coming from? last I checked the province and federal government are broke.

I'm against this strike. Teacher's make decent money and I blame the unions for protecting lazy and ineffective teachers. If it were up to me I would take advantage of the new supply of grads every year and use them on a trial basis to replace the crappy teachers and only end up keeping the good ones.

I am for this!

But there has to be feed back between the Students who need extra help and those who consume knowledge like a sponge.

If the students from each class have a 6 month semester meeting about the teacher's performance. This will give the government an actual first hand account of the teacher's performance and teaching style.

Those who perform poorly should have points given to them and if they reach a certain threshold of points, they will lose their teaching license. If there is one.

But it won't be as black and white as that, taking in consideration that if a teacher has a C+ or B- Average. What the students criticisms will have less merit.

Those teacher's who have higher achieving classes will receive points towards a bigger bonus at the end of the year.

Money talks and if you want the best and brightest, gotta pay up but if you got 10 years of experience in the union and you suck at teaching. Time to adjust your teaching style or GTFO!

I know a lot grads that have a better approach of teaching students. Aka tutors.

Tutors exist because some teacher's out there cannot teach.

[MG1]

I'm not sure if I quite understand what you are saying, but................

You guys honestly think the new wave of teachers out there are better? They're the ones who are going into the profession for the two months off and good pay. Like someone mentioned in the first couple of pages of this thread, these wannabe teachers don't give a flying crap about the kids.

Not saying all of them, but wow, some of you really need to think this through. The quality of teachers over the years have been dropping just as much as the ability of the students they teach.

I said this before somewheres else. The education system reflects the society it serves. What really needs to be done is to somehow filter the less effective candidates before they become eligible to teach. Raise the standards. Don't give out certificates from gumball machines. If you want quality teachers, make it difficult to get that degree.

My son had to take a 200 level math course in university. He couldn't believe how dumb these teacher wannabes were. In fact, I think they were full time teachers upgrading their certification.

The good news is, with the number of people wanting to get jobs as teachers, the noobs are having to "earn" their way into full time positions. Principals know which ones are good and which ones are not so good. They will put the word out which ones are keepers. Having said all that, not all school districts have the same hiring practices and, seniority is still the number one factor.

I've been out of touch for a few years as I am no longer on the PAC, but there are ways of getting certain people ahead of the line and hired at a school. Some principals are cunning and know the ropes.

Shall we start a thread on principals? The ones who run the schools?

Perhaps we should talk about district principals, superintendents and the school boards, while we're at it. Education isn't simple as, "Yeah, I'm an expert. I know all about teachers and schools...... I went to one, you know."

[MG1]

One more thing......... if any of you are parents. You really, really need to get involved in your child's education by joing the PAC (Parent Advisory Council). Actually, let me rephrase that....... by joining the PAC executive, as all parents are automatically on the PAC as members. A strong PAC can have a very big impact on how the school is run. Not only that, you will learn the politics that go on and your eyes will be opened to what really goes on in schools. Instead of criticizing teachers, you will quickly realize that working with them will improve the overall school community.

And, the last word. PAC's, at least the good ones are not there to raise money for schools. They are there to educate and promote good parenting among 1001 other things.

Most PACs, sadly, reduce themselves to just fund raising for new playground equipment and such.

[meme405]

Well, everyone has choices in life. What's your issue with the choice that teachers made to teach? Because they make more money than you? People on this forum talk about making choices and being responsible for those choices. It sounds like you're upset because you made the choice not to enter into a profession that has 3 months of vacation per year.

What I don't get is that if the grass is greener on the other side, what's stopping one from becoming a teacher? Because it is beneath you? Because you have to pay union dues for a union you don't support? Because of your principles - whatever they may be?

With that said, I personally feel that teachers make too much right now, or at the very least, they need a reality check in terms of place among other public servants. Quite frankly, their union is doing a poor job in terms of public relations.

I am a little confused, I am not upset about my profession, in fact it is the exact opposite, I am immensely proud of what I do. So much so that I am willing to work at it 80 hours a week, in return for that I get paid handsomely (much more than any teacher). Also I work 3 week shifts, which means that I get 12 weeks off a year, however I work the other ~270 days of the year. So I am not upset at all about the time off the teachers receive, nor am I jealous of it. The post that you quoted, was kinda related to a different discussion, one that was more for the "regular" people, the ones who are not like me, and prefer family time, and time off and not being stretched to the literal limits of their wits 24/7. These are the people who in many cases work jobs which require just as much qualifications as teachers, get paid relatively similarly and yet have about half of the benefits as teachers.

I have all along been opposed to giving teachers raises, as I do not feel our government should be spending EVEN MORE of my tax dollars on this. Not when I would rather them continue to focus their efforts on maintaining a balanced budget. I much like many others who have recently stepped forward think that teachers are paid an adequate wage for the duty they perform. I am not willing to dump more money into their pockets just so their union members can continue to siphon funds away from them, and then every 4 years convince them to strike for months on end. This cycle is getting ridiculous, it has been this way since I was in elementary school, and its goddamn annoying.

I am basically exactly in line with the opinion you shared in your last paragraph. I don't know where you got the idea that I am jealous of teachers, or that I wanted to be one...

[MG1]

Is there a difference between jealousy and envy?

When I see someone making more than me, I don't get jealous, I envy them. More power to them, I say...... as long as they are doing it legally and not on the backs of others.

I love that Dire Straits song, "Money for Nothing."

Now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do it
You play the guitar on the M.T.V.
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Money for nothin' and your chicks for free.

Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys ain't dumb
Maybe get a blister on your little finger
Maybe get a blister on your thumb.

We gotta install microwave ovens custom kitchen deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators we gotta move these color T.V.'s.

We gotta install microwave ovens custom kitchen deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators we gotta move these color T.V.'s.

I shoulda learned to play the guitar
I shoulda learned to play them drums
Look at that mama she got it stickin' in the camera
Man we could have some fun

And he's up there, what's that? Hawaiian noises?
You bangin' on the bongos like a chimpanzee
Oh that ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Get your money for nothin' get your chicks for free.

We gotta install microwave ovens custom kitchen deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators we gotta move these color T.V.'s.

Listen here
Now that ain't workin' that's the way to do it
You play the guitar on the M.T.V.
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Money for nothin' and your chicks for free

As for the raise the teachers are asking for, the union made the mistake of asking for so much at the beginning, but this is how you start negotiating, yes? Like haggling, you start high and find middle ground later.

What the goverment did in response was a slap in the face comeback with an offer of a 10 year contract. Who the hell would sign a fucking ten year contract? (besides Luongo, LOLOLOLOLOL)

I think what most teachers would settle for is what other public sector workers got. Cost of living and some compensation for the zero, zero they got previously.

The government isn't negotiating in good faith. Twice they've been told by the courts to get their shit together. Yet they still insist on fucking the teachers over.

Like I said before, the government, at least this one, is hell bent on pushing the limits. I'm no union supporter, but the government is fucked up. Their only saving grace is that the other unions are staying out of this one because the BCTF is not respected all that much by the other unions in our province and country. At least that's my take on it.

If the government doesn't do something in the next little while, the other unions might have to get involved and that is something nobody wants to see.

The BCTF is out of money. They used to have a tonne of money. I suspect they spent it all on lawyers trying to fight the province during the last two or three head buttings.

Will there be labour unrest? Nah, people hate teachers too much. Don't know what it is, but it's a fact.

"As long as it's not me," attitude is where it's at............. good luck, teachers. Should have become accountants.

[acrophobia]

On Friday the bctf proposed:
-the creation of a workload fund that would be used to address class size and composition, and specialist teacher ratios
-salary increase of 8% over 5 years, plus 5k signing bonus
-withdraw all grievances stemming from the violations of the collective agreement since 2002

On Sunday night the government countered with:
-no extra funding to the workload fund
-the ability to completely remove class size and composition from the collective agreement
-salary increase of 7% over 6 years (0.25% less than their previous proposal)

Like MG1 said, it's obvious the government is not negotiating in good faith. In an interview this morning Fassbender claimed that the government had negotiated all weekend and offered an increase in student funding and teacher salaries, all of which is untrue; their counter offer shows that they aren't even trying to end the labour dispute and will do anything in their power to avoid an increase in funding to the education system.

Also, please realize that most teachers, including myself, didn't choose the profession for the money or holidays: I'm a teacher because I love the job, and the vast majority of teachers share my passion. I work hard to make my classes exciting and interesting for students, I volunteer my time every day in the morning, lunch hour, and after school for extra help, and give up evenings and weekends with my family for four months to coach two different school teams. I'm not boasting or looking for sympathy, but remember that every year I am expected to more with less; the big push for individualized learning in larger and more varied classrooms with less funding for supplies, technology, and education assistants. My job is to make sure that I maximize the learning potential of each student in the class, but at some point student needs are missed occasionally, then more often, then quite often. I can only spread myself so thin.

I'm not asking for a huge wage increase and this strike isn't about my salary; I've already given up 4 days and 10% on 12 others, and am now facing two weeks without pay; I'm not making that money back any time soon. But I'm willing to take a financial hit to make my classroom better for my students and my own kids. I don't want my kids to be the high end or middle of the road students that fade into the background.

This morning's announcement was a punch in the gut. The entire province was and still is waiting for a resolution, but the government doesn't care. I keep reading that teachers "aren't really in it for the students". Well, I am. And at least I'm trying.

[MG1]

As a PAC exec and member I experienced first hand, dedicated teachers like you. We parents who are in the know, appreciate all that you guys do. PAC members throughout the province have supported you guys and will continue to do so.

The government promised to work hard to end the dispute, but they never came in with a counter offer till late Sunday night. I wasn't sure what the detail were, but this is a really big slap in the face.

I am glad you took the time to post here. Too many people on RS are quick to judge and jump on the bandwagon. I think they call it gang mentallity.

[meme405]

The BCGEU signed a 5 year 5.5 deal in December. The teachers will never see a penny more than this (Or atelast not a substantial one).

The reason?

Because that agreement had a "compensation bargaining comparability" clause. This clause basically stated that if at any point in the next 5 years a different union strikes a better deal, the 55 000 civil servants will also see an increase to this amount.

That means that should the BCTF or nurses union strike a better deal, the government will have to re-ink the BCGEU deal as well. When you realize that even a 1% raise on top of the 5.5 results in like a quarter of a billion dollars extra the government has to pay its hard to get over.

As soon as the BCTF or any other public union strikes a deal over about 1.1 a year, thats it we can say goodbye to a balanced budget for the next 10 years.

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, and most taxpayers like myself that hear the whole situation are going to find it tough to side with the teachers. Our government can't afford to pay more than 1.1 a year, and I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to paying more taxes, its just not going to fucking happen.

EDIT: I guess it comes down to how far the government can stretch the fact that the teachers last deal was a 0/0. Maybe they can word a portion of the deal to demonstrate its retroactive, this could make up a portion of the difference.

[MG1]

The nurses got more, I think, but it was all hidden in benefits and whatnot.

[tonyzoomzoom]

this government is just a big bully, imo. They will legislate things away that they don't like. For the teachers, the only thing they will be left with at the end of the day in their collective agreement is the ability to "negotiate" their salaries / wages. And even then there is little to negotiate, since they will essentially get what other government employees are getting.

[tiger_handheld]

On Friday the bctf proposed:
-the creation of a workload fund that would be used to address class size and composition, and specialist teacher ratios
-salary increase of 8% over 5 years, plus 5k signing bonus
-withdraw all grievances stemming from the violations of the collective agreement since 2002

On Sunday night the government countered with:
-no extra funding to the workload fund
-the ability to completely remove class size and composition from the collective agreement
-salary increase of 7% over 6 years (0.25% less than their previous proposal)

Like MG1 said, it's obvious the government is not negotiating in good faith. In an interview this morning Fassbender claimed that the government had negotiated all weekend and offered an increase in student funding and teacher salaries, all of which is untrue; their counter offer shows that they aren't even trying to end the labour dispute and will do anything in their power to avoid an increase in funding to the education system.

Also, please realize that most teachers, including myself, didn't choose the profession for the money or holidays: I'm a teacher because I love the job, and the vast majority of teachers share my passion. I work hard to make my classes exciting and interesting for students, I volunteer my time every day in the morning, lunch hour, and after school for extra help, and give up evenings and weekends with my family for four months to coach two different school teams. I'm not boasting or looking for sympathy, but remember that every year I am expected to more with less; the big push for individualized learning in larger and more varied classrooms with less funding for supplies, technology, and education assistants. My job is to make sure that I maximize the learning potential of each student in the class, but at some point student needs are missed occasionally, then more often, then quite often. I can only spread myself so thin.

I'm not asking for a huge wage increase and this strike isn't about my salary; I've already given up 4 days and 10% on 12 others, and am now facing two weeks without pay; I'm not making that money back any time soon. But I'm willing to take a financial hit to make my classroom better for my students and my own kids. I don't want my kids to be the high end or middle of the road students that fade into the background.

This morning's announcement was a punch in the gut. The entire province was and still is waiting for a resolution, but the government doesn't care. I keep reading that teachers "aren't really in it for the students". Well, I am. And at least I'm trying.


If the strike isn't about salary, why not agree and accept the salary deal but fight for classroom rights?

edit: I believe Fassbender offered a $1500 signing bonus if done by June 30 - now the teachers want $5000. And you tell me this isn't about salary?
:suspicious:

If salary is not the biggest issue BCTF is concerned with you guys are doing a piss poor job of communicating that with the public. Last I checked, communication was one of the biggest things you learn in school..

If I were the teachers, I would go to the table with amounts in [ ]

- [2%] the creation of a workload fund that would be used to address class size and composition, and specialist teacher ratios
-salary increase of [ 5%] 8% over [6] 5 years, plus [1.5k]5k signing bonus
-withdraw all grievances stemming from the violations of the collective agreement since 2002 [ I dont know much to comment on this]

[Soundy]

Yeah and the BCTF is any better?

All those blaming the government for the strike, just remember one thing: it was the teachers' CHOICE to escalate job action. Nobody else's.

[meme405]

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.

[acrophobia]

Yeah and the BCTF is any better?

All those blaming the government for the strike, just remember one thing: it was the teachers' CHOICE to escalate job action. Nobody else's.

I can't defend every action of my union since I would also have done/would do things differently, but you can only poke a dog for so long before it bites back.

I'm not absolving the bctf of any responsibility for the strike, but at some point we have to makes things better. The system is not broken in its current state, but it hasn't been improving in my eight years of teaching and if the government has its way and continues stripping of class size and composition language, things will (not maybe, but definitely) go downhill quickly.

How do you bring attention and/or put pressure on this government to change? Striking sucks, but what else can we do? Missing a few days now to make the next five+ years better is hopefully worth the lost wages on my end and the inconvenience for students and parents on the other. You have no idea how happy I would have been this morning if both sides had made a deal; I just want to teach, plain and simple.

[MG1]

Yeah and the BCTF is any better?

All those blaming the government for the strike, just remember one thing: it was the teachers' CHOICE to escalate job action. Nobody else's.

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. The rotating strikes didn't solve anything.

Like I said, the government wants a strike, because it's a win win for them. 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.

Plus, this government doesn't give a shit about the laws. The reason? Christy Clark is used to this bullshit. Check out her outstanding record over at SFU. Yup, she was fined then and refused to pay. I believe she got kicked out because of it. Many were led to believe she got a degree there, but she was caught cheating in an election (ran for student president or something).

[acrophobia]

If the strike isn't about salary, why not agree and accept the salary deal but fight for classroom rights?

edit: I believe Fassbender offered a $1500 signing bonus if done by June 30 - now the teachers want $5000. And you tell me this isn't about salary?
:suspicious:

If salary is not the biggest issue BCTF is concerned with you guys are doing a piss poor job of communicating that with the public. Last I checked, communication was one of the biggest things you learn in school..

If I were the teachers, I would go to the table with amounts in [ ]

- [2%] the creation of a workload fund that would be used to address class size and composition, and specialist teacher ratios
-salary increase of [ 5%] 8% over [6] 5 years, plus [1.5k]5k signing bonus
-withdraw all grievances stemming from the violations of the collective agreement since 2002 [ I dont know much to comment on this]

The 5k signing bonus is certainly negotiable and is likely a move to get around the BCGEU clause that meme405 mentioned. While 5k would be great, I don't think anyone expects to actually get close to that number. The workload-type funding we have had the past two years is currently at 75 million per year; pre-2002 it was 300 million.

While I don't always agree with the methods of my unions, when it came to crunch time we reduced and reworked our proposal to something fair and negotiable while the government twiddled their thumbs for 48 hours.

[meme405]

So you are saying the teachers should have just said we are not happy we are not happy and sing kumbayah?

That's how non-unioned employees do it.

It's very simple, every necessary profession has a market price. That market price is dictated by the number of positions available and the number of capable people willing to fill that position at any given time.

Non-unioned employees are paid based upon merit, do a shit job and you get paid shit (for the most part), keep doing a shitty job and you get yourself fired. Do a good job, and your pay rockets upwards, and you pretty much have guaranteed employment.

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.

The place for a union in our culture is gone, the only people left working 80 hours a week are those who choose to. The people working for minimum wage, are those who do not yet have the abilities to do anything else (this can be for various reasons).

I'll ask another question from everyone:

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?

[Soundy]

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

[MG1]

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

j/k


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.

I still think class size and composition should be decided by people other than the teachers.