Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me
I don't need to speak for Cliff, but I don't think
"teachers should be fairly compensated and have a right to advocate for themselves"
&
"a teacher’s strike would be anything but bad for children"
needs to be mutually exclusive.
Again, no dog in this fight and it would have zero effect on my life if there is a strike, but I feel something like a work to rule would be a good tool for the teachers to use in this case while minimizing the alienation of parents... Something like no extra-curriculars, no marking, nothing except straight teaching from 8am to 3pm (or whatever the specific classroom hours are)... Kids still learn, parents don't have to scramble for child care and the teachers get a reprieve from their overburdened schedules. I feel like if this were happening to my kids in that way, I'd be more supportive of the teachers position.
|
Work to rule is generally what happens long before any teachers strike occurs. If it was effective at resolving the matter you wouldn’t have to worry about a strike but that’s a whole other debate.
I guess you’d have to ask yourself which solution would be most conducive to both reaching an agreement and having the least impact on children. A strike but business as usual once it is resolved or working to rule for potentially years while students miss out on all sorts of extra curricular activities while the taxpayers pay the same amount for less service?