Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Anyone who thinks a teacher’s strike would be anything but bad for children is blinded by partisanship or self-interest.

I’ll counter this Helen Lovejoy argument with a nice anecdote.

In 2002 the teachers went on strike for almost the entire Winter Olympics. It didn’t have any affect on my grades and I’d be lying if I said that it wasn’t one of the best times of my life hanging out with my fellow student friends.

I’m not currently a student, nor am I a teacher but I do have 2 children who are students so I’m not sure how me saying a strike isn’t going to have the drastic negative impact your claiming it will and that I think kids will be fine is rooted in me being blinded by my own self interest. Nor do I understand how you link discussion on the potential ramifications of a labour dispute to being motivated by political partisanship.

[Point Blank]

Originally Posted by GGG

I know there are some days with insufficiently available subs. This would suggest that we are reaching the limits of available teachers right now. This would be ccsd no idea about other districts.

To be fair, that’s usually what happens every spring. All the good subs get snapped up into contracts as the school year progresses, and new grads have not yet been hired. It’s usually alleviated by April.

[Point Blank]

Since 2013, teachers have received 0%, 0%, 2%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0.5%, 1.25% and 2%. Not sure how that compares with other jobs such as accountants, plumbers, etc.

AB Nurses got a 20% raise. Mediator recommended 12% for teachers.

I want to point out what Clif is saying is exactly why I don’t want to turn this into a convo about salaries. We get called out for not acting in the best interest of students. Not sure what other profession, such as accountants and plumbers, where “think of the children” becomes a counter point for just trying to maintain purchasing power.

I also want to once again point out that the main reason I want to strike is because I have massive class sizes, I can’t do fun and authentic science projects with my students because I’m already constantly marking. Elementary teachers aren’t giving the best quality education because of unaddressed complexities in classrooms, where they spend most of their energy trying to support kids who are absolutely off the walls with no external support whatsoever.

So it’s not as simple as a strike is not aligning with the best interest of students. The fact that this government ended classroom size reporting, or legislating that we need to out LGBTQ students to parents should tell you that someone in the room isn’t acting in the best interest of students, and it’s not the teachers.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Point Blank

Since 2013, teachers have received 0%, 0%, 2%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0%, 0.5%, 1.25% and 2%...

I also don't have a dog in this fight, so don't really tend to follow closely, but if that's true, that's abhorrent.

[Mr.Coffee]

Just tie salary (…a fair salary…) to inflation, then in good faith work on bridging funding gaps to narrow on things like classroom sizes, make it so teachers don’t have to go spend their own money on supplies (this one I think is just unethical, basically), building in enough latitude for some time for marking, incentivizing extracurricular time properly, etc.

Basically, deal with teachers fairly and in good faith and THEN if they strike sure, turn your back on them but to take the attitude that parents will be pissy after how the province has treated them thus far (previous years context included) seems a bit aggressive.

That said I appreciate Cliffs insights and enjoyed this discussion which is getting incredibly rare on this site.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Just tie salary (…a fair salary…) to inflation

How do you define “fair”?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How do you define “fair”?

Fair Q. What about going back a few years to before inflation ramped and eroded their salary so significantly (basically restore salary to where it was at start of last CBA and then make that the new benchmark. Then tie to inflation.

Then install PST to pay for it. Problem solved.

[Geraldsh]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How do you define “fair”?

The ideal class size is 18 students, each body above that should trigger a surcharge ($100/ month?) or simply shut the door. The latecomers can go home or go private. The students now receiving an ideal education can earn money after hours by tutoring the losers.
Green text until the UCP figure out how to monetize the idea.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Now you’re just being lazy.

Police are considered an essential service and have limited options for job action as a result. By saying you don’t think they should be able to strike you’re not advocating for them to lose any rights they currently have.

Teachers are not considered an essential service and don’t have the same limitations. By saying you think they should be deemed essential you’re advocating for them to lose rights they do currently have.

I’m saying schools should be considered an essential service because we have a wealth of studies showing that kids missing school has a serious impact on their welfare. Do you think child welfare advocates are right-wing, anti-union troglodytes?

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/cont...fba44fa0f.html

[aaronck]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I’ll counter this Helen Lovejoy argument with a nice anecdote.

In 2002 the teachers went on strike for almost the entire Winter Olympics. It didn’t have any affect on my grades and I’d be lying if I said that it wasn’t one of the best times of my life hanging out with my fellow student friends.

I believe the word you are looking for is effect?

Maybe the strike affected you more than you know?


I'll see myself out

[5abi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I’m saying schools should be considered an essential service because we have a wealth of studies showing that kids missing school has a serious impact on their welfare. Do you think child welfare advocates are right-wing, anti-union troglodytes?

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/cont...fba44fa0f.html

and I think everyone else is saying teachers should be fairly compensated and have a right to advocate for themselves.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by 5abi

and I think everyone else is saying teachers should be fairly compensated and have a right to advocate for themselves.

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.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I’m saying schools should be considered an essential service because we have a wealth of studies showing that kids missing school has a serious impact on their welfare.

Unlike the police or hospitals parents have alternative options to provide education to their children if an individual school board is facing a labour dispute. If schools were essential to the wellbeing of a child home schooling wouldn’t be allowed and one would think they would be open everyday, like all hospitals, police/fire departments, care homes, etc that are deemed essential. Are you suggesting schools should be open every single day for the welfare of children?

Do you think child welfare advocates are right-wing, anti-union troglodytes?

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/cont...fba44fa0f.html

I won’t pretend to be able to read the mind of the author of that opinion piece so I can’t say with certainty what their motives are. Plus the article is behind a paywall.

[woob]

My problem with declaring teachers as essential service, is the risk that it’ll result in further disparity within the teachers salary structure. I could support such actions if it was in conjunction with a correction of salary, policy to address class sizes, and policy to address funding. However I have zero confidence the UCP would handle this appropriately and would merely use it to tie the hands of teachers.

The simplistic view of “mmmm pausing education is bad, k?” Is only one piece of the puzzle. I’m not sure how to quantify it, but I would guess class size, education funding, and poor morale among education workers would also have a detrimental impact long on term learning trends.

[iggy_oi]

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?

[you&me]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

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?

Admittedly (and clearly) I'm not familiar with labour disputes and the technicalities of various mechanisms, so thanks for the insight.


I think in general, parents want better work environments for teachers which in turn leads to better learning environments for children, so support for teachers (I think) starts off pretty high. (not Sliver, but even Cliff )

As a parent, I'm trying to look at it from the perspective of what I think would be most effective while minimizing the erosion of public support for the teachers. Rightly or wrongly, it seems public opinions can swing quickly if the actions taken effect people too much... Just look at the CP strike.

[TheIronMaiden]

Good education = good economy.

[Point Blank]

Originally Posted by woob

My problem with declaring teachers as essential service, is the risk that it’ll result in further disparity within the teachers salary structure. I could support such actions if it was in conjunction with a correction of salary, policy to address class sizes, and policy to address funding. However I have zero confidence the UCP would handle this appropriately and would merely use it to tie the hands of teachers.

The simplistic view of “mmmm pausing education is bad, k?” Is only one piece of the puzzle. I’m not sure how to quantify it, but I would guess class size, education funding, and poor morale among education workers would also have a detrimental impact long on term learning trends.

John Hattie is an educational researcher who conducts meta analysis for educational impact. Collective self advocacy is identified one of the biggest effects on positive impact on student learning.

https://visible-learning.org/2018/03...ficacy-hattie/

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by you&me

Admittedly (and clearly) I'm not familiar with labour disputes and the technicalities of various mechanisms, so thanks for the insight.


I think in general, parents want better work environments for teachers which in turn leads to better learning environments for children, so support for teachers (I think) starts off pretty high. (not Sliver, but even Cliff )

As a parent, I'm trying to look at it from the perspective of what I think would be most effective while minimizing the erosion of public support for the teachers. Rightly or wrongly, it seems public opinions can swing quickly if the actions taken effect people too much...

I think the teachers would be relying on the public frustration to sway the government to offer more.

Just look at the CP strike.

I don’t think the government gave the public enough time to change their opinion before forcing them back to work.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think the teachers would be relying on the public frustration to sway the government to offer more...

Perhaps... I just think it's a delicate balance. But like I said, the teachers union can burn 'er all down for all I care... and I hope they get everything they deserve.