October 6 - So it Begins - The Alberta Teacher Strike

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Some dude on my LinkedIn is claiming that a 0.05% drop in productivity in Alberta equates to a range of cost for AB at $30-50mm per day in economic output. I have no idea how he’s coming up with that haha but kind of interesting and just generally true that the gov should factor in the opportunity cost of lost economic output by forcing all businesses that have people to adjust to this reality by figuring out child care (work from home, cost, etc.).

He also makes a claim that he believes the demand from teachers to be met by the gov only requires an additional $200mm.

Not sure if any of that is true, don’t have time to go research it all.

It doesn't really matter how someone wants to crunch the numbers. This situation negatively impacts Albertans. It is not good for students, teachers, parents, employers (even the big bad corporations) and it was entirely avoidable had the UCP any interest in avoiding it.

The reality of the situation is that the UCP have been on this path since 2019 and have intentionally made this happen. In their arrogance, they probably thought that the teachers would roll over immediately and never get to a strike but, either way, their goal is to dismantle public education and grift the money into anything other than a properly funded public education system.

I don't know if it would cost $200M per year or 5 times that to meet the demands of Teachers but it is worth repeating, over and over again, the ever growing (and not complete) list of wastes of our money performed by the UCP:

Originally Posted by Wolven

The province has had enough money to do both (hire teachers and pay them a respectable amount).

Imagine if:

• the UCP hadn't funneled $7.5B into Keystone XL
• the UCP hadn't dunked $1.3B to 2.5B in Sturgeon Refinery
• The UCP hadn't dumped $100M into their war room embarrassment
• Had not slashed corporate tax rates (costing the government $4.7B in revenue) so that corporations could have bigger profits, executives could get bigger bonuses, and Albertans would still be getting salary rollbacks and layoffs
• They had not gifted $83M to MHCare for unusable Turkish Tylenol
• They had not gifted charter schools $123M to benefit a handful of students.
• The renewable energy projects cancelled ($33B in investment in Alberta)
• The legal exposure of their coal policy flip flop ($15B in potential legal losses to coal corporations)
• The UCP hadn't immediately deposited their surplus from last year into the Heritage fund so they could pretend to be broke right now
• And so much more....

This government is so incompetent that instead of having piles of money to pay for all of the services we want, they are instead burning billions of our dollars to enable grifts and appease their overlords and then telling us to stop looking under the hood when everything comes crashing down around us.

They are literally relying on people being stupid and willing to turn on each other instead of putting all of our focus on the UCP's horrible mismanagement of the province and all out theft of our tax money.

Properly funding education, at almost any cost, is more worthwhile than all of the dumb things the UCP has allocated our money to.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Two Fivenagame

I think it would be funny if Marlaina's $150 strike bucks got funneled back to the teachers to help them hold out longer. Like a go fund me or something.

We made a point to tell our kid's teachers that will will be giving them the Marlaina-bribe we get from the government (which should be their salaries).

If everyone did that the teachers would be able to strike until the UCP crumbles.

[malcolmk14]

A few comments about not being sure what teachers want. I actually like the ATA's strategy of bargaining at the table and not in the media - it takes a lot of power away from the other side to criticize it or activate public support against it.

Anyway, here is what I'd like.

- 15% immediate salary increase with 3% a year thereafter (the nurse deal).
- stricter limits on instructional and assignable time (forcing the schools to hire more teachers) so that I have time within the regular work day to do the non-instructional parts of my job.
- more support in the forms of guaranteed funding for high needs students. For example a school I know of has more than 240 ESL students (50% of the population) and almost 100 students with IPPs and no dedicated ESL teacher, ESL assistant, or resource teacher. All of the associated preparation, instruction, and paperwork for every one of those students is left to the classroom teacher.
- phased in soft class size caps with teacher compensation for additional workload near the end of the deal. Penalties should increase as time goes on for not meeting the cap.

Honestly just partially addressing some of the things above would get me to vote yes. But the government refuses to even talk about any of these things. They are standing firm on 3% a year for four years and hiring 3000 teachers (there are 2000 public schools in Alberta). Where are these teachers even coming from? No one is banging down the door to teach in this province.

[Dion]

[Point Blank]

The government just gave us notice that they’ll be locking us out from work…when we’re already not working.

In other words “you didn’t break up with us, we broke up with you!”

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Point Blank

The government just gave us notice that they’ll be locking us out from work…when we’re already not working.

In other words “you didn’t break up with us, we broke up with you!”

Really??!? I do not understand the rationale. What possible upside could their be?

Hmmm. Is this about shutting down the non-teaching staff as well?

[puffnstuff]

Those oil and gas subsidies arent going to pay themselves

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Really??!? I do not understand the rationale. What possible upside could their be?

Hmmm. Is this about shutting down the non-teaching staff as well?

Because the government can now control their return to work, which gives them some power. If the teachers start deciding they want to get as paycheque again, they can no longer just go back. Which means if they really want a pay cheque, they are more likely to accept a ####ty deal.


I think this is a bit of a sign the govenrment doesn't care how long this goes no for or the harms caused. I wouldn't be surprised if the UCP is happy how this is unfolding, because it gives them more tools to destroy public education. You can basically write their talking points going forward. If no one is teaching, why fund it at all, right? The money should follow the student, and they can take it to whatever private schools are operating and not have education held hostage by a union and greedy teachers.


You have to remember these people are extremely stupid, but also highly motivated. And they've had these same vapid ideas floating around their heads for decades, they just needed enough morons to give them the power to do it. Thanks, morons.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Two Fivenagame

I think it would be funny if Marlaina's $150 strike bucks got funneled back to the teachers to help them hold out longer. Like a go fund me or something.

Sadly...I think she's counting on it. I think she wants them holding out as long as possible.

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Really??!? I do not understand the rationale. What possible upside could their be?

Hmmm. Is this about shutting down the non-teaching staff as well?

Control the return. ATA can't just switch their strategy up now and go back then take another strike vote when they feel like it.

I imagine they'll lay off non-teaching staff by the end of the week.

[malcolmk14]

I must be in the target age and demographic the UCP is targeting with its various social media blitzes because I'm seeing a lot of nonsense pop up on my Facebook, X, and TikTok feeds. But I saw a quote today to the effect of, "If they're going to strike, make it so painful that they won't do it again." Have a feeling that's exactly what this government is going for.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

I must be in the target age and demographic the UCP is targeting with its various social media blitzes because I'm seeing a lot of nonsense pop up on my Facebook, X, and TikTok feeds. But I saw a quote today to the effect of, "If they're going to strike, make it so painful that they won't do it again." Have a feeling that's exactly what this government is going for.

I get the same the same feeling. I think you're right.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Control the return. ATA can't just switch their strategy up now and go back then take another strike vote when they feel like it.

I imagine they'll lay off non-teaching staff by the end of the week.

Well there's next to no EAs left in the province to lay off after all the cuts, so there's that. The admin staff at most schools is unsurprisingly small as well, so what is the point? They're also wasting millions a day paying parents to have their kids at home....this would be pretty hypocritical to save a few bucks even for the UCP at the expense of losing even more PR.

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Well there's next to no EAs left in the province to lay off after all the cuts, so there's that. The admin staff at most schools is unsurprisingly small as well, so what is the point? They're also wasting millions a day paying parents to have their kids at home, so that would be pretty hypocritical to save a few bucks even for the UCP.

It's not really about the dollars it's about being able to point to x number of layoffs of support staff and say, "look what the teachers made us do."

Realistically speaking they can't continue to pay these people forever with no kids in schools.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Seems pretty clear the union doesn't really understand what the needs of their membership are? Or explain, please. Why was there a tentative agreement with the union and the province, that the teachers then overwhelmingly rejected? Or is that just the process - you bring the best deal to a vote?

They understand fully what teachers need and want. The union has been banging their heads against a wall for over a year through initial bargaining, a useless attempt at mediation, and then again, bargaining attempts in the spring and fall.

The UCP has refused to even talk about bringing class size reporting, class caps back on the table, so as a last sign of good faith the union agreed to take the deal to the masses with the thinking that at minimum it will send a clear message that all of the teachers are against this when they vote it down.

There was never a "tentative agreement" in place, and that is all how it was angled by our lovely government. Broadcasting it as such the second they broke to take it to a vote was yet another attempt to undermine the process and to vilify teachers.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

It's not really about the dollars it's about being able to point to x number of layoffs of support staff and say, "look what the teachers made us do."

Realistically speaking they can't continue to pay these people forever with no kids in schools.

And that's exactly my point. Doesn't it ring hollow if you read the news and listen to Horner and Smith attempt to explain why they can pay parents millions to have their kids at home, but can't continue to pay EAs and Admin their wages? That would backfire so fast (the $30 daily bribe is already kicking them in the pants). There's always work in jobs like this to be done...people aren't just sitting in a room bouncing a ball off a wall while the clock ticks.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

And that's exactly my point. Doesn't it ring hollow if you read the news and listen to Horner and Smith attempt to explain why they can pay parents millions to have their kids at home, but can't continue to pay EAs and Admin their wages? That would backfire so fast (the $30 daily bribe is already kicking them in the pants). There's always work in jobs like this to be done...people aren't just sitting in a room bouncing a ball off a wall while the clock ticks.

We need to get those Learning Beds from the Venture Bros. That would solve all of this.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

A few comments about not being sure what teachers want. I actually like the ATA's strategy of bargaining at the table and not in the media - it takes a lot of power away from the other side to criticize it or activate public support against it.

Anyway, here is what I'd like.

- 15% immediate salary increase with 3% a year thereafter (the nurse deal).
- stricter limits on instructional and assignable time (forcing the schools to hire more teachers) so that I have time within the regular work day to do the non-instructional parts of my job.
- more support in the forms of guaranteed funding for high needs students. For example a school I know of has more than 240 ESL students (50% of the population) and almost 100 students with IPPs and no dedicated ESL teacher, ESL assistant, or resource teacher. All of the associated preparation, instruction, and paperwork for every one of those students is left to the classroom teacher.
- phased in soft class size caps with teacher compensation for additional workload near the end of the deal. Penalties should increase as time goes on for not meeting the cap.

Honestly just partially addressing some of the things above would get me to vote yes. But the government refuses to even talk about any of these things. They are standing firm on 3% a year for four years and hiring 3000 teachers (there are 2000 public schools in Alberta). Where are these teachers even coming from? No one is banging down the door to teach in this province.

I would put that 3rd bullet at the top just for optics if nothing else.

The amount of IPP's must be ugly (my kid on one). He's not a nightmare but definitely a little more work needed which is why we left public, not a chance it works out staying there.

It does sound like there is a certain poster that is choked that they now need to deal with their crappy kids instead of foisting them on a group of teachers, which is ironic.

My boss (who is an oil and gas worker because that is somehow relevant) wife is a t a school in the south where kids are biting teachers arms. They have given them shirts to wear. Apparently the covid kid thing is real and there are tonnes of buggered kids out there creating havoc in the classroom.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fotze2

I would put that 3rd bullet at the top just for optics if nothing else.

The amount of IPP's must be ugly (my kid on one). He's not a nightmare but definitely a little more work needed which is why we left public, not a chance it works out staying there.

It does sound like there is a certain poster that is choked that they now need to deal with their crappy kids instead of foisting them on a group of teachers, which is ironic.

My boss (who is an oil and gas worker because that is somehow relevant) wife is a t a school in the south where kids are biting teachers arms. They have given them shirts to wear. Apparently the covid kid thing is real and there are tonnes of buggered kids out there creating havoc in the classroom.

Teachers...the other, other white meat...

[WideReceiver]

What’s the point of locking out teachers who are on strike?