Toronto Sun - Ontario teachers headed for court

[basketcase]

...

A pay freeze in NOT the same as a pay cut.!!!
Besides,...$40,000 for 6 months to start,..ain't bad at all.

FAST

I'm done here, don't enjoy banging my head against a wall

While you're banging your head, you could try actually reading up on the matter. The province wanted a total pay freeze including salary grid. The unions that have discussed deals with them talked about not freezing the grid and to make up for the cost, all teachers take unpaid days meaning getting paid less.

I also wonder where you get the 6 months from, 9 would get closer and for people with two degrees it seems reasonable.

 

[train]

All public sector employee's wages should be frozen, not just the teachers. They should be allowed to move up the "grid" based on achievement ( not just on getting older). Sick days should be sick days and not be banked and paid if not used.

 

[oldjones]

The trick in that proposal, which looks like the Courts will get to settle, is how to accomplish it without destroying the principle that a legal contract between equally informed and competent parties is something the authorities should enforce, not destroy.

Everyone of those issues was discussed before being agreed to, and unless bargained for by incompetent idiots, should have been researched for cost and affordability over the life of the contract. Briefly put, either they made sense at the time, or no one shoulda signed off. It is not a good thing for anyone, when the government rewrites the law of contract for its own advantage, instead of completing the contract process they started.

'Clumsy and heavyhanded' is the kindest thing one could say about McG's earlier positions and this latest scheme, and whatever turmoil is required to get it through the leg will likely be small potatoes compared to forcing it down the teacher's throats.

 

[Possum Trot]

The trick in that proposal, which looks like the Courts will get to settle, is how to accomplish it without destroying the principle that a legal contract between equally informed and competent parties is something the authorities should enforce, not destroy.

Everyone of those issues was discussed before being agreed to, and unless bargained for by incompetent idiots, should have been researched for cost and affordability over the life of the contract. Briefly put, either they made sense at the time, or no one shoulda signed off. It is not a good thing for anyone, when the government rewrites the law of contract for its own advantage, instead of completing the contract process they started.

'Clumsy and heavyhanded' is the kindest thing one could say about McG's earlier positions and this latest scheme, and whatever turmoil is required to get it through the leg will likely be small potatoes compared to forcing it down the teacher's throats.

Are we not talking about contracts which have expired or are about to expire ? So they have now done the research and do not want to increase pay in the next contract. So what is your point exactly?

 

[FAST]

The union religion

All public sector employee's wages should be frozen, not just the teachers. They should be allowed to move up the "grid" based on achievement ( not just on getting older). Sick days should be sick days and not be banked and paid if not used.

Are you NUTS,...thats just crazy thinking,...what reality are you living in,...OH,...I'm sorry,...the REAL one.

FAST

 

[oldjones]

Are we not talking about contracts which have expired or are about to expire ? So they have now done the research and do not want to increase pay in the next contract. So what is your point exactly?

Like many contracts, just how this one expires is defined in the contract, just as your lease defines what happens when it ends. No one who cares enough to make a contract in the first place wants the calendar to deliver a complete blank slate, where all the rules and deals go out the window. In this instance, as is often the case, the contract continues until a new one replaces it, and by all reports the continuing contract requires certain raises Sept 1.

The government's problem is that they made their bottom line extreme their starting point for negociations they didn't actually begin until late in the day. Not exactly a wise or skillful strategy. Nor successful.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Like many contracts, just how this one expires is defined in the contract, just as your lease defines what happens when it ends. No one who cares enough to make a contract in the first place wants the calendar to deliver a complete blank slate, where all the rules and deals go out the window. In this instance, as is often the case, the contract continues until a new one replaces it, and by all reports the continuing contract requires certain raises Sept 1.

The government's problem is that they made their bottom line extreme their starting point for negociations they didn't actually begin until late in the day. Not exactly a wise or skillful strategy. Nor successful.

I've said it before in this thread but I am genuinely surprised we haven't heard from more centre-left and left wingers on this issue.

Personally, I'm not too bothered by McGuinty's attack on collective bargaining, but I'm a right-wing knuckledragger. I have found it surprising, though, that so many folks on the other side of the political aisle have been so quiet on this issue (other than the debate about publicly funded employees using their money to fund lawsuits).

I give oldjones full credit for taking a principled position.

 

[oldjones]

I've said it before in this thread but I am genuinely surprised we haven't heard from more centre-left and left wingers on this issue.

Personally, I'm not too bothered by McGuinty's attack on collective bargaining, but I'm a right-wing knuckledragger. I have found it surprising, though, that so many folks on the other side of the political aisle have been so quiet on this issue (other than the debate about publicly funded employees using their money to fund lawsuits).

I give oldjones full credit for taking a principled position.

Gee thanks, but hardly. I'm disposed to favour workers, and see no difference between unions and any other association, but these teacher negociations with multiple unions for various levels, languages, and faiths, Education Ministry and all those Boards who are the actual employers (or are they) is far too byzantine for me to fathom (and for most posting here, clearly). Successive attempts to rationalize the snakeball from Davis thru Peterson, Rae and that old trustee Harris have just made it all worse it seems. Who can say where the sides are, let alone which has right this time out?

But lots of people who've only heard about unions and never seen one of their contracts have some naïve notions. I was just trying to dispel some of them with the few bits of knowledge I have. Although my position is pretty firmly on the sidelines, I still think following the rules is important; by the time the Court tells everyone just what that means in this case we should be well into a right mess.

 

[basketcase]

Are we not talking about contracts which have expired or are about to expire ? So they have now done the research and do not want to increase pay in the next contract. So what is your point exactly?

First, I believe teachers had agree to pay freezes.

Second, the issue is that there aren't going to be negotiations between the boards and teachers but rather the province legislating a contract.

 

[Moviefan-2]

First, I believe teachers had agree to pay freezes.

That's true for the secondary school teachers but I don't think it's the case for the elementary teachers.

There was something in the secondary school teachers' offer that the government felt it couldn't accept, but it's unclear what that was.

 

[FAST]

Help

OK,... help me out here, as I understand the situation here, the contracts in question have NOT been signed yet by the employer, the school boards.

Another thing I need clarified,...who the hell do the school boards report to?

If it is the prov. government, don't the Libs have the right, to force the issue, since the boards appear to be dragging their feet?

With the boards failing to close the deal, probably intentional, as an out, I would think that it is a slam dunk for the Libs to step in and take advantage of the situation.




FAST

 

[Anbarandy]

All public sector employee's wages should be frozen, not just the teachers. They should be allowed to move up the "grid" based on achievement ( not just on getting older). Sick days should be sick days and not be banked and paid if not used.

All CEOs, Directors, VPs, B. of Directors compensation packages should be rolled back to pre-1981 levels. They should be eligble to move up the "grid" based upon how their achievements have had a positive effect on society(not just how many jobs they shift offshore or how many employees they screw over). Downsizing and/or 'right-sizing' should be just that, starting with their own jobs. Talk the talk, how about walking the walk.?

 

[Moviefan-2]

If it is the prov. government, don't the Libs have the right, to force the issue, since the boards appear to be dragging their feet?

With the boards failing to close the deal, probably intentional, as an out, I would think that it is a slam dunk for the Libs to step in and take advantage of the situation.

As a matter of law, you may be right. We'll see.

But we shouldn't be too hard on the school boards. Given what we've seen in the past -- such as the previous "wage freeze" that wasn't a freeze at all -- there is good reason to suspect the McGuinty government will focus solely on snappy headlines ("wages frozen") while cutting deals that aren't necessarily in the best interest of students.

I'm not clear on the specifics, but that may be the case this time in the government's deal with the Catholic union.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/edu...-affect-student-achievement-school-boards-say

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edit...ay-ontario-government-bargaining-in-bad-faith

 

[basketcase]

...

Another thing I need clarified,...who the hell do the school boards report to?
...

The school boards are officially run by the elected trustees. They are overseen to some extent by the ministry of education but I have no idea to what extent. The Ministry is also the source of education funding but I believe that it was municipal taxes that once funded education.

 

[basketcase]

On a related note, I found this about civil service wage freezes from another angle.

Ontario can’t push wage freeze with bonuses in play: critics

The governing Liberals shot themselves in the foot by giving bonuses to senior civil servants while demanding a wage freeze from public sector workers to eliminate a $15-billion deficit, union and opposition leaders say.

...

Premier Dalton McGuinty ordered a review of performance pay a day after The Canadian Press reported that nearly all eligible government managers received bonuses in 2011, costing $35.6 million.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...onto-ontario-government-bonuses-reaction.html

Seems the Liberals think wage freezes are needed, just not for everyone.

 

[frankcastle]

OH,...in other words,...tax payers!!!

FAST

They pay taxes too.

 

[frankcastle]

To say that teachers are planning to strike is false.... a strike vote has not happened

To say teachers won't accept a pay freeze is false.... see the Catholic boards (but they have a me too clause which means if public goes on strike losses pay but gets benefits they get them too..... very weird)

To say teachers will sue is false.... appeal the decision that's different

What we're talking about is the government is trying to get things done without negotiations which is how it is done in the past (and pretty sure it's part of labour laws)

Interesting that Hudak might not vote so that he won't claim "responsibility" in the outcome in the vote

I'm not sure if this is true but I heard that prior to the recession (most recent) we had a balanced budget.... so what happened? was it failure in the private sector that caused the deficit?

Also, if you are planning a budget don't you have to factor in that increase in things like salary are going to happen? If I were budgeting for my home I can't expect all rates to stay the same and expect the rates to change but not my budget.

I'm not suggesting teacherse should get a raise. I'm just suggesting that the procedure should be done via negotiations.

 

[Rockslinger]

Teachers - what a bunch of whiners. Acting like the spoiled brats that they are.

 

[Rockslinger]

Doesn't your money to purchase of a product eventually end up in the hands of the union to sue the company that eventually makes the product price go up and you pay more of your income for the product?

Prices can't go up too much because of competition. If union demands get out of hand, the private company goes bankrupt, the unionized employees lose their jobs, benefits and pensions. Such is the discipline of the free market.

 

[Moviefan-2]

To say teachers will sue is false.... appeal the decision that's different.

To be honest, I don't think that was a deliberate attempt to make a false statement. I think it was just a misunderstanding of the nature of the case.

My original post said the issue "will end up in court." The part about 'suing' got added in posters' reactions along the way.