# Ontario teachers "work to rule"



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Been having no fun with arrangements for a school trip planned for the spring. 

At the local school, teachers are badgering the kids to bring in a $100 trip deposit, while simultaneously sending messages to parents telling them that unfair action by the Ontario government will likely see them work to rule. The result: the trip will be canceled and parents will lose their non-refundable deposit.

Similar trips in other schools in Toronto have already been canceled. Playing games with $100 is no way to generate sympathy.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Our household fully support the public teacher's rights. A trip was cancelled in early December. Our $80 cheque was never cashed and it was returned.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

It is disrespectful the way teachers are behaving..
They should all be fired....
Find some that are willing to work. Like fresh students who just graduated and want the jobs and to work..
Can't wait for the province to bring in the right to work laws.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

macintosh doctor said:


> It is disrespectful the way teachers are behaving..
> They should all be fired....
> Find some that are willing to work. Like fresh students who just graduated and want the jobs and to work..
> Can't wait for the province to bring in the right to work laws.


Happy you're not in charge.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Our household fully support the public teacher's rights. A trip was cancelled in early December. Our $80 cheque was never cashed and it was returned.


Ours was not canceled. However, they warned people in late December that anyone who had already paid the deposit would lose it, should they decide to work to rule.


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Happy you're not in charge.


Be happy I'm not in charge either.

They are well compensated for the job that they do. I would never do it and I respect them for doing what I won't do.

I happened to find a 3rd year report card (would have been 1988) and the teacher actually hand wrote constructive criticism. Nowadays it's just a pointless form letter that they don't seem to be able to put a single negative in.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Ours was not canceled. However, they warned people in late December that anyone who had already paid the deposit would lose it, should they decide to work to rule.


Interesting. Who are the beneficiaries of the non-refundable deposit? Teachers?

Personally, when ever I encounter non-refundable deposits I view them as a crap shoot. Consequently I rarely, and pretty much never, participate. Too risky.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

imnothng said:


> Be happy I'm not in charge either.
> 
> They are well compensated for the job that they do. I would never do it and I respect them for doing what I won't do.
> 
> I happened to find a 3rd year report card (would have been 1988) and the teacher actually hand wrote constructive criticism. Nowadays it's just a pointless form letter that they don't seem to be able to put a single negative in.


We receive emails with detailed information regarding our children's progress from 3 teachers. No problem whatsoever. We have told each teacher that we support their work rights. These teachers have their student's interests in mind.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> We have told each teacher that we support their work rights. These teachers have their student's interests in mind.


So let me see remembrance was cancelled , so much for the lest we forget part..

Christmas concerts were not even done..
My sister in law (who is a teahcer) said the teachers reuined the concerts, and the unions threatened participating teachers with a $500 fine if they did participate.. Disgusting. 
This not teaching or even close to proper behaviour. What are you teaching the kids of the future?
So glad my kids aren't in public schools. 
If they don't want to work, quit. Stop destroying the education system. 
They are plenty who want to work..
Perfect example a of country who suffered under socialism is UK, now look at the debt they have to show for giving in to them.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Interesting. Who are the beneficiaries of the non-refundable deposit? Teachers?
> 
> Personally, when ever I encounter non-refundable deposits I view them as a crap shoot. Consequently I rarely, and pretty much never, participate. Too risky.


The travel agency that is organizing the trip gets the hun.


----------



## iMouse (Mar 1, 2008)

Well then, how about naming them, and putting their feet to the fire?


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

imnothng said:


> Be happy I'm not in charge either.
> 
> They are well compensated for the job that they do. I would never do it and I respect them for doing what I won't do.
> 
> I happened to find a 3rd year report card (would have been 1988) and the teacher actually hand wrote constructive criticism. *Nowadays it's just a pointless form letter that they don't seem to be able to put a single negative in.*


To let you know as I found out it is not the teachers choice on how they submit report cards. They are told what to do and pick a comment. Blame the gov and the board for the way it is not the teacher. And remember it is not the teachers who don't want to fail a student or give negative comments its again the board and gov.



Macfury said:


> The travel agency that is organizing the trip gets the hun.


Well then that is not the teachers fault. 

let’s see how many of you do extra work you don't get paid for and then when you don't want to do that extra work everyone screams. They don't get paid for the extracurricular activities. And this is above working extra hours to do all the marking and submitting of work outside of work hours and how about the preparing for the classes every day? They just don't show up at 8:30 and say hello. And if they do go home after class is out they still work when they get home doing marking and prep.

I am just letting you all know if you don't know a teacher first hand and know what they do you have no idea. You all like to go home after your work day and be done with your work but it isn't. Do you know how many weekends I don't do anything because my fiancée has to stay home to mark work? Matter of fact this whole month of January is shot just because of preparing for report cards. That is our time is shot not work hours. They don't give you time during the day to do marking and then go through it all and prepare report cards.

They are not asking for more money they already agreed to a 2 year wage freeze. Please educate yourself as to why they are on work to rule. And it is not every board that is striking.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> Well then that is not the teachers fault. {/QUOTE]
> 
> What I'm objecting to is the fact that the teachers are sending mixed messages. Hauling the kids into the office to demand they bring in their trip deposits, then sending notices by e-mail that if they decide not to hold the trip, the deposit will be forfeited.
> 
> I want them to either commit to the trip or cancel it.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

iMouse said:


> Well then, how about naming them, and putting their feet to the fire?


I'm meeting with the principal tomorrow.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Ah to be a fly on the wall


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> To let you know as I found out it is not the teachers choice on how they submit report cards. They are told what to do and pick a comment. Blame the gov and the board for the way it is not the teacher. And remember it is not the teachers who don't want to fail a student or give negative comments its again the board and gov.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like :clap:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> I am just letting you all know if you don't know a teacher first hand and know what they do you have no idea. You all like to go home after your work day and be done with your work but it isn't. Do you know how many weekends I don't do anything because my fiancée has to stay home to mark work? Matter of fact this whole month of January is shot just because of preparing for report cards. That is our time is shot not work hours. They don't give you time during the day to do marking and then go through it all and prepare report cards.


I've gotta say, most people I know take work home with them for no extra pay.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't know too many people who work for free like that. 

I sure as hell wouldn't.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Macfury said:


> I've gotta say, most people I know take work home with them for no extra pay.


Yes and that is class prep and marking. And they know it is part of their job. But extracurricular activities is not, they are just assumed they are. It is like taking away the remote syndrome. Once you give someone something they assume they will always have it.

So for example when I played hockey and football in high school and the teachers who coached me did not get paid one extra cent for the thousands of hours they put in each year above their normal job.

Anyways the are not fighting for more pay which everyone thinks they are. they agreed to a pay freeze. They are fighting for their right to negotiate a contract in the future.

But I am sure you know that and just want your $100 back as I would.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> let’s see how many of you do extra work you don't get paid for and then when you don't want to do that extra work everyone screams.


Regularly. Curse of the self-employed. Also curse of working with family. 

I'm not against the teachers in this--too be honest, I'm not following the issue closely so I don't have much of an opinion on it--but making comparisons about how much work one profession works vs another.... well, frankly, everyone sees themselves as a hard worker. 

Most people in Canada probably are hard workers--we're the nation that takes less vacation time than any other, even when we have it. But the laziest person I know thinks he works really hard... no one gets anywhere by trying to tell people how hard they work.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

I can't seem to muster much sympathy for Ontario school teachers when you look at the numbers. These are from the Canadian Taxpayers Association.

-The average industrial wage in Ontario is $47,000/year
-The average Teacher salary $72,000/year (The top teachers, about half, earn $95,000/year)
-Top teachers in BC earn $81,000, Quebec $72,000
-On top of the more than generous salary they enjoy $1200 of employment insurance contributions,$2300 contributed to CPP and $7800 contributed to the Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan.
-Add in drugs, medical, dental etc. and about half of Ontario Teachers are costing the tax payers $110,000 a year.

-Taking into consideration the reduced sick days from 20 to 10, teachers are only expected to be in the classroom for 195 instructional days. The average worker with two weeks holidays works 250 days a year.
-Between 2002 and 2010, Ontario school boards added 24,000 teachers and support staff to the payroll while student enrolment fell 120,000 students.
-Payroll costs consumed 76% of the provincial education budget.

It looks like education costs have become a runaway train and someone has to reign it in before we go bankrupt. I think McGuinty sees that but the horse has left the barn.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

MacGuiver said:


> I can't seem to muster much sympathy for Ontario school teachers when you look at the numbers. These are from the Canadian Taxpayers Association.
> 
> -The average industrial wage in Ontario is $47,000/year
> -The average Teacher salary $72,000/year (The top teachers, about half, earn $95,000/year)
> ...


Again they are not looking for more money.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Joker Eh said:


> Again they are not looking for more money.


I realize that but I think they see the writing on the wall. They're overpaid and we're on the brink of bankruptcy in Ontario. Tough medicine is coming and they don't want to loose the power to hold the province over the fire. I can't blame them for wanting to protect their bargaining rights since its the mechanism that got them to the overpaid positions they enjoy today.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

MacGuiver said:


> I realize that but I think they see the writing on the wall. They're overpaid and we're on the brink of bankruptcy in Ontario. Tough medicine is coming and they don't want to loose the power to hold the province over the fire. I can't blame them for wanting to protect their bargaining rights since its the mechanism that got them to the overpaid positions they enjoy today.


They are not over paid. No matter what you think.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> They are not over paid. No matter what you think.


If other qualified teachers are waiting in line for those jobs than the salaries are more than adequate. I would agree they are not overpaid, only if others were not willing to take on those positions if they were vacated.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

The vast majority of teachers support their legal right to work to rule. It's the teachers that object to work to rule that should leave the system and create space for new teachers. 

A good friend teaches at UCC for that very reason. His compensation is lower than a publicly funded teacher. He prefers it that way. 

Hopefully Ontario's new government will restore the negotiating process. I detest that our legislature is prorogued and that our current government is not being held accountable.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

The statistics seem to support your statement MacFury.
This from the Canadian Tax Payers Association:



> Ontario universities continue to graduate 7,600 more teachers every year than there are teaching vacancies to be filled. Young teachers know a good deal when they see one – they want a piece of the action.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

MacGuiver said:


> The statistics seem to support your statement MacFury.
> This from the Canadian Tax Payers Association:


The same could be said for every parent putting their child into hockey or any pro sport. They know a good deal when they see one. Thinking their child is going to hit the big time. 

The same way I want the job to sit behind a booth at a subway platform and watch people drop in coins for 12 hours a day and collect $100G/year  No education here needed. And not the thousands spent.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> The same could be said for every parent putting their child into hockey or any pro sport. They know a good deal when they see one. Thinking their child is going to hit the big time.


The point is that the teachers have a job that others covet. If teachers feel they are not being paid what they are worth, they should find a position that rewards them to their expectations. Others would happily take their jobs for less.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> The vast majority of teachers support their legal right to work to rule. It's the teachers that object to work to rule that should leave the system and create space for new teachers.


I would prefer the other group leave. They are leaving a bad taste in the mouths of the public by exercising their rights conspicuously in a time of economic despair.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Joker Eh said:


> They are not over paid. No matter what you think.


What a ridiculous notion that they are overpaid. Here, let me return the stupidity of all this around: Right wing hardliners would rather grab welfare recipients of the line and have them teach public school if they could get away with that. (note that private schools will have the better teachers...)

There. That should further discourse eh?


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Macfury said:


> The point is that the teachers have a job that others covet. If teachers feel they are not being paid what they are worth, they should find a position that rewards them to their expectations. Others would happily take their jobs for less.


Who says they don't feel they are getting paid what they are worth? The work for rule is not about money, that part of the contract is done. A wage freeze. It is about... ah forget it I hate repeating myself.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Teachers are not your daycare or your childs athletic coach, or a trip chaperone.


----------



## kelman (Sep 25, 2010)

Macfury said:


> I've gotta say, most people I know take work home with them for no extra pay.


every day, curse of us self employed, the ones with no benefits.



Sonal said:


> Regularly. Curse of the self-employed. Also curse of working with family.


as said



Macfury said:


> If other qualified teachers are waiting in line for those jobs than the salaries are more than adequate. I would agree they are not overpaid, only if others were not willing to take on those positions if they were vacated.


there are many jobs that if an employee walked away from the job there are a dozen standing in line to take it. I would list many under the union label



Macfury said:


> The point is that the teachers have a job that others covet. If teachers feel they are not being paid what they are worth, they should find a position that rewards them to their expectations. Others would happily take their jobs for less.


they obviously know the job is worth it, or they would find a better job, if your job sucked would you stay if it didn't pay well?

Oh and by the way my brother is a high school teacher and I was employed in the union and even served as a union steward prior to starting my own company 20 years ago.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> Who says they don't feel they are getting paid what they are worth? The work for rule is not about money, that part of the contract is done. A wage freeze. It is about... ah forget it I hate repeating myself.


_You_ said they were not overpaid. _I_ said they are if a large supply of qualified applicants would consistently take their jobs for less, year after year.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Joker Eh said:


> Teachers are not your daycare or your childs athletic coach, or a trip chaperone.


They are not my daycare. I take full responsibility for that.

However, if they state that they promise to be my child's athletic coach, or a trip chaperone in any given year, I expect them to follow through on their word. Next year is a whole new ballgame.


----------



## kelman (Sep 25, 2010)

Macfury said:


> I would prefer the other group leave. They are leaving a bad taste in the mouths of the public by exercising their rights conspicuously in a time of economic despair.





Joker Eh said:


> Who says they don't feel they are getting paid what they are worth? The work for rule is not about money, that part of the contract is done. A wage freeze. It is about... ah forget it I hate repeating myself.


At this time in the economy where there are so many people with no work in the forecast or shortened hours and smaller pay checks the teachers should just stop, sit back and be happy they have a full time job with security.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

kelman said:


> At this time in the economy where there are so many people with no work in the forecast or shortened hours and smaller pay checks the teachers should just stop, sit back and be happy they have a full time job with security.


Duh they are. Again read what the work to rule is about.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Macfury said:


> They are not my daycare. I take full responsibility for that.
> 
> However, if they state that they promise to be my child's athletic coach, or a trip chaperone in any given year, I expect them to follow through on their word. Next year is a whole new ballgame.


In your case I would give the exception as they took your money and haven't given it back as of yet. So they should follow through but maybe look at the agency that won't refund the money. But also the school for taking the money and not thinking this could be an issue. Again this falls on the principle not the teachers.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

kelman said:


> [With respect to taking work home/working overtime for no extra pay] every day, curse of us self employed


And essentially every academic on earth. I strongly suspect a significant majority of professions now involve working a lot of 'unbillable hours.' My cousins are self-employed entrepreneurs, and they work almost as many hours as I do. All of my academic colleagues work >60h per week (and we all worked even harder when we were graduate students; ironically now it's the faculty that work the long hours and the graduate students who work 9-5). Most teachers, lawyers, doctors and many engineers I know take a lot of work home with them and frequently work weekends.

About the only people I can think of who work 9-5 are the office drones in cube farms and unionized labourers. I don't envy them.



> they obviously know the job is worth it, or they would find a better job, if your job sucked would you stay if it didn't pay well?


Um, because it's what you spent years getting trained to do, and/or because you have some hope of making it better. "Finding a better job" would solve a lot of people's problems, but it isn't easy for most.


----------



## kelman (Sep 25, 2010)

bryanc said:


> Um, because it's what you spent years getting trained to do, and/or because you have some hope of making it better. "Finding a better job" would solve a lot of people's problems, but it isn't easy for most.


exactly, if they knew the job wasn't going to pay well they wouldn't have spent all that time training for it. Same as those of us in the construction trades who spent 5 years apprenticing. 

Finding a better job isn't easy I understand but I have had grown adults with commitments looking to start over as a first year apprentice to better their future. Sometime 'finding a better job' is when you step away and become your own boss.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

kelman said:


> exactly, if they knew the job wasn't going to pay well they wouldn't have spent all that time training for it. Same as those of us in the *construction trades who spent 5 years apprenticing*.
> 
> Finding a better job isn't easy I understand but I have had grown adults with commitments looking to start over as a first year apprentice to better their future. Sometime 'finding a better job' is when you step away and become your own boss.


to get into the union 

You can not equate spending 5 years of getting paid to learn on the job to get a license versus going to univerisity and getting a degree and paying for it yourself?

You do what you do maybe because you love it and so there are teachers who do what they do because they feel the joy in teaching and they are good at it. In any profession there is always going to be those who got in it for the money. Just like some construction contrators  

You can't do anything about those few who are in it solely for the money or the benefits. They get weeded out anyways. They soon find out the stress of teaching is not worth it.

Sometimes I think why don't I quit my job and go into some construction union or work for an auto company and get into the union. Man I would have a pension and maybe not stress out so much about my job.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Joker Eh said:


> You can't do anything about those few who are in it solely for the money or the benefits.


Not a problem in my feild  No one does basic research for the money.


----------



## kelman (Sep 25, 2010)

Joker Eh said:


> to get into the union
> 
> You can not equate spending 5 years of getting paid to learn on the job to get a license versus going to univerisity and getting a degree and paying for it yourself?
> 
> ...


I think you have mistaken my comments. 

I *was* in the union, worked for years in the trade, taking my turn as a steward and then got laid off. I was laid off so long I forgot what work was. I started my own company (non union) out of my own back pocket already in the hole thanks to the union I left. (just wait work is just around the corner, just be patient, it'll come, you'll see)

After many long years of stress and non payed after hours office/research/pricing etc work I am now getting paid what I am worth as a tradesman.

I also went to college before I decided to take up a trade so yes, 5 years is 5 years, quite a bit of time out of your life dedicated to one direction. 

I do what I do do because it pays my bills, the fact I enjoy it is because I am good at it. Benefits are there but not like you think, no dental pension etc available for the self employed,


----------



## Puccasaurus (Dec 28, 2003)

imnothng said:


> Be happy I'm not in charge either.
> 
> They are well compensated for the job that they do. I would never do it and I respect them for doing what I won't do.
> 
> I happened to find a 3rd year report card (would have been 1988) and the teacher actually hand wrote constructive criticism. Nowadays it's just a pointless form letter that they don't seem to be able to put a single negative in.


Don't blame us for that. Blame the hordes of useless consultants and Ministry hacks and their "no failure" policies. Every teacher I know hates those stupid report card comment banks we have to use.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Puccasaurus said:


> Don't blame us for that. Blame the hordes of useless consultants and Ministry hacks and their "no failure" policies. Every teacher I know hates those stupid report card comment banks we have to use.


I believe the Ministry uses those so that teachers aren't sued for a comment that may be misconstrued as libelous against the precious muffins they teach. No fault against teachers here.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Working to rule is not an effective negotiating tactic. Either go on strike or don't. Working to rule makes no difference cost wise to the school board and just annoys students and parents. It does not engender sympathy for the cause. And yes I am a teacher, and I get paid very well (Alberta) and the benefits are fantastic. The kids make it all worthwhile in my view. I cannot speak for teachers in other jurisdictions.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Working to rule is not an effective negotiating tactic. Either go on strike or don't. Working to rule makes no difference cost wise to the school board and just annoys students and parents. It does not engender sympathy for the cause. And yes I am a teacher, and I get paid very well (Alberta) and the benefits are fantastic. The kids make it all worthwhile in my view. I cannot speak for teachers in other jurisdictions.


I agree. Working to rule does not make parents eager to pressure the government to give them what they want--it reduces action on the disagreement to simply irritating parents and students. A strike is a more honest method of settling unsettled grievances between the employer and worker.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Macfury said:


> I agree. Working to rule does not make parents eager to pressure the government to give them what they want--it reduces action on the disagreement to simply irritating parents and students. A strike is a more honest method of settling unsettled grievances between the employer and worker.


We should mark this day on the calendar, Macfury. You and I actually agreed on something. :lmao:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> We should mark this day on the calendar, Macfury. You and I actually agreed on something. :lmao:


Let me mark this on iCal.... although I believe we came close to agreeing a few months back!


----------



## mlmummert (Jan 3, 2013)

fjnmusic said:


> Working to rule is not an effective negotiating tactic. Either go on strike or don't. Working to rule makes no difference cost wise to the school board and just annoys students and parents. It does not engender sympathy for the cause. And yes I am a teacher, and I get paid very well (Alberta) and the benefits are fantastic. The kids make it all worthwhile in my view. I cannot speak for teachers in other jurisdictions.


The only time work to rule works is if you can make them lock you out as opposed to you going on strike.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

Puccasaurus said:


> Don't blame us for that. Blame the hordes of useless consultants and Ministry hacks and their "no failure" policies. Every teacher I know hates those stupid report card comment banks we have to use.


Teachers hate them so much, but they don't seem to hate them enough to fight over do they? Just proves to me that it all ESSENTIALLY comes down to money and time off. I know they're not admitting that, but why else would they be so peeved off about losing the right to hold parents hostage?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Nice of the teachers' union to announce at 5:00 am that, they're returning to school. I checked the status of the strike date at 4 a.m. before deciding there was no reason to pack my own child off in the morning. Received a call at 10 am demanding to know why my child was not at school. They must have made 500 calls like that. I delivered him to a school that was more than half empty.

Last month, they declared that their campaign was an effort to teach children about democracy. Today, they have demonstrated that democracy has a cash price of $2,000 per day.

Can the teachers union isolate itself any further from public sympathy?


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

Macfury said:


> . Today, they have demonstrated that democracy has a cash price of $2,000 per day.
> 
> Can the teachers union isolate itself any further from public sympathy?


Well the union blinked first, lol.

They have lost ANY sympathy I may have felt for them.


----------



## Dr_AL (Apr 29, 2007)

I'm glad I don't have to deal with this mess since I'm in Quebec (I get other issues though), but I see the point of the teachers over bill 115.

She doesn't the government kill 115, shakehands with the union that they will work while they negotiate a reasonable contract which is similar to the other agreements in place with other teacher's unions.


Sent from my iPhone


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Nice of the teachers' union to announce at 5:00 am that, they're returning to school. I checked the status of the strike date at 4 a.m. before deciding there was no reason to pack my own child off in the morning. Received a call at 10 am demanding to know why my child was not at school. They must have made 500 calls like that. I delivered him to a school that was more than half empty.
> 
> Last month, they declared that their campaign was an effort to teach children about democracy. Today, they have demonstrated that democracy has a cash price of $2,000 per day.
> 
> Can the teachers union isolate itself any further from public sympathy?


That time crunch was because the labour board didn't rule until 4am. The teachers then followed the ruling and the law.

Democracy comes at a price and sometimes it has its own schedule. The board obviously needed extra time to deliberate and come up with their ruling.

I emailed my children's teachers that they would not be attending school yesterday as we had already worked out alternative arrangements. Consequently we were not called by the school looking for our children.

Polling that I have looked at shows that the public is evenly split across the province. My neighbourhood is a bit different we are 7 households backing the teachers versus 2 households backing McGuinty.

The real crime against democracy is the prorogation of our legislature. 

I do hope things improve with a new Liberal leader and then again with another minority government.


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> That time crunch was because the labour board didn't rule until 4am. The teachers then followed the ruling and the law.
> 
> Democracy comes at a price and sometimes it has its own schedule. The board obviously needed extra time to deliberate and come up with their ruling.
> 
> ...


Always the other guys fault, interesting. Perhaps if the teachers just did the job they were paid to do it would have never occured. But it's ok, it was the other guys fault.

That's nice that your neighborhood is taking a poll, personally I am for neither parties, but for people doing the jobs they're paid to do.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

imnothng said:


> Always the other guys fault, interesting. Perhaps if the teachers just did the job they were paid to do it would have never occured. But it's ok, it was the other guys fault.
> 
> That's nice that your neighborhood is taking a poll, personally I am for neither parties, but for people doing the jobs they're paid to do.


Ontario's public teachers are performing their jobs to the letter of the law. They are doing the work that they are paid to do, nothing more, and nothing less. This means the volunteer aspect of their labour to support extracurricular activities will be sacrificed for the foreseeable future. This is a consequence of draconian legislation by the prorogued McGuinty government.  From my perspective the government brought this upon themselves and are at fault.

You have a democratic right to differ in your opinion of course.


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Ontario's public teachers are performing their jobs to the letter of the law. They are doing the work that they are paid to do, nothing more, and nothing less. This means the volunteer aspect of their labour to support extracurricular activities will be sacrificed for the foreseeable future. This is a consequence of draconian legislation by the prorogued McGuinty government. From my perspective the government brought this upon themselves and are at fault.
> 
> You have a democratic right to differ in your opinion of course.


Did I say anything about them having to do any "extra" work? No I did not, because I can't fault the "work to rule" aspect of their childish behaviour. I am taking issue with the "protest" and/or the one day strike. They want to protest or strike, then do it, but don't do this one day here, one day there bull****te.

Is that some passive aggressive thing? You feel the need to remind me of my democratic rights?


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

imnothng said:


> Did I say anything about them having to do any "extra" work? No I did not, because I can't fault the "work to rule" aspect of their childish behaviour. I am taking issue with the "protest" and/or the one day strike. They want to protest or strike, then do it, but don't do this one day here, one day there bull****te.
> 
> Is that some passive aggressive thing? You feel the need to remind me of my democratic rights?


Thanks for being a bit more specific. Now with the labour board ruling there will be no more strike action due to it's illegality. I can't rule out that they might find a loop hole in the legislation but the law seems quite firm at the moment. The teachers were trying to exercise their democratic rights but they have been suppressed by the legislation.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> This means the volunteer aspect of their labour to support extracurricular activities will be sacrificed for the foreseeable future.


I thought as a salaried employees this was part of their duty. I could understand if teachers were paid by the hour* why they would want to cut out extracurricular activity supervision, but oh well.

By the way do you know what kind of quality, "to the letter of the law" teaching my kids got Friday? Movie, games and free-time.  (Okay, okay, I know it was because the class was half full, but still...) 


*Has anybody calculated how much the average is per hour (as in, when they "Work to Rule")?


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Personally, I think skippy is right, "The real crime against democracy is the prorogation of our legislature. ". The Big D didn't want to handle this on his way out, and the teachers were an easy target in his so-called-cost cutting measure. The reality is that the economies in education are from the rearranging of its infrastructure and policy review.

We constantly ask our teachers to be pseudo-parents, and we can get into the societal reasons for this latter, but teachers, while expensive, are not the real waste of education costs. It's the structure that is the big waster.

1- We should really eliminate all school boards and have them under one administrative body. The old Catholic/Protestant/French/ and what ever else we have should be a curricula matter not a board matter.
2- Eliminate all Trustees and put more control in the hands of the Principal and Parent Committees, we have structures in place to assist in conflict, such as Ombudsmen or even the local MPP.
3- Make Principals CEOs of the school and they are held responsible for meeting standardized results and financial costs .... if teachers don't meet the set expectations then they should be let go.....if the school doesn't meet the expectations the Principal should be let go, and if the school can't meet financial expectations then the school should go.
4 - Review programmes, one should be the all day kindergarten. Pilot the thing to see if the literacy skills actually do improve, which by the way has its first testing around Grade 3..... too long and too expensive a programme if it doesn't do what it was intended to do.

That's were the cost is...... that's where D should have started cost cutting....


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> That time crunch was because the labour board didn't rule until 4am. .


I will use a favourite teachers' quote here: "you started the assignment too late." Why plan a walkout at such short notice that the OLB had to consider it late into the night/


----------



## iMouse (Mar 1, 2008)




----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> I will use a favourite teachers' quote here: "you started the assignment too late." Why plan a walkout at such short notice that the OLB had to consider it late into the night/


It seemed to me that there was quite a lapse between the action being announced and McGuinty going to the labour board. 

Nonetheless this was all done legally.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> It seemed to me that there was quite a lapse between the action being announced and McGuinty going to the labour board.
> 
> Nonetheless this was all done legally.


Any fool could see the strike date was illegal under 115. That it had to go to the OLB is the fault of the teachers union.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Rps said:


> Personally, I think skippy is right, "The real crime against democracy is the prorogation of our legislature. ". The Big D didn't want to handle this on his way out, and the teachers were an easy target in his so-called-cost cutting measure. The reality is that the economies in education are from the rearranging of its infrastructure and policy review.
> 
> We constantly ask our teachers to be pseudo-parents, and we can get into the societal reasons for this latter, but teachers, while expensive, are not the real waste of education costs. It's the structure that is the big waster.
> 
> ...


Some of these ideas seem fine to me, but payroll costs still consume 76% of Ontario's education budget. Some cost cutting is required there as well.

Number 2: A parent review board would require elected positions and this would strike me as replicating the position of trustees, albeit unpaid.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Any fool could see the strike date was illegal under 115. That it had to go to the OLB is the fault of the teachers union.


If that's the case there were a lot of fools deliberating the arguments brought forward to the board. The school boards were expecting a ruling at 8pm on Thursday evening. 

Democracy is not for fools though.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> If that's the case there were a lot of fools deliberating the arguments brought forward to the board. The school boards were expecting a ruling at 8pm on Thursday evening.
> 
> Democracy is not for fools though.


It's the democratic right of the teachers union to argue an obviously losing case before the OLB. It is our right to call out union leaders as the fools they have demonstrated themselves to be.

Interesting that many teachers have expressed a desire to return to to their former activities but have been denied their individual rights by the union leadership. I guess these teachers are fools, because democracy is not for them. in that iron-fisted union system


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> It's the democratic right of the teachers union to argue an obviously losing case before the OLB. It is our right to call out union leaders as the fools they have demonstrated themselves to be.
> 
> Interesting that many teachers have expressed a desire to return to to their former activities but have been denied their individual rights by the union leadership. I guess these teachers are fools, because democracy is not for them. in that iron-fisted union system





Macfury said:


> It's the democratic right of the teachers union to argue an obviously losing case before the OLB. It is our right to call out union leaders as the fools they have demonstrated themselves to be.
> 
> Interesting that many teachers have expressed a desire to return to to their former activities but have been denied their individual rights by the union leadership. I guess these teachers are fools, because democracy is not for them. in that iron-fisted union system


I'm not sure how obvious it was given the time spent reviewing the arguments. 
I don't think the teachers or their union are fools. It would have been foolish to disregard the law though. We obviously have law abiding teachers. 

The work action has been overwhelmingly endorsed in votes by the teachers. Dissenters (a small minority) are free to go elsewhere for employment. Odd that they accepted being union members when they signed on. Or were they just being foolish?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> It would have been foolish to disregard the law though. We obviously have law abiding teachers.


They wanted to make sure they wouldn't be dinged $2,000 a day for their illegal strike. Once they understood the strike would cost them, instead of children and parents, they hightailed it.



skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Dissenters (a small minority) are free to go elsewhere for employment. Odd that they accepted being union members when they signed on. Or were they just being foolish?


It highlights the immorality of a system in which a union is given special rights within a workplace. Soon, Ontario will be a right-to-work province and this nonsense will cease.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> They wanted to make sure they wouldn't be dinged $2,000 a day for their illegal strike. Once they understood the strike would cost them, instead of children and parents, they hightailed it.
> 
> The union knew the fine as did most teachers. They were exercising their charter rights to protest. They followed the law once the labour board ruled.
> 
> It highlights the immorality of a system in which a union is given special rights within a workplace. Soon, Ontario will be a right-to-work province and this nonsense will cease.


Canada is a UN signatory in favour of supporting collective bargaining. The system is legal and moral.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Canada is a UN signatory in favour of supporting collective bargaining. The system is legal and moral.


Collective bargaining is both legal and moral. Giving a union the ability to demand workers join a union when they do not own that workplace is immoral. The right-to-work movement will rectify that problem, making such a thing illegal.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Collective bargaining is both legal and moral. Giving a union the ability to demand workers join a union when they do not own that workplace is immoral. The right-to-work movement will rectify that problem, making such a thing illegal.


I know certain extreme elements favour so called "right to work" legislation. I believe they are a minority. A majority of union members seek their union's protection and strength in collective bargaining.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> I know certain extreme elements favour so called "right to work" legislation. I believe they are a minority. A majority of union members seek their union's protection and strength in collective bargaining.


Most teachers will continue to favour the union then, on the strength of the what the union offers them. A small minority will choose their own path with the same employer. This provides all public school teachers with the democracy that the union states it wishes to demonstrate!


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Most teachers will continue to favour the union then, on the strength of the what the union offers them. A small minority will choose their own path with the same employer. This provides all public school teachers with the democracy that the union states it wishes to demonstrate!


You are articulating the so called "right to work" mantra that a solid majority of voters find unappealing. In my view this will not happen in Ontario and most of Canada.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

Rps said:


> Personally, I think skippy is right, "The real crime against democracy is the prorogation of our legislature. ". The Big D didn't want to handle this on his way out, and the teachers were an easy target in his so-called-cost cutting measure. The reality is that the economies in education are from the rearranging of its infrastructure and policy review.
> 
> We constantly ask our teachers to be pseudo-parents, and we can get into the societal reasons for this latter, but teachers, while expensive, are not the real waste of education costs. It's the structure that is the big waster.
> 
> ...


I wholeheartedly agree that one board to administer makes perfect sense.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> You are articulating the so called "right to work" mantra that a solid majority of voters find unappealing. In my view this will not happen in Ontario and most of Canada.


Stay tuned.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo (Nov 28, 2012)

No denying that. 

Here's to another minority.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Bjornbro said:


> I thought as a salaried employees this was part of their duty. I could understand if teachers were paid by the hour* why they would want to cut out extracurricular activity supervision, but oh well.
> 
> By the way do you know what kind of quality, "to the letter of the law" teaching my kids got Friday? Movie, games and free-time.  (Okay, okay, I know it was because the class was half full, but still...)
> 
> ...


Teachers are paid by the hour as salaried employees, at least in the jurisdiction where I work, Alberta. I should know as I won a grievance once based on this fact. How do you think their assignment, full-time or part-time is calculated? In order to calculate FTE (full-time equivalency) for a part-time teacher, there must be a definition for a full-time teacher. In my district, it is based on instructional time, although some districts also incorporate "assignable time." To figure out the salary per hour, take the annual salary and divide the 1000 hours of instruction in a given school year (mileage may vary by jurisdiction), and you have the hourly rate. Where I live, that works out to about $50 to $92 an hour for any K-12 teacher. When I taught summer school ten years ago, the rate if $42/hour was spelled out in the contract. This is why I have never complained about teaching wages; where I live, they are pretty decent. Teachers are very specialized workers and should be paid well, imho. Working conditions (and student learning conditions) can be a very different matter though.

Now the matter of "working to rule" is a different matter. Where I work, teachers have never been paid for extracurricular work like coaching sports teams or putting on Christmas concerts, any more than they get paid extra for planning or marking. They can choose to put as much or as little time into these as their individual circumstances dictate to get the job done. New teachers may need to put much more time into the same subject as experienced teachers do, for example. It is simply impossible to measure "effort" in any kind of objective and consistent way beyond the classroom hours, so that is what is used. If I want to be an effective teacher for my students, I work behind the scenes for their benefit, but also balance that responsibility with my own family needs and my health. If I don't find the balance, I burn out, no matter how good I am. Some teachers have to limit their extracurricular involvement, but most try to find something they can do because it makes for a better relationship with kids.

I hope this information helps to clarify the instructional time vs.extracurricular (and voluntary) time part if the equation.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

fjnmusic said:


> I hope this information helps to clarify the instructional time vs.extracurricular (and voluntary) time part if the equation.


It does for me, thanks for setting me straight.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

I don't object to individual teachers cancelling their participation in extracurricular activities, but I do object to the Union making them do this. If the activity is voluntary, every individual should be free to make their own decision and the union should have no say on it.


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

I was quizzing my son for an upcoming test by asking random questions about law and government. I asked him how many seats are in the house of commons, he says 301. I hesitate and say, are you sure? He says he is, so I ask him to grab the sheet that says that, because I was 99.9% sure that wasn't right. Sure enough, the sheet he has that was given to him at school, by his teacher, says 301. That was when I noticed the copyright date of 2002.

I actually started shaking with adrenalin because I was so pissed. This an elementary school that goes up to grade 5 (which my son is in), so there's no excuse of after school sports and any other "extracurricular" activities to warrant this appalling laziness in teaching.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Fox said:


> I don't object to individual teachers cancelling their participation in extracurricular activities, but I do object to the Union making them do this. If the activity is voluntary, every individual should be free to make their own decision and the union should have no say on it.


Agreed.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

imnothng said:


> I was quizzing my son for an upcoming test by asking random questions about law and government. I asked him how many seats are in the house of commons, he says 301. I hesitate and say, are you sure? He says he is, so I ask him to grab the sheet that says that, because I was 99.9% sure that wasn't right. Sure enough, the sheet he has that was given to him at school, by his teacher, says 301. That was when I noticed the copyright date of 2002.
> 
> I actually started shaking with adrenalin because I was so pissed. This an elementary school that goes up to grade 5 (which my son is in), so there's no excuse of after school sports and any other "extracurricular" activities to warrant this appalling laziness in teaching.


My son's French teacher spent a class telling the kids that shrimp should have the rights of human beings--in English. Another waste of teaching time.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Fox said:


> I don't object to individual teachers cancelling their participation in extracurricular activities, but I do object to the Union making them do this. If the activity is voluntary, every individual should be free to make their own decision and the union should have no say on it.


Agreed


----------



## imnothng (Sep 12, 2009)

Macfury said:


> My son's French teacher spent a class telling the kids that shrimp should have the rights of human beings--in English. Another waste of teaching time.


Wow. Yup, keep at it teachers, ya'll are doing a great job and deserve more money...... er... I mean the "right to negotiate".


----------



## Puccasaurus (Dec 28, 2003)

Fox said:


> I don't object to individual teachers cancelling their participation in extracurricular activities, but I do object to the Union making them do this. If the activity is voluntary, every individual should be free to make their own decision and the union should have no say on it.


Strangely enough these people are happy enough to "do what I want", but never seem to want to give back their union-negotiated salaries and benefits. This is why the rest of us (I am a teacher and proud union member) get upset with the ones who suddenly start spouting this "Don't tell me what to do!" stuff during job action.

If you are willing, in good times, to accept the benefits won by your fellow workers, then you owe some allegiance to them in bad times too. No one likes a freeloader! How would you feel if you gave up something you enjoyed or that could've brought you some career advancement to support the fight (I have), and then there's some shmuck going out there and doing whatever he wants -- only to reap the reward later with no skin off his nose?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Puccasaurus said:


> Strangely enough these people are happy enough to "do what I want", but never seem to want to give back their union-negotiated salaries and benefits. This is why the rest of us (I am a teacher and proud union member) get upset with the ones who suddenly start spouting this "Don't tell me what to do!" stuff during job action.
> 
> If you are willing, in good times, to accept the benefits won by your fellow workers, then you owe some allegiance to them in bad times too. No one likes a freeloader! How would you feel if you gave up something you enjoyed or that could've brought you some career advancement to support the fight (I have), and then there's some shmuck going out there and doing whatever he wants -- only to reap the reward later with no skin off his nose?


Good point. Most people do not understand that as a teacher, you are not a free agent. You must be a member of your professional association (what people refer to as union) and you are paid by the school board to teach a curriculum. You have a little flexibility in style of presentation, but you are not free to dump the association any more than an auto builder can dump their trade union. Doctors likewise are not free agents and must act within their associations parameters. Most people don't seem to get this.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

fjnmusic said:


> Good point. Most people do not understand that as a teacher, you are not a free agent. You must be a member of your professional association (what people refer to as union) and you are paid by the school board to teach a curriculum. You have a little flexibility in style of presentation, but you are not free to dump the association any more than an auto builder can dump their trade union. Doctors likewise are not free agents and must act within their associations parameters. Most people don't seem to get this.


I get that tie easily fjn. It is not only teachers, auto workers and doctors who are not free to jump their 'associations', whatever they may be. Many independent workers work under the same constraints even without benefit of those associations. Peer pressure alone makes the same demands of those who are not unionized, journalism a good example. Add to that greedy media corporations who toss thirty year plus employees out the window in favour of Pakistani or Indian sweat shops to turn out sub standard work, all in the name of profits. 

I abhor unions and the destruction and graft they have brought to too many members who began life as reluctant, but forced members, who joined only under 'compulsory' conditions to gain employment, and wound up in foreign-based so-called unions who do little more than syphon off dues for their own benefit, usually run by overweight American 'Dons' complete with the requisite greased back, barber shop hair styles of the thirties.

Teachers have my sympathy, but I have little for the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund who have owned more media outlets in this country over the past twenty years than any other organization and profited mightily by that ownership. It has gone far beyond providing security for Ontario teachers and turned into something much more sinister in its ability to influence major Canadian stock deals alone.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

SINC said:


> I get that tie easily fjn. It is not only teachers, auto workers and doctors who are not free to jump their 'associations', whatever they may be. Many independent workers work under the same constraints even without benefit of those associations. Peer pressure alone makes the same demands of those who are not unionized, journalism a good example. Add to that greedy media corporations who toss thirty year plus employees out the window in favour of Pakistani or Indian sweat shops to turn out sub standard work, all in the name of profits.
> 
> I abhor unions and the destruction and graft they have brought to too many members who began life as reluctant, but forced members, who joined only under 'compulsory' conditions to gain employment, and wound up in foreign-based so-called unions who do little more than syphon off dues for their own benefit, usually run by overweight American 'Dons' complete with the requisite greased back, barber shop hair styles of the thirties.
> 
> Teachers have my sympathy, but I have little for the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund who have owned more media outlets in this country over the past twenty years than any other organization and profited mightily by that ownership. It has gone far beyond providing security for Ontario teachers and turned into something much more sinister in its ability to influence major Canadian stock deals alone.


So there's that, Don. Of course there will be abusers in every organization, but I must thank the ATA for fighting a legal battle on my behalf about fourteen years ago that got me about $8000 in well-earned back pay and become a precedent-setting decision for other part-time teachers in the province. I have a lot of respect for the ATA. Other unions I don't really know enough to comment.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

fjnmusic said:


> So there's that, Don. Of course there will be abusers in every organization, but I must thank the ATA for fighting a legal battle on my behalf about fourteen years ago that got me about $8000 in well-earned back pay and become a precedent-setting decision for other part-time teachers in the province. I have a lot of respect for the ATA. Other unions I don't really know enough to comment.


I have no issues with the ATA either Frank, like you our daughter benefitted from that same agreement, but let me be clear that most unions I have known in my time were not teachers unions. They were auto, or types of unions who suddenly represented media workers although they had zero expertise in the field, just in trying to extort benefits for workers. In my career, I had two decertified with great delight.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Puccasaurus said:


> If you are willing, in good times, to accept the benefits won by your fellow workers, then you owe some allegiance to them in bad times too. No one likes a freeloader! How would you feel if you gave up something you enjoyed or that could've brought you some career advancement to support the fight (I have), and then there's some shmuck going out there and doing whatever he wants -- only to reap the reward later with no skin off his nose?


I wouldn't like it--and I would respect their choice.


----------

