There used to be a joke when I was in school that the Teachers will cancel recess for a punishment…well, seems it finally happened!
you know i support teachers but the bctf always seems to find spokespeople whos caricature could very easily be a weasel. I know its judgemental and shallow but i just dont think it helps their cause. matter of fact the ndp seems to suffer the same problem.
The teachers didn’t cancel recess. The superintendent cancelled recess. She also announced that schools will be starting 15 minutes later than normal starting Wednesday.
As far as I know, this is the first time that recess has been cancelled in this district.
Phase one includes refusing communication with school managers, arriving no more than an hour before and leaving an hour after school hours, and refusing supervision of students outside class time.
ie no recess supervision so that means teachers are making the schools cancel recess due to their actions
“ie no recess supervision so that means teachers are making the schools cancel recess due to their actions”
Are you making the assumption that only teachers can provide supervision?
In the past, administrative personnel and others have successfully provided supervision. I do not believe that teachers would refuse support in an emergent situation. So it is doable. In fact, as far as I can ascertain only 4 other districts in the province have currently cancelled recess.
As to school starting 15 minutes later beginning next Wednesday: I have heard that too - does anybody have an official source for that rumour? It seems that would only annoy parents and disrupt student routines for no particular purpose.
[quote=“chien22”]“ie no recess supervision so that means teachers are making the schools cancel recess due to their actions”
Are you making the assumption that only teachers can provide supervision?
In the past, administrative personnel and others have successfully provided supervision. I do not believe that teachers would refuse support in an emergent situation. So it is doable. In fact, as far as I can ascertain only 4 other districts in the province have currently cancelled recess.
As to school starting 15 minutes later beginning next Wednesday: I have heard that too - does anybody have an official source for that rumour? It seems that would only annoy parents and disrupt student routines for no particular purpose.[/quote]
Yes. School is starting 15 minutes later beginning next Wednesday. I received an automated call about that from the school district.
Yes, I got both phone calls…elementary and Middle school. Not sure what’s happening at the highschool. We were told not to bring the elementary kids before 9:10, school starts at 9:15. No supervision before school either. It will be hard for parents that have based their schedules around the “normal” day…getting someone to watch their kids the extra 15 minutes. Doesn’t seem like much, but it is when you work on the clock.
Sunflowergurl: the School District decision to change start times is very disruptive to many. I wonder why the School District choose to do that (what was their motivation)? Is there any reason they could not cancel recess and keep the same start time? Or am I missing something?
the reason they are doing it is political. Its to make the parents annoyed with the teachers for disrupting their day and to reduce any public support the teachers have and decrease their bargaining position.
No, I’m not a teacher, not related to any teachers, I can just see this for the lame tactic it is.
They are paid for a certain amount of teaching time. Since they are not paid to “baby sit” at recess time they have cancelled it (and for the sake of my kids I hope they let them have a snack in class or see what happens when mine have a crash…). Therefore they are asking them to come later. They are fulfilling their teaching time that the contract dictates (although I have never read their contract, but I do know there are a certain amount of hours required each year to be teaching time). That being said, if they DO allow a snack time in class I guess they will be taking from the teaching time we expect our kids are to get each day…so yes, seems it is a politically annoying way to get their point across. Isn’t that what democracy is all about? 
Quoted for truth. The teachers had nothing to do with cancelling recess.
sunflowergurl:
- If you are suggesting that your kids have an issue that could lead to a medical emergency when they do not have a recess snack and ‘crash’ I suggest for their safety that you immediately inform the school if you have not done so.
- If you are suggesting that your kids will exhibit behavioural changes because they have not had a snack - surprise: most teachers have seen and are able to handle that type of behaviour…just part of the job unhappily.
- What exactly do you mean by ’ see what happens when mine have a crash…’ If not 1 or 2 above is it an attempt to bully teachers? Sorry, but most teachers have seen that before too - that’s part of the job, but shouldn’t be.
- It comes as no surprise that you have not read the teachers contract…but if looking for ‘required’ minutes of instruction time: you might more successfully search the British Columbia government web site for required instructional time regulations.
- Finally, why would teachers want to punish themselves by cancelling recess - I would think that some ‘away time / play time’ is good for both students and teachers.
Personally, I can understand parents being frustrated and angry by the decision made by the School District but blaming teachers for that decision seems pointless.
As usual, there are two parts to this story.
The actions of the Superintendent are at best boorish, amateur and clumsy; at worst demeaning and punitive to students as well as parents, the very people and purpose she serves. These actions surely cannot be viewed as being professional.
Would this be considered within the range of moral actions and responsibilities of a professional? Really?
Let’s now examine the actions of the teachers.
The following is a passage taken from a report on Peter Cameron’s letter to BCTF President Jim Iker,
On March 28, Peter Cameron wrote that the plan “includes a refusal to ‘perform mandated supervision outside of class time.’ [We believe] that this aspect of your proposed strike activity could threaten the safety of students. As a result, we seek from you an agreement to ensure sufficient resources are available to maintain the safety of students.”
Jim Iker responded,
School administrators will now need to supervise their students. “They may need to sweat a little,” he said, adding that he hopes overworked administrators pressure the government to negotiate a faster conclusion.
Exhibiting an offhand and disdainful dismissal of important matters as student safety won’t earn much respect from parents, Jim.
Professionalism is how an organization ensures that all its decisions, actions and stakeholder interactions conform to the organization’s moral and professional principles. Happy with what you’re seeing?
Imagine yourself as an investor. Would you throw more money at this?
You left out the part of why the teachers are doing this.
You know, the supreme court decision, the government’s actions being found unconstitutional, and the court finding that the government tried to provoke a strike.
How much is that going to cost taxpayers? Imagine you’re an investor. Would you invest in that?
[quote=“MiG”]You left out the part of why the teachers are doing this.
You know, the supreme court decision, the government’s actions being found unconstitutional, and the court finding that the government tried to provoke a strike.
How much is that going to cost taxpayers? Imagine you’re an investor. Would you invest in that?[/quote]
I’ll probably get frowned upon for this but I find it hard to support either side of this conflict between teachers and the Government. The only ones who suffer from this is the kids. And MiG you were/are a teacher so I’m sure you are not impartial to this conflict. Hopefully an agreement can be made for the sake of students. I also hope they will think about agreeing to a longer contract than 3 years. ILWU have an 8 year contract and I believe the UFCW have a longer contract as well.
[quote=“chien22”]sunflowergurl:
- If you are suggesting that your kids have an issue that could lead to a medical emergency when they do not have a recess snack and ‘crash’ I suggest for their safety that you immediately inform the school if you have not done so.
- If you are suggesting that your kids will exhibit behavioural changes because they have not had a snack - surprise: most teachers have seen and are able to handle that type of behaviour…just part of the job unhappily.
- What exactly do you mean by ’ see what happens when mine have a crash…’ If not 1 or 2 above is it an attempt to bully teachers? Sorry, but most teachers have seen that before too - that’s part of the job, but shouldn’t be.
- It comes as no surprise that you have not read the teachers contract…but if looking for ‘required’ minutes of instruction time: you might more successfully search the British Columbia government web site for required instructional time regulations.
- Finally, why would teachers want to punish themselves by cancelling recess - I would think that some ‘away time / play time’ is good for both students and teachers.
Personally, I can understand parents being frustrated and angry by the decision made by the School District but blaming teachers for that decision seems pointless.[/quote]
A few comments on here are deflecting responsibility and suggesting that the teachers have nothing to do with the cancellation of recess. Of course they don’t make the decision but when they remove themselves from performing a primary responsibility, what choice is there? You probably already know this but for shits and giggles I’ll share it anyways.
“Duties of teachers 4. (1)The duties of a teacher include the following:
(a)providing teaching and other educational services, including advice and instructional assistance, to the students assigned to the teacher, as required or assigned by the board or the minister;
(b)providing such assistance as the board or principal considers necessary for the supervision of students on school premises and at school functions, whenever and wherever held;”
bced.gov.bc.ca/legislation/s … 265-89.pdf
Secondly, the comment being discussed about a kid crashing is I believe about eating to maintain energy.
“Children need to be able to refuel throughout the day to maintain energy and focus on academics, and that’s where snacking comes in.”
Crazy Train,
You are absolutely correct to point out the duties of a teacher - during the regular work day. However, starting Wednesday job action begins and it will not be business as usual. Before 72 hour notice was given and before job action can begin, both sides appeared before the LRB to argue ‘essential services’. I’m sure both the BCTF and the employer made strong argues for their side. The LRB has made a decision about what are considered essential services and the BCTF has moved ahead with outlining their proposed actions.
The question is: is providing supervision during non-instructional time an ‘essential service’? According to the LRB - it appears not…and I believe there is a process available if the employer believes the job action contravenes the ruling.
The concern is this District’s response to job action: to cancel recess and begin the day 15 minutes later. This response is different than previously where administration and other appropriate staff worked together to provide supervision before school, at recess and after school. Administration has decided they are unwilling to provide supervision at this time. Why?
As for cancelling recess and beginning the day 15 minutes later? Why, when there appears to be no need to do so since Instructional time is usually defined as a minimum number of minutes required.
[quote=“chien22”]
The question is: is providing supervision during non-instructional time an ‘essential service’? According to the LRB - it appears not…
…The concern is this District’s response to job action: to cancel recess and begin the day 15 minutes later. This response is different than previously where administration and other appropriate staff worked together to provide supervision before school, at recess and after school. Administration has decided they are unwilling to provide supervision at this time. Why?
As for cancelling recess and beginning the day 15 minutes later? Why, when there appears to be no need to do so since Instructional time is usually defined as a minimum number of minutes required.[/quote]
Let’s detach from the term “essential service” that is so widely tossed about in this day and age and ask ourselves, Is adult supervision of school children during recess required? Absolutely, it is essential that these children are supervised. Now those who typically are tasked with this responsibility are no longer willing to do so. So now what? There are undoubtedly options including the one being chosen. You the teachers are operating within your rights, and so are those that have chosen to cancel recess. For every action there is an equal reaction and this move has entirely to do with the teachers job action. I’m not necessarily against the teachers but don’t sit up here on your high horse and blame the recess cancellation on those who have inherited the job of managing the schools within the mess surrounding labour negotiations. By all means do what you have to do to get a fair contract but also be clear that the teachers are due their fair share of blame for the current situation.
[quote=“Crazy Train”]
[quote=“chien22”]
The question is: is providing supervision during non-instructional time an ‘essential service’? According to the LRB - it appears not…
…The concern is this District’s response to job action: to cancel recess and begin the day 15 minutes later. This response is different than previously where administration and other appropriate staff worked together to provide supervision before school, at recess and after school. Administration has decided they are unwilling to provide supervision at this time. Why?
As for cancelling recess and beginning the day 15 minutes later? Why, when there appears to be no need to do so since Instructional time is usually defined as a minimum number of minutes required.[/quote]
Let’s detach from the term “essential service” that is so widely tossed about in this day and age and ask ourselves, Is adult supervision of school children during recess required? Absolutely, it is essential that these children are supervised. Now those who typically are tasked with this responsibility are no longer willing to do so. So now what? There are undoubtedly options including the one being chosen. You the teachers are operating within your rights, and so are those that have chosen to cancel recess. For every action there is an equal reaction and this move has entirely to do with the teachers job action. I’m not necessarily against the teachers but don’t sit up here on your high horse and blame the recess cancellation on those who have inherited the job of managing the schools within the mess surrounding labour negotiations. By all means do what you have to do to get a fair contract but also be clear that the teachers are due their fair share of blame for the current situation.[/quote]
Totally agree with your post Crazy Train.
To Crazy Train and Gracies Mom,
From the BCPSEA web site (the employer’s association), a quote from the LRB ruling:
“With respect to any before/after school, recess or noon hour supervision normally provided
by teachers, before/after school supervision related only to bus drop off and pick up, and
recess and noon hour supervision will continue to be provided by teachers subject to the
Employer utilizing management and excluded staff to the best extent possible to replace
teachers for these activities. The utilization of management and excluded personnel will be
discussed locally. If the matter cannot be resolved at the local level, either party may refer
the matter to the Board for mediation/adjudication. The principles set out in BCLRB No.
B417/2001, B431/2001 and B194/2011 shall apply to this decision.”
You will note: 1) teachers are required to provide supervision when the employer has used management and excluded staff to replace teachers for these activities. Has management even attempted to cover supervision?
2) there is a resolution process in place should the issue not be able to be resolved locally: has a resolution been attempted (management / PRDTU discussions), if so, and the discussion failed has the resolution process with the LRB been begun?
So the questions still remain although more specifically, why has Administration cancelled recess…and prior to cancelling recess did it meet the expectations of the LRB decision? 2) Why did they change the start time to the day?