I am having a hard time understanding why somebody would be told to take off a shirt that has the charter of rights written on the back if that is all the person was doing.
[quote=“DWhite”]I am having a hard time understanding why somebody would be told to take off a shirt that has the charter of rights written on the back if that is all the person was doing.
vancouversun.com/business/Te … story.html[/quote]
I assume because it was an organized, politically motivated protest being paraded in front of students who are obviously going to ask what it is about. And do you think they will get both sides of the dispute? Pretty childish if you ask me.
[quote=“crazy Horse”]
[quote=“DWhite”]I am having a hard time understanding why somebody would be told to take off a shirt that has the charter of rights written on the back if that is all the person was doing.
vancouversun.com/business/Te … story.html[/quote]
I assume because it was an organized, politically motivated protest being paraded in front of students who are obviously going to ask what it is about. And do you think they will get both sides of the dispute? Pretty childish if you ask me.[/quote]
The Charter of Rights on a T-shirt is an organized, politically motivated protest? What was on the front of the T-shirt?..just asking so I’ll have both sides?
I find it harmless to explain kids about our nation’s most cherished Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, crazy Horse.
Yes that does make sense for sure. Not sure why anyone would disagree.
[quote=“Incognito”]
Yes that does make sense for sure. Not sure why anyone would disagree.[/quote]
That’s it, that’s why they wore the t shirts, to teach the kids about The Charter.
I hope that explaination comes with a grain of salt.
Crazy Horse got it right.
Give me a break DWhite…you CLEARLY know the real reason why those shirts were worn, so please stop pretending to be so wildly in the dark…it just cheapens your argument.
[quote=“chien22”]
The Charter of Rights on a T-shirt is an organized, politically motivated protest? What was on the front of the T-shirt?..just asking so I’ll have both sides?[/quote]
I like the both sides pun.
On the front of the shirt are the words: our charter rights 2b or not 2b
CBC had interviews with Joanna Larson and Lynne Hauptmann cbc.ca/daybreaknorth/#igImgId_61100
A couple of points from the interview with Joanna. The shirts have been worn before without incident. The shirts were worn yesterday in other districts without (to her knowledge) any incident. The teachers were only wearing the shirts and not commenting about the specific reason for teachers being concerned.
The interviewer with the superintendent did not ask the question “How is the wearing of that tshirt a political message?”
I realize that there are subtleties here (it was a day of protest), but if a quotation from the charter of rights is deemed too political and we need to insulate children from reading section 2 then we are in a pretty sad state.
[quote=“DWhite”]
As subtle as a steamroller.
Do you really think that the teachers wanted the students, and others, to read section 2 for reasons
other than to further their agenda?
It’s campaign messaging.
Respectfully, Piknic…the comment you quoted should be attributed soley to DWhite:
[quote=“Piknic”]
[quote=“DWhite”]
As subtle as a steamroller.
Do you really think that the teachers wanted the students, and others, to read section 2 for reasons
other than to further their agenda?
It’s campaign messaging.[/quote]
But thank you for informing me that there is a campaign to further the ‘Charter’…is that why it hangs in many schools and buildings nationwide and appears in some textbooks? Or have I misunderstood?: is the campaign to do away with the ‘Charter’'?
[quote=“Piknic”]
[quote=“DWhite”]
As subtle as a steamroller.
Do you really think that the teachers wanted the students, and others, to read section 2 for reasons
other than to further their agenda?
It’s campaign messaging.[/quote]
Clearly we have opposite points of view.
So just so I understand, what is the campaign message that teachers were trying to get across by wearing that tshirt. I am not being disingenuous here. When teachers wore shirts that said “negotiate don’t legislate” there is clearly a political message that can’t be ignored. (whether we need to insulate children from that kind of message is another matter, but I will grant there is a definite message there.)
But what is the message of children reading section 2 of the charter of rights? And again I am assuming that there was no discussion about teacher/government conflicts.
I am just trying to figure out what you think goes through a kid’s head after reading that shirt?
I understand that it was a day of remembrance of the illegal gutting of the teacher’s contract but there is nothing on that shirt that mentions that. Was it the wearing of that shirt on that day that is the problem? In other words, could the shirt be worn on any other day except a day of protest. (Again assuming that the teacher does not use the shirt as a means to guide a discussion to complaints about the government.) Are you OK with the wearing of a plain black shirt on a day of protest that has the same significance if a child is at all knowledgeable about what is going on between teachers and government.
Sometimes we give students too much credit. That they actually pay attention to what is going on and are reading shirts and getting the subtleties etc. etc. and at the same time giving them too little credit - that they have so little thought process that the reading of a single line will sway them to be robots for a particular cause.
But to my original question: What do you think goes through a kid’s head (at various age levels as well) after reading that tshirt?
The message is that they are opposed to stripping of rights
Could they wear black t shirts with no slogan? Not if the shirt is a recognised
protest symbol.
And no they couldn’t wear the shirt, slogan or not, on any other day if the
issue hasn’t been resolved.
I have no idea what goes through the students heads after reading the slogan
but i’m sure it wasn’t lost on the teachers that the wearing of the shirts would
facilitate some sort of curiosity…to which the response would, no doubt, be
biased.
A school is no place for teachers to score gravy points.
Hey and what about all those students in the schools wearing those nice hoodies with “Say no to tankers”. Isn’t that political too.
[quote=“Piknic”]The message is that they are opposed to stripping of rights
Could they wear black t shirts with no slogan? Not if the shirt is a recognised
protest symbol.
And no they couldn’t wear the shirt, slogan or not, on any other day if the
issue hasn’t been resolved.
I have no idea what goes through the students heads after reading the slogan
but i’m sure it wasn’t lost on the teachers that the wearing of the shirts would
facilitate some sort of curiosity…to which the response would, no doubt, be
biased.
A school is no place for teachers to score gravy points.[/quote]
Again I am just trying to find common ground.
I found this on the BCPSEA site.
bcpsea.bc.ca/documents/20130 … %20Day.pdf
The BCPSEA position is based on a court case that went in their favour. The BCTF is appealing. The pertinent paragraphs in regard to this case are here.
[quote]With respect to the protest planned for Monday, January 28, 2013, BCPSEA’s position is that
teachers should not wear in the classroom buttons or t-shirts with political messages that may
engage students in the teacher’s political views on Bills 27 and 28. If teachers wear attire with
political messages in the presence of students, they should be reminded that this is not permitted
under the arbitral jurisprudence and should be asked to remove it from the classroom.
Although the BCTF may intend that the wearing of black on Monday is itself a form of political
protest, in our view the wearing of black by a teacher is not something that warrants employer
action. However, regardless of the colour of attire worn, teachers should not engage students in
discussion about their political views.[/quote]
So the question now comes down to what constitutes a political message. BCPSEA notes that the wearing of black may be a form of political protest but does not warrant employer action. I guess my question is how the wearing of a tshirt with some of our fundamental rights printed on them would be considered a form of political protest? I am pretty sure the vast majority of people support those rights.
I totally agree with you and BCPSEA that in this particular instance it would be inappropriate for “teachers {to} engage students in
discussion about their political views”.
I think the teachers wore the shirts for a possible effect in their favour.
That makes it a protest.
and sorry chien22…my error
Yes,and when they break the law,violate school board direction or dress code, professional ethics or any other such thing
banning them then they should not wear them to school.
Until then it’s open season on the tankers.
Lynn Hauptman said that students need to be insulated from political messaging in her interview with the CBC. I think the tanker message is very political.
Ironically, this incident has brought more discussion to the topic than would have occurred if the superintendent had just ignored the shirts. I’ve been told that he shirts were worn around the province by other teachers and no directives came from any other school board. A good question might be “why here?”
Seems like SD52 have never heard of the Streisand effect.
DWHITE: Im kind of shocked how someone who spent so many years in the school system would say maybe we give the kids too much credit on knowing things, political or job wise. Well dwhite I can clearly remember you as my teacher at prss being very middle of the road a touch on the the left side of things. But I remember the strike of 81 or 82 where it was very very political …picket lines and the emotions between teachers and school management (principals). it was horrible for all involved. AND the kids did notice what was going on via the TV and family dinners.
I cant believe that this school districts management leadership tries to censor the activities of its employees directly…wether it be by clothing or other means. I think all Canadians should be aware of the charter and its contents…Christ what are we teaching our kids…put there fricken heads in the sand and say theres nothing to see here folks…gimme a break.