When $3,000,000,000 was taken out of the education system by the illegal stripping of the contract in 2002, then I think the teachers have more than met the net zero requirement.
Talk to some teachers. The teachers are not out for 15% come hell or high water. That is a bargaining position. The teachers are saying that is what they are worth. Whether they deserve that or get that is all part of the negotiating process.
If the teachers were offered
A. a return to the former contract that addressed class size and composition and meeting the needs of special education students - contract language that was gained in the '90’s at the expense of salary increases and then illegally stripped away
or
B. a 15% raise
nothing in between, one or the other. My guess and it is just a guess, the majority would take A.
The media is framing the issue around salary because it is the simplest way to write the story.
Im not going to read the entire thread so I apologize if this has been brought up already. Has anyone bothered to mention the millions being stolen away from school budgets by carbon tax and adjusted what the liberals are ACTUALLY spending on education.
You know as opposed to the amount they say they are spending but are actually funnelling to resorts in whistler and other liberal friendly corporations/projects via pacific carbon trust?
I’m pretty sure if they exempted schools from the carbon tax they could maybe find a few bucks towards smaller class sizes and other teachers requests. I don’t think the wage increase should be on the table right now though mostly due to public perception. 15% isnt a big deal and teachers can always negotiate for that on their next contract or potentially more.
I’m surprised that the media hasn’t spoke of the net zero issue before now. Only in the last day or two the topic of wages/ salary has been mentioned, and usually at the end of a story.
Regardless, from most of the newspapers I have perused, the strike action is not backed by the majority of the working public. Whether this means anything remains to be seen. From what I have read in papers and talking to locals that the majority of people simply make less than teachers.
Personally, I’m thankful that teachers are getting the benefits and wages/ salary they currently receive. It takes certain qualities and character traits that not every one has.
There seems to undertones of resentment already surfacing between various groups that have already signed their agreements.Maybe Susan should to take another poll amongst the membership to see where they stand.
Why not agree to net zero? This would be the tale of the tape to see if your theory is right, regarding how most teachers would pick “A”. At least it would get both parties back at the table.
My A or B scenario is completely hypothetical. Bill 22 offers neither. The $3B was based on the approximate saving of $275M per year since 2002. How has the government addressed that? They are offering $165M over three years. This year the total will be $30M. They will be getting $33M from teachers in lost salary over these three days.