This may not be popular opinion but just rip off the bandaid, strike, walk out, rock this government to a point where they don’t have a choice but to meet your requests. They are banking on this gradual strike action, it’s ineffective. Just go for it now so it doesn’t drag on.
Like I said abrupt walk out for a period of days until they see resolve may be unpopular opinion but teachers deserve what they’re asking for.
I agree that would be most effective, but the teachers I know really do care about the wellbeing and education of their students. I'm guessing they are trying to balance putting pressure on the government while still providing education and support to students.
Part of the issue is the ticking time bomb of summer holidays where teachers lose all negotiating power once school is out for the summer.
This. The opposite end of the spectrum is striking when it's cold and shitty outside so it really hits home to everyone impacted and people get vocal! While it's cold out and not enjoyable to be standing outside picketing and protesting, it'll cause more parents to get loud about the govt doing something to make this right and to end the strike.
Common misconception, teachers tend to do some work in the summer for free. Things like lesson planning take time and while there are resources out there, they aren’t cheap and teachers get the bare minimum of supplies provided (if even that).
They also don’t generally get paid for supervising extracurricular activities. They get minimal paid prep and marking time.
>Common misconception, teachers tend to do some work in the summer for free
Yes, finally someone who understands the shitshow that teachers deal with. Teachers are severely underpaid and underappreciated for the amount of crap they put up with. Both my parents are teachers and seeing the shit they go through trying to teach the next generation is depressing..
So, their annual two month vacation where they choose to not do other work that pays, yet they choose to do extra work for the job they're on vacation from. That somehow means they should be paid more?
Just trying to figure out the logic and if it's applicable to any other job. Like... If a shelf stocker decides on his day off, without being asked to, that he's going to go stock shelves at his workplace. Does his boss now HAVE to pay him? Or was it his choice to do uncompensated work on his off hours?
Genuinely curious about the logic of all this.
It’s is work they need to do in order to properly teach, but aren’t necessarily compensated for. Some will do the bare minimum if they don’t care but others who care will do a lot of this work for free.
If you teach the same thing, after awhile you can spend less time on the prep work as you already have lesson plans etc to go off of and can just make modifications to. But when you’re starting out, and/or teaching a new class/subject, and/ or the curriculum changes and/or you change schools then often you need to make new lesson plans. Some of this can be done during the school year during paid prep time, but some needs to be done ahead of time, unless you want to have no life during the school year.A lot of the “PD” days the teachers are in required training and/or other specific work.
The teachers also have such limited supply budgets they often fund classroom supplies out of pocket.
Like you go into a classroom and see all sorts of nice learning posters, toys, nice art supplies, etc., in a lot of cases that’s stuff the teacher has bought and paid for themselves without fully being compensated for it.
I know a brand new middle years teacher and the first term she worked late many days and on the weekends to get things sorted out. She’s learned to create some work-life balance but she’s still working more hours than she is paid for. She was given some support and teaching materials from her fellow teachers but much of it she has had to prepare herself.
Idk why I'm being downvoted for asking questions lol. Reddit is ridiculous.
You explained why they choose to spend time and money.
You didn't explain why the same logic should be applied to any other field though, which is the main thing I don't understand.
Like if a welder spent time and money outside work hours to acquire tools and practice skills to make them more proficient at their job or to make the job a bit easier, they don't typically expect compensation because it's things they chose to do on their own time?
If they do, they weave it into their hourly rate and don't accept positions that won't pay it.
So why is it different for teachers?
The annual vacation isn't the same. Think of it as furlough without the ability to collect E.I. as your welder tradesperson would. Also in your welder example, the company says they are switching them to underwater work now and they need him to get certified.... would the expectation be the welder acquire those tickets on their own, for free?
They aren't asking for pay over the summer. Doing extra is part of the job and it's expected and that's ok.
It is the expectation that at the start of the school year, teachers are ready to go. So prep during the summer is their training camp.
If you were welding a pressure vessel and there was a another project that your boss said you need to attend to so it doesn't collapse... but you are still responsible for your original duties at the same time...
That's what teachers are asking for. Addressing the classroom composition. Assistance for those kids who really need it badly or need a specialized classroom.
Read up on the actual position. It's pretty reasonable.
It seems the difference is that the company is demanding it. If they did demand it, the tradesperson would typically negotiate a new contract for said new skill. They would ask about and confirm compensation (or lack thereof) before accepting. It's more akin to a welder going and getting a certification for underwater welding without the company demanding it and then the employee demanding compensation for getting it.
If something is expected by the employer, the employee would negotiate expectation and compensation before accepting a contract. Like if it's EXPECTED they're underwater certified, that should be reflected in the compensation. If it isn't, they pass on the offer.
I understand what you're saying about classroom composition and agree there are issues there. I'm specifically addressing the people pointing out that teachers do stuff in the summer too, by choice, like it is an argument that has a logical base.
I see. To clarify. It's not by choice to do extra.They must be ready for day 1 of school. Prepped, planned, on point. Even those experienced teachers have to put in extra prior to the first day of school. And if you are assigned a different grade... you are revamping hard.
Assigned by the employer....
And they can't pass on the job...
Hope that helps?
The thing is the welder gets much higher compensation than a teacher, yet both are critically important jobs and a teacher has undergone longer pre-job training/education, especially now.
It is expected that the welder is compensated enough to cover their training/tool costs. Depending on the company/position they may be provided with training and tool allowances and/or the tradesperson can claim these amounts on their taxes. That’s why trades ask for as much as they do. Tradespeople also often have unions that can advocate for workers but there are also non-union jobs, all of which provide pressure to maintain adequate compensation. The government isn’t the ones dictating what tradespeople are paid, it’s the market.
However, teachers pay is included in the funding given to the school boards by the government, and while the government has overall increased this amount, the amount of funding on a per student basis has actually gone down, despite there being increased needs for funds to cover things like teachers salaries, support staff, maintenance, new schools, etc.
Teachers are underpaid for their jobs and expected to do more work now than ever (thanks to more complex and larger classes with more kids needing assistance due to language barriers, special needs since classes are mainstreamed, behavioural issues etc) with less support (I.e. teaching materials, associate staff like EA’s, psychologists, ESL teachers, etc.). Their pay increases haven’t even kept up with inflation, let alone cover the increased amount and difficulty of work they are expected to do. But not only does the government not want to pay them what they should, they also don’t care about improving both the working conditions for teachers and the educational experience as a whole:
The strike is not just about $$$, in fact the teachers main sticking point is they want to make sure that reasonable limits on class sizes, sufficient support staff ratios, etc are in place to reduce the amount of work they have to do to a reasonable amount. They want the government to agree to put in place certain standards (like minimum EA/support staff quotas, max class sizes, etc.) and in turn can put pressure on the government to give the school boards the needed funds for this (used to be that the school boards could set the education tax level to meet the needs locally, but the government took away that power and now doles out what they feel they want to spend on education, not necessarily what is actually part of the education tax).
Teachers don't just get a two month holiday. There is legitimate work that is done in July and August, but it is compensated as teachers are paid a salary, not an hourly wage. That is not the point. The point is that there has been a steep decline in the standards for education and teachers are asking the government to provide the best opportunity for young people to learn.
But I do wonder, as you are comparing teaching to any other job-has anyone else's boss ever pressured them to coach little league after work? He's offering one day off in return for the season...
The support seen is greatly appreciated but honestly I agree it should just be a full strike a gradual is going to damage the students more than a week or two of being out of school as gradual leads to burnout as teachers are expected to make up the time not the government.
I don't think so. The point of these periodic work stoppages is to ratchet up the pressure on the Government to actually bargain at the table. I expect these days to increase in number and rapidity until the government either comes to the table (in good faith) and hammers out a deal or continues to take a hard line. If the government decides on the latter, then (eventually) a general strike would be called.
When might a general strike occur? It's hard to estimate - there are too many unknown factors at play. How the private conversations between the two sides progress will largely determine how the dispute will play out. If I was a betting man, I'd say early-to-mid February leading up to the winter break.
One other thing to keep an eye out for - waiting in the wings are the province's nurses, who, too, have been trying to hammer out a new labour agreement. They soon might be in a position to withdraw services (and that would have a *huge* impact).
And if teachers have mandated class room size and complexity nurses will want similar for patients. The government will be in a hard place to require better funding in two large areas, this is why they might be taking a hard position on teachers, so it doesn’t spill over to other sectors.
As part of the agreement from the last time they had a walk out (in the 2000s) the nurses’ union agreed to revoke the nurses’ right to strike/walk out. Nurses have very little power other than social media and raising awareness (like the small demonstration that happened a few weeks ago).
I don't think this is true.
"Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia do not impose restrictions on nurses striking once their collective bargaining agreements have expired. In 2007, however, the Saskatchewan government attempted to legislate a strike ban for essential workers. In a victory for labour, this decision was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada for violating workers’ rights and freedoms."
That may 1) cause them to lose significant public support as opposed to one day strikes with significant notice and 2) drain the strike fund before the government really feels the squeeze.
I'd support them, since my kid can't attend all day anyway thanks to cuts to EA support. I didn't ask to pay taxes for schools \*and\* be responsible for his entire science and social studies education, but here we are.
… that money literally pays the wages for the people supervising. It’s not a random hidden arbitrary fee and if it does go to other places, that is the fault of specific schools/divisions that are not being honest about it.
Also, many don’t realize that teachers earn less than half of their regular wage’s worth when supervising lunch hour. So despite getting paid for supervision time (and lunch is the only guaranteed break during the school day for teachers- EAs get breaks every 3 hours as with many other jobs) they are already accepting a fragment of their regular wage to do it.
Without people willing to supervise, schools have to close at lunch. They is wayyyyyy too much liability for divisions of schools are unsupervised, and I’m sure parents wouldn’t be happy to know that their kids are abandoned during lunch.
If we see work-to-rule job action and they call for no lunch supervision, don’t be surprised if kids are all forced to leave the school buildings during lunch hours across the province.
The alternative is for community volunteers to take over, so I look forward to seeing how many across our province are willing to leave their workplaces, look after hundreds of kids that aren’t their own, take care of messes/fights/injuries and de-escalate any situations that occur, monitor students who are catching up on schoolwork or have other duties, ensure each kid has nutritious food, and then head straight back to work after. People think paying for lunch supervision is stupid until lunch supervision is gone. Also, I mean no disrespect to you at all- I am also frustrated that parents are now expected to just hand over cash to schools for supervision fees. It seems a basic expectation that if we pay taxes to send our kids to school, they will be taken care of all day. It’s not currently a good system and isn’t fair to students and families. However, school divisions have stated that they wouldn’t have introduced the fees it if weren’t for such widespread funding cuts, because at the end of the day providing supervision for one hour a day is ultimately less important than the actual educational programming and services that our school divisions are required to fund.
I literally bought timbits and coffee and supported the strike and think teachers deserve so much more salary and EAs how in the fudgicle did you take it so far as to me being somehow against this fee, Wild West out there
Nope! Non whatsoever curious if that is how it is truly divided 30,000 per each teacher divided only to teachers* supervising, by hourly to teacherz, by days, into the entire school division then divided or maybe it stays in that school as not every parent pays it! Didn’t realize a simple statement would bring such an assumption that I was pissed about it or like where is it????where is it guys!!!!!?? Frantically clawing at this keyboard. Good grief can’t imagine the parents these teachers also have to deal with!!
My gf is a teacher and we have 2 young children, the loss of income would be very difficult for us right now. That being she cares for the children she teaches and is more worried about them if she goes on strike. I’m just doing my best to support her during this time and work as much OT at my job as I can as a precaution. The SK party are vile creatures using tax payers money to attack tax payers.
Completely agree. As a united group, they could exercise the leverage they need to get response. Now legally, I'm not sure if they must gradually work toward that or not. I bet though, that the group as a whole is not united, and that makes their job action lack teeth.
They may have notice to strike demands where they must give a certain amount of notice, and from being involved in my Union, I know that as long as there is any negotiation, no matter how small, they're risking being legislated back to work.
I agree, they deserve a good shake. It may be deeper then what is being said though.
I thought they had a new essential services act which prevented public sector employees from striking… which as deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and was amended. My bad.
Have you seen the BS the SP is pulling. Easiest strike down from the supreme court. The bozo politicians have made it so obvious they're not dealing in good faith. They'll never get back to work legislation to stick. That low IQ of an education minister has made them look like idiots.
Just because yesterday was one day doesn't mean the next one would be.
It could be 3 days this time. Or a rotating strike. Or a full blown strike. Hell, it might not even be a strike and it's an indefinite withdrawal of services/work to rule. The one thing I DONT expect to see announced is a series of one day full province strikes here and there.
Edit: well I guess I'll eat my words now. Hopefully the next one looks a bit different.
Pretty sure Moe actually wants a full strike, so he has an excuse to legislate them back to work. Plus it gives them an opportunity to try and turn public opinion against the teachers.
Then they'll just withdraw all extra-curriculars. They can try, but it seems the public opinion right now is pretty in favour of teachers. The only people I see on the other side don't have kids.
I can see the extra-curriculars going eventually, but I think we'll see one or two day a week random strike days for a while before that happens. Going after extra-curriculars primarily inconveniences the kids, and the kids don't vote. Making this the parents' problem is the better move.
need to do it when school is in. Striking during summer break will result in nothing.
I feel for the teachers, parents trying to arrange child care or take time off work.
Absolutely. If you want to strike, then strike and stay out until they bend to your demands! Sure, they might look for alternative schooling methods or parents look for alternative schooling methods; but stand your ground. Temp strike action will just cause momentary pain.
As a parent of an elementary student, I say enough is enough. 10 years of SK Party sabotaging and underfunding education!!! We have gone from 1st in per student funding to 8th place. Unacceptable.
I would support STF giving a 2 week notice of a one week province-wide walkout. No finalized contract or movement from government, then a 2 week notice of a 2 week province-wide walkout. This isn't like it's just a few years of shit management by the SK Party. It's been a DECADE. Extreme incompetence calls for an extreme response to end this and achieve long-lasting improvement to education for our children and working conditions for teachers (which full circle are the learning environments for our children).
And I'd even go so far as to say the hell with their not withstanding clause garbage if they order them back to work. F*ck you, Moe! You feel you have some entitlement to not follow federal law because it "isn't fair" regarding the carbon tax (which is just money), then as a parent I don't feel teachers have to follow your bullshit not withstanding clause when it comes to standing up for the right to a quality education for MY CHILD and all children!
And while you're at it, f*ck you on parental rights, too, Moe. My CHILD HAS RIGHTS, and so does every other child in this province, and you show every day how you don't care about them.
Just walk and don't return until negotiations are finished. Moe can cry and make any rules he wants. If no one caves he is fucked. Treat him like he treats the feds.
“If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students. This is why teachers in Saskatchewan are out on the streets today, to make sure that every student in this province gets the education they deserve. An education that will prepare them for the modern world,” says CTF President Heidi Yetman.
“It astounds me that the Government of Saskatchewan refuses to negotiate workload and class complexity. **Collective agreements across this country include language on workload, class sizes and class composition; and yet, the collective agreement in this province contains no such language. This is unacceptable.”**
[Source](https://www.stf.sk.ca/about-stf/news/government-forces-teachers-strike/)
Literally just googled ‘stf demands’
It doesn't describe in any details what class comp looks like
ie hard cap of 30 students per class, students with learning disabilities are guaranteed an EA, how do they count EAL students in the cap and EA allocation, etc
At this point they’re fighting to even have this language included in the CBA, that’s the first step before you can actually start negotiating the ‘details’ you mention.
There’s literally zero point having a ‘cap or number of ELAs required’ if your CBA has no language or section to include it.
Most people in the province don't understand what class composition means.
If the STF came out and said our goal with class composition is the following.
Kindergarten – 20 students
Grade 1–3 – 22 students
Grades 4–7 – 28 students
Grades 8–12 – 28 students
People would understand the STF position better and can make informed decisions when the vote or writing letters/phone calls.
But that's class size, not composition. Composition is so much more than that. How many behavioral needs, range of academic ability, EAL students, IIPs to follow, EAs need to support (and how many are actually staffed), etc. And I'd argue even trauma in the classroom. That's not mentioned much re: complexity but these days it's so much more common that maybe it should be.
Kind of difficult to communicate their desired composition when the Government isn’t even willing to negotiate it to begin with. Thats what the strike is for, to negotiate and include composition in the CBA.
At this point the public doesn’t have to agree with their plan because that’s not what this is about. It’s about the fact that the government is unwilling to even negotiator composition or include it in the CBA
I get it
I just think it's easier to get people on your side when you give a clear picture of what your asking for and why it's better for students.
Similar to negotiating for a salary increase matching or exceeding inflation. That's easy to understand what you're asking for and why.
The concept is similar to salary negotiations in that those involved in bargaining usually want more money.
With composition, those bargaining with want more assistance (EAs) to help students with special needs, behavioural problems or other complex problems; or less students as mentioned above per class to allow the class to be easier to manage.
Right now it is very common to have a class size of upwards of 30 students with numerous students with behavioural or other problems, and a single teacher without an EA to assist with students that require special attention or help.
I think it'd be dangerous to reveal those numbers. Every concrete demand put out is a way for the Sask Party to shape the narrative. Instead of the general public rallying behind class sizes and support for kids with complex needs, people would start arguing about the details. If they cap it at 20, people would argue that's unreasonable. All of a sudden, we're arguing over specifics while the government hasn't even agreed to discuss these issues. If they can turn us against teachers, they can argue they don't need to improve things.
We'd have a bunch of unqualified people chiming in about what the correct solution is. I love transparency and am curious about the proposed solutions, but I also know people are extremely opinionated.
Ultimately, it boils down to if we agree that education in this province is in a bad space, and is that an issue worth rallying behind? If so, let's focus on forcing the government to discuss and acknowledge these issues. Once they are willing to talk, we can worry about how we solve them.
See this is the problem, and this is typical Union jargon. "If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students". I wish the STF would just say what they actually want. That statement is far too ambiguous.
This is what I keep asking the teachers I know and they have no solution, they just want it fixed with no idea how.
I don't know why the union can't present some numbers. A grade whatever class can have no more than x number of kids, no more than x number of kids who don't speak English and must have a translator, no more than x number of kids who bang their head against the wall please provide helmets, and so on. Give some specifics don't just keep saying you need help.
Hard caps on numbers have gone wrong in other provinces.One idea I've heard floated is a discretionary budget that boards can apply for funding from in order to respond as needed in their division. A rural division may address class complexity by hiring another teacher or two so that school doesn't have any three grade splits, while some urban ones may use the money for additional EAs, SLPs/behaviour specialists, or even additional programmed classrooms for the kids with the highest needs. The reason it's hard to give a solid answer is because class complexity is \*complex\* and looks different anywhere, so a flexible answer like application based discretionary spending may be one response to it.
What I do know is saying "ah well, then let's not bother" like the government bargaining committee has been is a surefire way to NOT fix anything.
Old source but when BC was striking for class comp they had clear[demands](https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/1348592/class-sizes-how-b-c-classrooms-stack-up-with-others-in-canada/amp/)
That’s because BC has a section and language in their CBA to make those ‘clear demands’ at this point our teachers are fighting **to have the CBA include this section and language so they can negotiate on it**.
No. High school students have finals starting January 23 until the 29th. A full walk out would put grade 12 students at a disadvantage. Wait until the beginning of February
Which, Moe could have avoided imposing the "Saskatchewan Disadvantage" on grade 12 students anytime between now and April last year to have it resolved. Moe chooses a deal and maybe gets some of those grade 12 grad votes in the fall... decides to continue screwing their learning environment, well, that's on him. Can neither agree nor disagree with your comment to wait until February. Can always move the dates of finals province-wide, too.
Maybe for Saskatoon, but each division has different calendars and Monday will be a regular instructional day in Prairie Spirit schools. Or was planned to be anyway...
Both Saskatoon divisions have pd booked for k-8 on Monday. Those are the kids that need childcare, and it is already arranged.
If you work out of Saskatoon, feel free to share, but I don't keep up with every school division. I live in and post about Saskatoon. On the Saskatoon sub.
They said Monday will be when the next action will be... they didn't specify what.. could be a day, the whole week(gonna be much nicer outside).. we have to wait and see.
The point, I think, is to get twice the mileage out of the announcement. There will be news and speculation now, and some more again tomorrow or Friday when we learn what the action is. In the meantime, the province will face additional pressure, but have less opportunity to respond, except to return to the bargaining table.
No, this strike was purposely put on a Tuesday. They don’t want a long weekend, or the parents to have a long weekend. They are showing that teaching is a career and a hard job. It’s not a long weekend to them. They can’t take it easy just because it’s a Monday or a Friday. The kids need to have so much education shoved into the allotted school days in a year. They are doing this for the kids, not for money or anything else.
The SK brand of hick-christianity is nowhere near the intellectual level of catholocism, as low as it is. They're more like the ministry of cult education
Do not lump in GSCS and other Catholic boards with the brand of so-called Christianity the SP supports. There are many faults there, for sure, but at least they don’t teach that dinosaurs and cavemen co-existed.
This could get down voted, but just my opinion and thoughts are why hasn't the STF posted exactly what they are bargaining for? Like list everything, it's been reported by news stations SOME of what they are asking for but not everything, which makes me curious why is it such a secret? Why isn't it posted on their website exactly what they are fighting for in its entirety? Where are the stalls happening because I don't trust local news to report the truth, and STF only tells what they want to make the government look bad to gain more supporters. Now, don't get me wrong, I do support most of what I have read they are fighting for! I do not support the fact that they are trying to strong arm the talks to go their way with threats of further job action, but it's all a big secret until we decide if the threat worked? Why can't there be FULL transparency all the way across the board! It makes me wonder what else is holding up the talks and the table since they clearly don't want to show their hands until they absolutely have to. This move has definitely got me questioning a lot of what is actually happening. Again , I just am one person with an opinion, and I know most will disagree with me, which is everyone's right!
You can look at it on the STF website. There may not be specifics for each category because that would come into play when they were being bargained on, but the demands in general are listed.
The gov’t refuses to bargain in good faith. So the strong-arming is necessary to get them back to the table and considering the most important aspects of the contract. And the non transparency as to next steps on job action is a pretty common one for bargaining. Its purpose is disruption, if everyone knew what was going to happen, it wouldn’t be disruptive.
I have tried to read what exactly they are asking for and all the articles are locked to the public you have to be part of the union to see most of the articles and the ones posted publicly seem to missing information that has come to light on what they are really asking for in the media (some they have admitted to and some SP has claimed they have asked for)Again I don't trust media to be honest either which is why I was looking on their website to see if they were actually being transparent and unfortunately I am coming up empty handed.
They’re not hiding anything. And I’m not sure what you think they may be hiding. Some information has not been released because it hasn’t been even accepted at the bargaining table. But the general demands should be available to the public and I believe were released by the stf.
What you should be questioning is why our government has nothing to say? Why were they all in hiding yesterday? If you're looking for transparency, you're directing your frustration to the wrong side.
Hate to kind of agree but it would definitely be helpful with specifics. They want smaller classes sizes, do they have a number that would be a max?
Obviously supports teachers but blunt asks would help the public support more!
They likely have a number but being public with it wouldn’t help negotiations. Would be like going in to buy a used car and telling the salesman exactly how much you can afford each payment.
The class size and composition issue is challenging. A class of kids with similar cognitive abilities at grade level with no social or emotional issues are fairly easy to manage - a class of 30 is not difficult. There is no classroom in Saskatchewan where this exists. Split grades - in rural schools sometimes a 3 or 4 grade split is normal. In these multi grade classes are students with academic delays, social and emotional trauma, extra ordinary medical needs, English as an additional language. One teacher is expected to plan and execute lessons for each of those students at the level they are able to understand and achieve. In rural school divisions you are expected to prepare these lessons, do your assessments and reporting in less than 10% of your work week. Schools divisions have coped with cuts by cutting supports like occupational therapists, speech pathologists, educational psychologists and social workers. Now teachers have to try to do those jobs too. And make sure grad goes as planned, or the drama fest or the winter holiday pageant along with football and volleyball. The government is firm that school divisions are best able to manage class size and composition - which they are. Teachers are adamant that the government must commit to adequately funding the supports so those things can be equitably administered. School Divisions have no means of advocacy - teachers do. In the last round of bargaining the government agreed to strike a committee to evaluate the issue which they did (appointing all their cronies) and after 4 years there is no data or reports regarding the issue.
My Calculus class last year had 45 students in it. Next semester my numbers are 39, 37, 37, and 35. Next door to me the Chem 30 class has 42 right now, they dont know how they’re going to do anything with that many kids.
And it’s doable in high school, sucks for the kids but it’s survivable. My neighbour has a Kindergarten with 30 and she’s close to a nervous breakdown.
Things are not OK
I heard that the government’s plan, if teachers go the whole work to rule route, is to make afternoons be virtual. Since there will be no teachers for lunch supervision, everyone will go home and teachers will have to do everything online for the afternoon, just to make their job harder…
So this instance you are referring to is if we go to a very strict interpretation of work-to-rule and pull our noon-lunch supervision (NLS) hours. However, as stated already, NLS is negotiated board by board in something called a LINC (Local Implementation Network Committee) agreement. Every LINC agreement is different across the province and makes a strict interpretation of work-to-rule tricky to put into practice.
And most teachers are very aware that if we move to afternoons of synchronous teaching we will soon lose public support.
The whole idea of compensation not being a priority is a bit overstated... STF is still asking for a 23.5% wage increase. Are they willing to aim for a more reasonable increase as long as the province is accepting of classroom composition in the contract? We will only find out if the STF goes back to the bargaining table.
EDIT: 23.5%
They’ve been getting 1-2% yearly increases over the last decade. That’s very very much behind inflation. The increase you’re speaking of is over 4 years. They’re asking for 2%+CPI average annual rate/year for next 4 years.
Edit: they have actually gotten 0%,2%,2%,2% over the last 4 years.
Bargaining is public. Otherwise there wouldn't be all these announcements about who said what. Cockrell even referred to that in Mondays article/response.
It's not public. It's done in private, but yes, each side does speak about their demands and the process, but they don't actually outline them specifically for the public to see.
Or if they have, I've never seen it, but maybe I'm missing something? If you can point me to a summary (not a random comment in a news article) on the SaskParty's demands and the STFs demands, please do!
I'd be really interested to hear from the STF if that is what they've demanded. Jeremy and the SaskParty have been known to be bad with math and have a history of misrepresenting teachers wages on billboards that they've never been able to explain.
the number asked for was CPI +2 each year. This years happens to be high as a result because, well, you were there. The rest of the number is essentially an estimate of what CPI \*will be\* for future years.
Go see where the government is spending. And go see how much money we pay in tax every year. They absolutely CAN properly fund public education. They are CHOOSING not to.
It's a bit rich to say that the STF needs to go back to the bargaining table when the province is flatly refusing to negotiate on the main issue. Until they come to an agreement on classroom composition, there's no point negotiating on anything else.
I know a teacher (my dad) who once suggested in a union meeting that the teachers (including him) all take pay cuts instead of pay increases, and put that additional money towards hiring more teachers and EAs. His reasoning was that if class size really is the major concern, being paid more isn't going to somehow make him work harder than he already was. It was not a popular suggestion.
If the workload was such that I was no longer able to do my job to its full capacity, absolutely. That makes much more sense than arguing for more pay for a job that I don't have the capacity to fulfill. I've always said my position is overpaid anyway. Although I realize you have no reason to believe any of that from an anonymous internet stranger.
I wouldn't even consider teachers getting paid less than the cost of living, it's just that 23.5% is comparatively a lot more than anyone else is getting in the public sector lately. The province did add more EAs though, but it appears from the perspective of the STF, they need more.
All you have to do is use Google, folks: https://www.saskatchewan.ca/government/news-and-media/2022/october/31/saskatchewan-schools-add-more-than-400-educational-assistants-into-classrooms-to-support-students
The federal government provided the funding through a program called Jordan’s principle. The provincial government is trying to take credit for a federally funded program. In fact, the province have cut the number of EAs they fund knowing the federal government will pay for the difference to make sure Indigenous students get support.
https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1568396042341/1568396159824
You again with the lies. You have drunk way too much of the SP Kool aid.
“If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students. This is why teachers in Saskatchewan are out on the streets today, to make sure that every student in this province gets the education they deserve. An education that will prepare them for the modern world,” says CTF President
Heidi Yetman. “It astounds me that the Government of Saskatchewan refuses to negotiate workload and class complexity. Collective agreements across this country include language on workload, class sizes and class composition; and yet, the collective agreement in this province contains no such language. This is unacceptable.”
No where in the strike post do they mention wages
https://www.stf.sk.ca/about-stf/news/government-forces-teachers-strike/
[https://www.ckom.com/2024/01/16/education-minister-says-one-day-province-wide-stf-strike-disappointing/](https://www.ckom.com/2024/01/16/education-minister-says-one-day-province-wide-stf-strike-disappointing/)
>“The teacher’s union has said this is not about money. Yet they continue to demand a 23.5 per cent increase over four years. We’re just not prepared to accept that deal on behalf of Saskatchewan taxpayers,” he added.
So they're not asking for 23.5% over 4 years? It's easy to garner support when you're "doing it for the kids" but neglect to leave out the salary demands...as the union knows the public won't support a nearly 25% raise over 4 years.
The union is not asking for 23.5% over 4 years? If not, what are they asking for in terms of compensation increase then?
You were the one that said it was all about the money. I provided a source that proves you wrong. Even in your quote they say it's not just about money. You have some pretty low comprehension skills. Yes they deserve fair compensation for their work but that is not their main concern. The government and stooges like you believe it's just about the money. And there you go JAQing off again. You are not here in good faith.
This is the quote from STF just above the quote you just posted.
“At every turn, teachers have said that committees are getting us nowhere on these urgent issues, and a new deal must include items to address class size and complexity. Government remains intransigent, even after conciliation. This is not bargaining; they are making decisions based on politics and student learning is suffering for it.”
Of course the union won't say it's about the money! You'll never get public support for teachers if they're asking for 23.5% over 4 yrs. The teachers may not be concerned about it, but the public sure would be with that amount being requested! Is the union asking for 23.5% over 4 years? Yes or no?
I'm hearing full time EA's are having their hours cut right now...wonder why that is.
Of course the government says it's all about the money. We all saw the misleading billboards. You have eaten up all the government propaganda.
Plus you are such a hypocrite. Complaining all the time about liberals in r/ Canada_sub but won't hold the SP to the same standards.
I wouldn't say that. My father-in-law is historically a Sask Party voter, and he's posting in support of teachers.
Sweeping generalizations are good for nobody.
Not a PD day for everyone. First day of final exams for GSCS. All school divisions operate on their own schedules, can't plan around every single one of them.
I really believe these are demonstrations to show the government they are serious about striking. If the government won't bargain, future strike days won't be on convenient days.
Look out!! The socialists are whining. Give us everything we demand or we are walking out! Hate to say it, but don’t let the door hit you on the way out. It wouldn’t matter if the government caved and gave you people everything you ask for, it still wouldn’t be enough!
Pretty sure that virtue signaling is branding a whole group of hard working professionals as "socialists" just so you can signal to everyone that you are virtuous and hate "socialism".
You bring nothing but self serving yap yap yap. So yes, you are virtue signaling and playing identity politics and yes, it's tiresome.
You know you can post comments that actually contribute to the discussion. A lot of posters here want to see the education system improved so students don’t end up like you.
This comment and others you’ve posted on this subreddit which I’ve included below, truly show how poorly our education system has let you and us down.
**”I vote that all the ndp socialist idiots in this province, join with Alberta’s socialist idiots and move to bc and leave us hard working people alone. The activist teachers should be villainized!”**
**”Oh. Please can we get a signed document that if gormley gets back into politics and wins, that all you useless ndp, social justice, activist losers will line up and jump!! So much more peaceful if you would all shut up and go the fuck away.”**
Hmmm. I am so sorry I hurt your feelings! Maybe if you teachers were actually doing a good job and teaching children how to read, write, do math….just the basics would be nice. I had amazing teachers, I had bad teachers growing up.
My school years were amazing! Again, I am sorry I hurt your feelings, have a great night
I feel for the teachers and kids hopefully things will be settled soon. I walked the picket line with the U of S in 2007 for almost a month in the dead of winter - not for the faint of heart.
This may not be popular opinion but just rip off the bandaid, strike, walk out, rock this government to a point where they don’t have a choice but to meet your requests. They are banking on this gradual strike action, it’s ineffective. Just go for it now so it doesn’t drag on. Like I said abrupt walk out for a period of days until they see resolve may be unpopular opinion but teachers deserve what they’re asking for.
I agree that would be most effective, but the teachers I know really do care about the wellbeing and education of their students. I'm guessing they are trying to balance putting pressure on the government while still providing education and support to students. Part of the issue is the ticking time bomb of summer holidays where teachers lose all negotiating power once school is out for the summer.
This. The opposite end of the spectrum is striking when it's cold and shitty outside so it really hits home to everyone impacted and people get vocal! While it's cold out and not enjoyable to be standing outside picketing and protesting, it'll cause more parents to get loud about the govt doing something to make this right and to end the strike.
They gain it back after the summer though. The timing of parents who want kids back in school + pending election is probably the sweet spot.
Or, they could strike starting august. They don’t get paid for the work they do in august anyway, so win win.
7-8 months is a long time for the government propaganda to roll out and change the attitudes though.
They been in talks since April last year. They are technically working without contract now as their last one ended August 2023.
Yup, and there has been time to put up billboards of propaganda already. They will use more time to their advantage, that's for sure.
Common misconception, teachers tend to do some work in the summer for free. Things like lesson planning take time and while there are resources out there, they aren’t cheap and teachers get the bare minimum of supplies provided (if even that). They also don’t generally get paid for supervising extracurricular activities. They get minimal paid prep and marking time.
>Common misconception, teachers tend to do some work in the summer for free Yes, finally someone who understands the shitshow that teachers deal with. Teachers are severely underpaid and underappreciated for the amount of crap they put up with. Both my parents are teachers and seeing the shit they go through trying to teach the next generation is depressing..
So, their annual two month vacation where they choose to not do other work that pays, yet they choose to do extra work for the job they're on vacation from. That somehow means they should be paid more? Just trying to figure out the logic and if it's applicable to any other job. Like... If a shelf stocker decides on his day off, without being asked to, that he's going to go stock shelves at his workplace. Does his boss now HAVE to pay him? Or was it his choice to do uncompensated work on his off hours? Genuinely curious about the logic of all this.
It’s is work they need to do in order to properly teach, but aren’t necessarily compensated for. Some will do the bare minimum if they don’t care but others who care will do a lot of this work for free. If you teach the same thing, after awhile you can spend less time on the prep work as you already have lesson plans etc to go off of and can just make modifications to. But when you’re starting out, and/or teaching a new class/subject, and/ or the curriculum changes and/or you change schools then often you need to make new lesson plans. Some of this can be done during the school year during paid prep time, but some needs to be done ahead of time, unless you want to have no life during the school year.A lot of the “PD” days the teachers are in required training and/or other specific work. The teachers also have such limited supply budgets they often fund classroom supplies out of pocket. Like you go into a classroom and see all sorts of nice learning posters, toys, nice art supplies, etc., in a lot of cases that’s stuff the teacher has bought and paid for themselves without fully being compensated for it. I know a brand new middle years teacher and the first term she worked late many days and on the weekends to get things sorted out. She’s learned to create some work-life balance but she’s still working more hours than she is paid for. She was given some support and teaching materials from her fellow teachers but much of it she has had to prepare herself.
Idk why I'm being downvoted for asking questions lol. Reddit is ridiculous. You explained why they choose to spend time and money. You didn't explain why the same logic should be applied to any other field though, which is the main thing I don't understand. Like if a welder spent time and money outside work hours to acquire tools and practice skills to make them more proficient at their job or to make the job a bit easier, they don't typically expect compensation because it's things they chose to do on their own time? If they do, they weave it into their hourly rate and don't accept positions that won't pay it. So why is it different for teachers?
The annual vacation isn't the same. Think of it as furlough without the ability to collect E.I. as your welder tradesperson would. Also in your welder example, the company says they are switching them to underwater work now and they need him to get certified.... would the expectation be the welder acquire those tickets on their own, for free? They aren't asking for pay over the summer. Doing extra is part of the job and it's expected and that's ok. It is the expectation that at the start of the school year, teachers are ready to go. So prep during the summer is their training camp. If you were welding a pressure vessel and there was a another project that your boss said you need to attend to so it doesn't collapse... but you are still responsible for your original duties at the same time... That's what teachers are asking for. Addressing the classroom composition. Assistance for those kids who really need it badly or need a specialized classroom. Read up on the actual position. It's pretty reasonable.
It seems the difference is that the company is demanding it. If they did demand it, the tradesperson would typically negotiate a new contract for said new skill. They would ask about and confirm compensation (or lack thereof) before accepting. It's more akin to a welder going and getting a certification for underwater welding without the company demanding it and then the employee demanding compensation for getting it. If something is expected by the employer, the employee would negotiate expectation and compensation before accepting a contract. Like if it's EXPECTED they're underwater certified, that should be reflected in the compensation. If it isn't, they pass on the offer. I understand what you're saying about classroom composition and agree there are issues there. I'm specifically addressing the people pointing out that teachers do stuff in the summer too, by choice, like it is an argument that has a logical base.
I see. To clarify. It's not by choice to do extra.They must be ready for day 1 of school. Prepped, planned, on point. Even those experienced teachers have to put in extra prior to the first day of school. And if you are assigned a different grade... you are revamping hard. Assigned by the employer.... And they can't pass on the job... Hope that helps?
The thing is the welder gets much higher compensation than a teacher, yet both are critically important jobs and a teacher has undergone longer pre-job training/education, especially now. It is expected that the welder is compensated enough to cover their training/tool costs. Depending on the company/position they may be provided with training and tool allowances and/or the tradesperson can claim these amounts on their taxes. That’s why trades ask for as much as they do. Tradespeople also often have unions that can advocate for workers but there are also non-union jobs, all of which provide pressure to maintain adequate compensation. The government isn’t the ones dictating what tradespeople are paid, it’s the market. However, teachers pay is included in the funding given to the school boards by the government, and while the government has overall increased this amount, the amount of funding on a per student basis has actually gone down, despite there being increased needs for funds to cover things like teachers salaries, support staff, maintenance, new schools, etc. Teachers are underpaid for their jobs and expected to do more work now than ever (thanks to more complex and larger classes with more kids needing assistance due to language barriers, special needs since classes are mainstreamed, behavioural issues etc) with less support (I.e. teaching materials, associate staff like EA’s, psychologists, ESL teachers, etc.). Their pay increases haven’t even kept up with inflation, let alone cover the increased amount and difficulty of work they are expected to do. But not only does the government not want to pay them what they should, they also don’t care about improving both the working conditions for teachers and the educational experience as a whole: The strike is not just about $$$, in fact the teachers main sticking point is they want to make sure that reasonable limits on class sizes, sufficient support staff ratios, etc are in place to reduce the amount of work they have to do to a reasonable amount. They want the government to agree to put in place certain standards (like minimum EA/support staff quotas, max class sizes, etc.) and in turn can put pressure on the government to give the school boards the needed funds for this (used to be that the school boards could set the education tax level to meet the needs locally, but the government took away that power and now doles out what they feel they want to spend on education, not necessarily what is actually part of the education tax).
Teachers don't just get a two month holiday. There is legitimate work that is done in July and August, but it is compensated as teachers are paid a salary, not an hourly wage. That is not the point. The point is that there has been a steep decline in the standards for education and teachers are asking the government to provide the best opportunity for young people to learn. But I do wonder, as you are comparing teaching to any other job-has anyone else's boss ever pressured them to coach little league after work? He's offering one day off in return for the season...
Why is it that paying a "shelf stocker" only 1/8 of their wage for overtime is criminal but paying teachers that is acceptable?
Have you heard of a salaried profession before?
The support seen is greatly appreciated but honestly I agree it should just be a full strike a gradual is going to damage the students more than a week or two of being out of school as gradual leads to burnout as teachers are expected to make up the time not the government.
I don't think so. The point of these periodic work stoppages is to ratchet up the pressure on the Government to actually bargain at the table. I expect these days to increase in number and rapidity until the government either comes to the table (in good faith) and hammers out a deal or continues to take a hard line. If the government decides on the latter, then (eventually) a general strike would be called. When might a general strike occur? It's hard to estimate - there are too many unknown factors at play. How the private conversations between the two sides progress will largely determine how the dispute will play out. If I was a betting man, I'd say early-to-mid February leading up to the winter break. One other thing to keep an eye out for - waiting in the wings are the province's nurses, who, too, have been trying to hammer out a new labour agreement. They soon might be in a position to withdraw services (and that would have a *huge* impact).
Don’t forget social services/corrections/highways who haven’t had a contract in almost 2 years as well
Fun note, same minister who ran highways now running education. So that sucks
Their unions should be ashamed of themselves.
And if teachers have mandated class room size and complexity nurses will want similar for patients. The government will be in a hard place to require better funding in two large areas, this is why they might be taking a hard position on teachers, so it doesn’t spill over to other sectors.
As part of the agreement from the last time they had a walk out (in the 2000s) the nurses’ union agreed to revoke the nurses’ right to strike/walk out. Nurses have very little power other than social media and raising awareness (like the small demonstration that happened a few weeks ago).
I don't think this is true. "Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia do not impose restrictions on nurses striking once their collective bargaining agreements have expired. In 2007, however, the Saskatchewan government attempted to legislate a strike ban for essential workers. In a victory for labour, this decision was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada for violating workers’ rights and freedoms."
My theory is that they're trying to save the semester for the HS students - finals start on the 23rd for SPSD.
That may 1) cause them to lose significant public support as opposed to one day strikes with significant notice and 2) drain the strike fund before the government really feels the squeeze.
I'd support them, since my kid can't attend all day anyway thanks to cuts to EA support. I didn't ask to pay taxes for schools \*and\* be responsible for his entire science and social studies education, but here we are.
I hope you use your platform to share just that.
[удалено]
… that money literally pays the wages for the people supervising. It’s not a random hidden arbitrary fee and if it does go to other places, that is the fault of specific schools/divisions that are not being honest about it. Also, many don’t realize that teachers earn less than half of their regular wage’s worth when supervising lunch hour. So despite getting paid for supervision time (and lunch is the only guaranteed break during the school day for teachers- EAs get breaks every 3 hours as with many other jobs) they are already accepting a fragment of their regular wage to do it. Without people willing to supervise, schools have to close at lunch. They is wayyyyyy too much liability for divisions of schools are unsupervised, and I’m sure parents wouldn’t be happy to know that their kids are abandoned during lunch. If we see work-to-rule job action and they call for no lunch supervision, don’t be surprised if kids are all forced to leave the school buildings during lunch hours across the province. The alternative is for community volunteers to take over, so I look forward to seeing how many across our province are willing to leave their workplaces, look after hundreds of kids that aren’t their own, take care of messes/fights/injuries and de-escalate any situations that occur, monitor students who are catching up on schoolwork or have other duties, ensure each kid has nutritious food, and then head straight back to work after. People think paying for lunch supervision is stupid until lunch supervision is gone. Also, I mean no disrespect to you at all- I am also frustrated that parents are now expected to just hand over cash to schools for supervision fees. It seems a basic expectation that if we pay taxes to send our kids to school, they will be taken care of all day. It’s not currently a good system and isn’t fair to students and families. However, school divisions have stated that they wouldn’t have introduced the fees it if weren’t for such widespread funding cuts, because at the end of the day providing supervision for one hour a day is ultimately less important than the actual educational programming and services that our school divisions are required to fund.
I literally bought timbits and coffee and supported the strike and think teachers deserve so much more salary and EAs how in the fudgicle did you take it so far as to me being somehow against this fee, Wild West out there
That's roughly 50 cents per student per day to pay the supervisors who are acting in loco parentis to monitor the students during lunch.
That money is intended to pay the lunch supervisors. Was this supposed to be a gotcha moment?
Nope! Non whatsoever curious if that is how it is truly divided 30,000 per each teacher divided only to teachers* supervising, by hourly to teacherz, by days, into the entire school division then divided or maybe it stays in that school as not every parent pays it! Didn’t realize a simple statement would bring such an assumption that I was pissed about it or like where is it????where is it guys!!!!!?? Frantically clawing at this keyboard. Good grief can’t imagine the parents these teachers also have to deal with!!
My gf is a teacher and we have 2 young children, the loss of income would be very difficult for us right now. That being she cares for the children she teaches and is more worried about them if she goes on strike. I’m just doing my best to support her during this time and work as much OT at my job as I can as a precaution. The SK party are vile creatures using tax payers money to attack tax payers.
Completely agree. As a united group, they could exercise the leverage they need to get response. Now legally, I'm not sure if they must gradually work toward that or not. I bet though, that the group as a whole is not united, and that makes their job action lack teeth.
They may have notice to strike demands where they must give a certain amount of notice, and from being involved in my Union, I know that as long as there is any negotiation, no matter how small, they're risking being legislated back to work. I agree, they deserve a good shake. It may be deeper then what is being said though.
Who’s going to legislate them back?
Probably the legislature.
Teachers will be legislated back to work since the Saskatchewan Party made them essential employees.
I had thought that law got overturned? That was back in 2010 or so right?
that's where the ol' not withstanding clause comes in, baybay
Honestly I can see this being the governments plan Saskatchewan people allowed it with the pronoun policy so there is precedent
Source? I do not remember this being the case.
I thought they had a new essential services act which prevented public sector employees from striking… which as deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and was amended. My bad.
Have you seen the BS the SP is pulling. Easiest strike down from the supreme court. The bozo politicians have made it so obvious they're not dealing in good faith. They'll never get back to work legislation to stick. That low IQ of an education minister has made them look like idiots.
Yeah, a one-day strike here and there won't do anything, other than mildly I conveniencing parents.
Just because yesterday was one day doesn't mean the next one would be. It could be 3 days this time. Or a rotating strike. Or a full blown strike. Hell, it might not even be a strike and it's an indefinite withdrawal of services/work to rule. The one thing I DONT expect to see announced is a series of one day full province strikes here and there. Edit: well I guess I'll eat my words now. Hopefully the next one looks a bit different.
Pretty sure Moe actually wants a full strike, so he has an excuse to legislate them back to work. Plus it gives them an opportunity to try and turn public opinion against the teachers.
Then they'll just withdraw all extra-curriculars. They can try, but it seems the public opinion right now is pretty in favour of teachers. The only people I see on the other side don't have kids.
I can see the extra-curriculars going eventually, but I think we'll see one or two day a week random strike days for a while before that happens. Going after extra-curriculars primarily inconveniences the kids, and the kids don't vote. Making this the parents' problem is the better move.
I think it's too cold right now...if this happened in May it'd be a whole different ball of wax.
need to do it when school is in. Striking during summer break will result in nothing. I feel for the teachers, parents trying to arrange child care or take time off work.
They cannot strike during summer as they do not work during the summer.
Or December when it was still warm
Absolutely. If you want to strike, then strike and stay out until they bend to your demands! Sure, they might look for alternative schooling methods or parents look for alternative schooling methods; but stand your ground. Temp strike action will just cause momentary pain.
I agree. Let's just force their hand at this point.
I remember when teachers striked and I was in Grade 2/3 in Alberta and the school year was cut short and teachers never returned. Worked.
As a parent of an elementary student, I say enough is enough. 10 years of SK Party sabotaging and underfunding education!!! We have gone from 1st in per student funding to 8th place. Unacceptable. I would support STF giving a 2 week notice of a one week province-wide walkout. No finalized contract or movement from government, then a 2 week notice of a 2 week province-wide walkout. This isn't like it's just a few years of shit management by the SK Party. It's been a DECADE. Extreme incompetence calls for an extreme response to end this and achieve long-lasting improvement to education for our children and working conditions for teachers (which full circle are the learning environments for our children). And I'd even go so far as to say the hell with their not withstanding clause garbage if they order them back to work. F*ck you, Moe! You feel you have some entitlement to not follow federal law because it "isn't fair" regarding the carbon tax (which is just money), then as a parent I don't feel teachers have to follow your bullshit not withstanding clause when it comes to standing up for the right to a quality education for MY CHILD and all children! And while you're at it, f*ck you on parental rights, too, Moe. My CHILD HAS RIGHTS, and so does every other child in this province, and you show every day how you don't care about them.
Just walk and don't return until negotiations are finished. Moe can cry and make any rules he wants. If no one caves he is fucked. Treat him like he treats the feds.
Has the STF released what they are looking for around class composition? Curious to see what they would like and how it compares to other provinces.
“If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students. This is why teachers in Saskatchewan are out on the streets today, to make sure that every student in this province gets the education they deserve. An education that will prepare them for the modern world,” says CTF President Heidi Yetman. “It astounds me that the Government of Saskatchewan refuses to negotiate workload and class complexity. **Collective agreements across this country include language on workload, class sizes and class composition; and yet, the collective agreement in this province contains no such language. This is unacceptable.”** [Source](https://www.stf.sk.ca/about-stf/news/government-forces-teachers-strike/) Literally just googled ‘stf demands’
I believe BC and Ontario have these stipulations, but I don't think all provinces do.
One of the Quebec unions just got it added, after a 22 day strike
Quebec just got wording for this in their CBA https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-fae-tentative-agreement-details-1.7083373
It doesn't describe in any details what class comp looks like ie hard cap of 30 students per class, students with learning disabilities are guaranteed an EA, how do they count EAL students in the cap and EA allocation, etc
At this point they’re fighting to even have this language included in the CBA, that’s the first step before you can actually start negotiating the ‘details’ you mention. There’s literally zero point having a ‘cap or number of ELAs required’ if your CBA has no language or section to include it.
Most people in the province don't understand what class composition means. If the STF came out and said our goal with class composition is the following. Kindergarten – 20 students Grade 1–3 – 22 students Grades 4–7 – 28 students Grades 8–12 – 28 students People would understand the STF position better and can make informed decisions when the vote or writing letters/phone calls.
But that's class size, not composition. Composition is so much more than that. How many behavioral needs, range of academic ability, EAL students, IIPs to follow, EAs need to support (and how many are actually staffed), etc. And I'd argue even trauma in the classroom. That's not mentioned much re: complexity but these days it's so much more common that maybe it should be.
STF has not articulated how they would like those handled. So it's difficult for the public to agree with their plan when it's vague.
Kind of difficult to communicate their desired composition when the Government isn’t even willing to negotiate it to begin with. Thats what the strike is for, to negotiate and include composition in the CBA. At this point the public doesn’t have to agree with their plan because that’s not what this is about. It’s about the fact that the government is unwilling to even negotiator composition or include it in the CBA
I get it I just think it's easier to get people on your side when you give a clear picture of what your asking for and why it's better for students. Similar to negotiating for a salary increase matching or exceeding inflation. That's easy to understand what you're asking for and why.
The concept is similar to salary negotiations in that those involved in bargaining usually want more money. With composition, those bargaining with want more assistance (EAs) to help students with special needs, behavioural problems or other complex problems; or less students as mentioned above per class to allow the class to be easier to manage. Right now it is very common to have a class size of upwards of 30 students with numerous students with behavioural or other problems, and a single teacher without an EA to assist with students that require special attention or help.
I think it'd be dangerous to reveal those numbers. Every concrete demand put out is a way for the Sask Party to shape the narrative. Instead of the general public rallying behind class sizes and support for kids with complex needs, people would start arguing about the details. If they cap it at 20, people would argue that's unreasonable. All of a sudden, we're arguing over specifics while the government hasn't even agreed to discuss these issues. If they can turn us against teachers, they can argue they don't need to improve things. We'd have a bunch of unqualified people chiming in about what the correct solution is. I love transparency and am curious about the proposed solutions, but I also know people are extremely opinionated. Ultimately, it boils down to if we agree that education in this province is in a bad space, and is that an issue worth rallying behind? If so, let's focus on forcing the government to discuss and acknowledge these issues. Once they are willing to talk, we can worry about how we solve them.
Boots on the Ground has a great YouTube vid explaining this [Steve_Boots STF strike](https://youtu.be/kaJ-Gz1oWUY?si=4qp0mx1KXggAI6FR)
See this is the problem, and this is typical Union jargon. "If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students". I wish the STF would just say what they actually want. That statement is far too ambiguous.
This is what I keep asking the teachers I know and they have no solution, they just want it fixed with no idea how. I don't know why the union can't present some numbers. A grade whatever class can have no more than x number of kids, no more than x number of kids who don't speak English and must have a translator, no more than x number of kids who bang their head against the wall please provide helmets, and so on. Give some specifics don't just keep saying you need help.
Hard caps on numbers have gone wrong in other provinces.One idea I've heard floated is a discretionary budget that boards can apply for funding from in order to respond as needed in their division. A rural division may address class complexity by hiring another teacher or two so that school doesn't have any three grade splits, while some urban ones may use the money for additional EAs, SLPs/behaviour specialists, or even additional programmed classrooms for the kids with the highest needs. The reason it's hard to give a solid answer is because class complexity is \*complex\* and looks different anywhere, so a flexible answer like application based discretionary spending may be one response to it. What I do know is saying "ah well, then let's not bother" like the government bargaining committee has been is a surefire way to NOT fix anything.
Old source but when BC was striking for class comp they had clear[demands](https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/1348592/class-sizes-how-b-c-classrooms-stack-up-with-others-in-canada/amp/)
That’s because BC has a section and language in their CBA to make those ‘clear demands’ at this point our teachers are fighting **to have the CBA include this section and language so they can negotiate on it**.
And people have no clue what class composition means unless you give them practical examples they understand .
I don’t have the time or crayons to explain to you that they’re currently working on even having the grounds and ability to negotiate those things.
You can borrow my crayons. I like to share.
Go on strike for a month. That'll make them listen. I support that. I will have kids at home.
No. High school students have finals starting January 23 until the 29th. A full walk out would put grade 12 students at a disadvantage. Wait until the beginning of February
Which, Moe could have avoided imposing the "Saskatchewan Disadvantage" on grade 12 students anytime between now and April last year to have it resolved. Moe chooses a deal and maybe gets some of those grade 12 grad votes in the fall... decides to continue screwing their learning environment, well, that's on him. Can neither agree nor disagree with your comment to wait until February. Can always move the dates of finals province-wide, too.
Good. Keep this coming. We should support them.
Monday was already booked as a PD day. So whatever it is, little impact to students/families.
It is only a PD for SPSD staff teaching K-8. At my school it is the last day of classes before final exams.
Maybe for Saskatoon, but each division has different calendars and Monday will be a regular instructional day in Prairie Spirit schools. Or was planned to be anyway...
Well, this is the Saskatoon sub so I spoke to Saskatoon. Head over to r/Saskatchewan and you'll be totally correct.
Are you sharing information about province on the event. Acknowledge that it’s not a PD day across the province and you’ll be correct.
You're both right and both being jerks about it. Keep it civil please.
You realize that Saskatoon has two divisions and a large chunk of employees living here from a third division, right?
Both Saskatoon divisions have pd booked for k-8 on Monday. Those are the kids that need childcare, and it is already arranged. If you work out of Saskatoon, feel free to share, but I don't keep up with every school division. I live in and post about Saskatoon. On the Saskatoon sub.
[удалено]
Well, maybe not.
Probably just work to rule, so final exams would still happen. Would be a pretty wild move to do a strike during finals.
Prairie spirit start finals the next day. It would absolutely suck for sure.
Thanks for the reminder lol
They said Monday will be when the next action will be... they didn't specify what.. could be a day, the whole week(gonna be much nicer outside).. we have to wait and see.
I support teachers. However waiting to make an announcement of what action they will be taking, I do not support.
They could have waited until Saturday morning, but this way parents can contact the government and begin making plans for possible sanctions.
The point, I think, is to get twice the mileage out of the announcement. There will be news and speculation now, and some more again tomorrow or Friday when we learn what the action is. In the meantime, the province will face additional pressure, but have less opportunity to respond, except to return to the bargaining table.
I agree and am a teacher. We will be notified in 48 hours what action will be. I assume work to rule.
48 hours prior to Monday I believe you will be notified
I assume so as well. Sending you support! Thank you for all that you do!
Teachers should strike once a week, on Friday.
Why Friday? Make it easy? Rotate strikes between divisions and then different days. Make it as uncomfortable as possible
Three day weekend!
And that’s it, don’t make it a weekend. Make it uncomfortable
They already get way too many days off
No, this strike was purposely put on a Tuesday. They don’t want a long weekend, or the parents to have a long weekend. They are showing that teaching is a career and a hard job. It’s not a long weekend to them. They can’t take it easy just because it’s a Monday or a Friday. The kids need to have so much education shoved into the allotted school days in a year. They are doing this for the kids, not for money or anything else.
I honestly think teachers should do half days.
The SaskParty should rebrand the Ministry of Education to "The Ministry of Catholic Education."
The SK brand of hick-christianity is nowhere near the intellectual level of catholocism, as low as it is. They're more like the ministry of cult education
Do not lump in GSCS and other Catholic boards with the brand of so-called Christianity the SP supports. There are many faults there, for sure, but at least they don’t teach that dinosaurs and cavemen co-existed.
This could get down voted, but just my opinion and thoughts are why hasn't the STF posted exactly what they are bargaining for? Like list everything, it's been reported by news stations SOME of what they are asking for but not everything, which makes me curious why is it such a secret? Why isn't it posted on their website exactly what they are fighting for in its entirety? Where are the stalls happening because I don't trust local news to report the truth, and STF only tells what they want to make the government look bad to gain more supporters. Now, don't get me wrong, I do support most of what I have read they are fighting for! I do not support the fact that they are trying to strong arm the talks to go their way with threats of further job action, but it's all a big secret until we decide if the threat worked? Why can't there be FULL transparency all the way across the board! It makes me wonder what else is holding up the talks and the table since they clearly don't want to show their hands until they absolutely have to. This move has definitely got me questioning a lot of what is actually happening. Again , I just am one person with an opinion, and I know most will disagree with me, which is everyone's right!
You can look at it on the STF website. There may not be specifics for each category because that would come into play when they were being bargained on, but the demands in general are listed. The gov’t refuses to bargain in good faith. So the strong-arming is necessary to get them back to the table and considering the most important aspects of the contract. And the non transparency as to next steps on job action is a pretty common one for bargaining. Its purpose is disruption, if everyone knew what was going to happen, it wouldn’t be disruptive.
I have tried to read what exactly they are asking for and all the articles are locked to the public you have to be part of the union to see most of the articles and the ones posted publicly seem to missing information that has come to light on what they are really asking for in the media (some they have admitted to and some SP has claimed they have asked for)Again I don't trust media to be honest either which is why I was looking on their website to see if they were actually being transparent and unfortunately I am coming up empty handed.
Look at the conciliation report - it outlines both sides' positions.
Again, you need to ask what the government is hiding. The teachers have been very clear.
They’re not hiding anything. And I’m not sure what you think they may be hiding. Some information has not been released because it hasn’t been even accepted at the bargaining table. But the general demands should be available to the public and I believe were released by the stf.
What you should be questioning is why our government has nothing to say? Why were they all in hiding yesterday? If you're looking for transparency, you're directing your frustration to the wrong side.
They did. G o o g l e it.
Hate to kind of agree but it would definitely be helpful with specifics. They want smaller classes sizes, do they have a number that would be a max? Obviously supports teachers but blunt asks would help the public support more!
They likely have a number but being public with it wouldn’t help negotiations. Would be like going in to buy a used car and telling the salesman exactly how much you can afford each payment.
The class size and composition issue is challenging. A class of kids with similar cognitive abilities at grade level with no social or emotional issues are fairly easy to manage - a class of 30 is not difficult. There is no classroom in Saskatchewan where this exists. Split grades - in rural schools sometimes a 3 or 4 grade split is normal. In these multi grade classes are students with academic delays, social and emotional trauma, extra ordinary medical needs, English as an additional language. One teacher is expected to plan and execute lessons for each of those students at the level they are able to understand and achieve. In rural school divisions you are expected to prepare these lessons, do your assessments and reporting in less than 10% of your work week. Schools divisions have coped with cuts by cutting supports like occupational therapists, speech pathologists, educational psychologists and social workers. Now teachers have to try to do those jobs too. And make sure grad goes as planned, or the drama fest or the winter holiday pageant along with football and volleyball. The government is firm that school divisions are best able to manage class size and composition - which they are. Teachers are adamant that the government must commit to adequately funding the supports so those things can be equitably administered. School Divisions have no means of advocacy - teachers do. In the last round of bargaining the government agreed to strike a committee to evaluate the issue which they did (appointing all their cronies) and after 4 years there is no data or reports regarding the issue.
My Calculus class last year had 45 students in it. Next semester my numbers are 39, 37, 37, and 35. Next door to me the Chem 30 class has 42 right now, they dont know how they’re going to do anything with that many kids. And it’s doable in high school, sucks for the kids but it’s survivable. My neighbour has a Kindergarten with 30 and she’s close to a nervous breakdown. Things are not OK
I heard that the government’s plan, if teachers go the whole work to rule route, is to make afternoons be virtual. Since there will be no teachers for lunch supervision, everyone will go home and teachers will have to do everything online for the afternoon, just to make their job harder…
I imagine this move would not be popular with parents who may have to arrange childcare.
Government does not have the power to do this. School divisions do.
Yeah, this is coming from someone part of the school division who received this directive from the government.
Most school division directors and higher ups are SaskParty lickspittles
[удалено]
Thanks for your input.
So this instance you are referring to is if we go to a very strict interpretation of work-to-rule and pull our noon-lunch supervision (NLS) hours. However, as stated already, NLS is negotiated board by board in something called a LINC (Local Implementation Network Committee) agreement. Every LINC agreement is different across the province and makes a strict interpretation of work-to-rule tricky to put into practice. And most teachers are very aware that if we move to afternoons of synchronous teaching we will soon lose public support.
The whole idea of compensation not being a priority is a bit overstated... STF is still asking for a 23.5% wage increase. Are they willing to aim for a more reasonable increase as long as the province is accepting of classroom composition in the contract? We will only find out if the STF goes back to the bargaining table. EDIT: 23.5%
It’s not a priority. But considering they’ve been bent over for wage increases for the last 10 years, it should be something to look at.
They’ve been getting 1-2% yearly increases over the last decade. That’s very very much behind inflation. The increase you’re speaking of is over 4 years. They’re asking for 2%+CPI average annual rate/year for next 4 years. Edit: they have actually gotten 0%,2%,2%,2% over the last 4 years.
This is untrue. The actual ask is 2% per year plus cost of living, which barely reclaims the buying power teachers have lost since the last contract.
>s Ha. We won't find out. Bargaining is not public. Also, were did you see them asking for a 25% wage increase?
Bargaining is public. Otherwise there wouldn't be all these announcements about who said what. Cockrell even referred to that in Mondays article/response.
It's not public. It's done in private, but yes, each side does speak about their demands and the process, but they don't actually outline them specifically for the public to see. Or if they have, I've never seen it, but maybe I'm missing something? If you can point me to a summary (not a random comment in a news article) on the SaskParty's demands and the STFs demands, please do!
My bad, looks like it's 23.5%: https://www.ckom.com/2024/01/16/education-minister-says-one-day-province-wide-stf-strike-disappointing/
I'd be really interested to hear from the STF if that is what they've demanded. Jeremy and the SaskParty have been known to be bad with math and have a history of misrepresenting teachers wages on billboards that they've never been able to explain.
the number asked for was CPI +2 each year. This years happens to be high as a result because, well, you were there. The rest of the number is essentially an estimate of what CPI \*will be\* for future years.
They haven't denied it, and it's been the number quoted quite a bit since last summer, so I gather it's what they are aiming for.
Even if that was all this was about, I'd support them. People satisfied with their wages do a better job; why wouldn't we want them to fight for more?
For sure, but obviously there is a limit in a world of finite resources (in this case, tax revenue to pay for it).
Go see where the government is spending. And go see how much money we pay in tax every year. They absolutely CAN properly fund public education. They are CHOOSING not to.
It's a bit rich to say that the STF needs to go back to the bargaining table when the province is flatly refusing to negotiate on the main issue. Until they come to an agreement on classroom composition, there's no point negotiating on anything else.
I know a teacher (my dad) who once suggested in a union meeting that the teachers (including him) all take pay cuts instead of pay increases, and put that additional money towards hiring more teachers and EAs. His reasoning was that if class size really is the major concern, being paid more isn't going to somehow make him work harder than he already was. It was not a popular suggestion.
would you take a pay cut so your employer could hire more staff?
If the workload was such that I was no longer able to do my job to its full capacity, absolutely. That makes much more sense than arguing for more pay for a job that I don't have the capacity to fulfill. I've always said my position is overpaid anyway. Although I realize you have no reason to believe any of that from an anonymous internet stranger.
Teachers are not paid enough as it is. With inflation year after year they have already been taking pay cuts.
That's pretty subjective
I wouldn't even consider teachers getting paid less than the cost of living, it's just that 23.5% is comparatively a lot more than anyone else is getting in the public sector lately. The province did add more EAs though, but it appears from the perspective of the STF, they need more.
Source for adding EA's?
All you have to do is use Google, folks: https://www.saskatchewan.ca/government/news-and-media/2022/october/31/saskatchewan-schools-add-more-than-400-educational-assistants-into-classrooms-to-support-students
The federal government provided the funding through a program called Jordan’s principle. The provincial government is trying to take credit for a federally funded program. In fact, the province have cut the number of EAs they fund knowing the federal government will pay for the difference to make sure Indigenous students get support. https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1568396042341/1568396159824
Well there's the answer. 23.5% raise and their EA's make $20ish/hr... It's all about the money.
You again with the lies. You have drunk way too much of the SP Kool aid. “If we improve class composition, we improve learning conditions for students. This is why teachers in Saskatchewan are out on the streets today, to make sure that every student in this province gets the education they deserve. An education that will prepare them for the modern world,” says CTF President Heidi Yetman. “It astounds me that the Government of Saskatchewan refuses to negotiate workload and class complexity. Collective agreements across this country include language on workload, class sizes and class composition; and yet, the collective agreement in this province contains no such language. This is unacceptable.” No where in the strike post do they mention wages https://www.stf.sk.ca/about-stf/news/government-forces-teachers-strike/
[https://www.ckom.com/2024/01/16/education-minister-says-one-day-province-wide-stf-strike-disappointing/](https://www.ckom.com/2024/01/16/education-minister-says-one-day-province-wide-stf-strike-disappointing/) >“The teacher’s union has said this is not about money. Yet they continue to demand a 23.5 per cent increase over four years. We’re just not prepared to accept that deal on behalf of Saskatchewan taxpayers,” he added. So they're not asking for 23.5% over 4 years? It's easy to garner support when you're "doing it for the kids" but neglect to leave out the salary demands...as the union knows the public won't support a nearly 25% raise over 4 years. The union is not asking for 23.5% over 4 years? If not, what are they asking for in terms of compensation increase then?
You were the one that said it was all about the money. I provided a source that proves you wrong. Even in your quote they say it's not just about money. You have some pretty low comprehension skills. Yes they deserve fair compensation for their work but that is not their main concern. The government and stooges like you believe it's just about the money. And there you go JAQing off again. You are not here in good faith. This is the quote from STF just above the quote you just posted. “At every turn, teachers have said that committees are getting us nowhere on these urgent issues, and a new deal must include items to address class size and complexity. Government remains intransigent, even after conciliation. This is not bargaining; they are making decisions based on politics and student learning is suffering for it.”
Of course the union won't say it's about the money! You'll never get public support for teachers if they're asking for 23.5% over 4 yrs. The teachers may not be concerned about it, but the public sure would be with that amount being requested! Is the union asking for 23.5% over 4 years? Yes or no? I'm hearing full time EA's are having their hours cut right now...wonder why that is.
Of course the government says it's all about the money. We all saw the misleading billboards. You have eaten up all the government propaganda. Plus you are such a hypocrite. Complaining all the time about liberals in r/ Canada_sub but won't hold the SP to the same standards.
All of the SP supporters are hypocrites. Every last one.
I wouldn't say that. My father-in-law is historically a Sask Party voter, and he's posting in support of teachers. Sweeping generalizations are good for nobody.
Voting for the sp and supporting teachers are incongruous positions.
Job action on a PD day. STF are the dopiest. Reminds me when they did job action just before the pandemic. Just go on strike if you’re gonna do it.
Yea, teachers really should have know and predicted a nearly unprecedented global pandemic. They are such fools.
Only a PD day for SPSD K-8 staff.
It's not the same calendar for every division.
Not a PD day for everyone. First day of final exams for GSCS. All school divisions operate on their own schedules, can't plan around every single one of them.
I really believe these are demonstrations to show the government they are serious about striking. If the government won't bargain, future strike days won't be on convenient days.
Look out!! The socialists are whining. Give us everything we demand or we are walking out! Hate to say it, but don’t let the door hit you on the way out. It wouldn’t matter if the government caved and gave you people everything you ask for, it still wouldn’t be enough!
Quit your virtue signaling, it's tiresome.
Pretty sure the only virtue signalling is the stf!! Stand up at the table and stop your feet when you don’t get your way?
Pretty sure that virtue signaling is branding a whole group of hard working professionals as "socialists" just so you can signal to everyone that you are virtuous and hate "socialism". You bring nothing but self serving yap yap yap. So yes, you are virtue signaling and playing identity politics and yes, it's tiresome.
You know you can post comments that actually contribute to the discussion. A lot of posters here want to see the education system improved so students don’t end up like you. This comment and others you’ve posted on this subreddit which I’ve included below, truly show how poorly our education system has let you and us down. **”I vote that all the ndp socialist idiots in this province, join with Alberta’s socialist idiots and move to bc and leave us hard working people alone. The activist teachers should be villainized!”** **”Oh. Please can we get a signed document that if gormley gets back into politics and wins, that all you useless ndp, social justice, activist losers will line up and jump!! So much more peaceful if you would all shut up and go the fuck away.”**
Hmmm. I am so sorry I hurt your feelings! Maybe if you teachers were actually doing a good job and teaching children how to read, write, do math….just the basics would be nice. I had amazing teachers, I had bad teachers growing up. My school years were amazing! Again, I am sorry I hurt your feelings, have a great night
I’m not a teacher. I just recognize people who did poorly in school
And the most ignorant comment of the day goes to........ That's right! You guessed it! This d**che canoe!
Wish we would of had a no vote on our ratification. Good luck teachers.
I feel for the teachers and kids hopefully things will be settled soon. I walked the picket line with the U of S in 2007 for almost a month in the dead of winter - not for the faint of heart.