Why Van Isle?

Nothing is more demoralizing to a staff or a worse lesson for young people than seeing a clearly better teacher laid off due to how old they are.

A huge and non political issue is how many former parental and societal responsibilities have been dumped on the school system over the past twenty years.

Investor

If you want to demoralizing just see the new asskissing kid sweet-talk the boss and when it comes to downsizing time the fella with years of experience, but not a brownnoser, gets the boot. Saw that scenerio many times.

Teacher seniority structure

I have to agree with Van Isle regarding lay-off by seniority. I worked in a business where seniority ruled where and when you could work, take vacation etc. It's hard on junior employees, but you know coming in exactly how it all works. No room for favouritism. Having said that, the only word to describe the system for teachers in BC is bizarre !

Generally worldwide teachers are unionized, but I know of nowhere else that this annual mass potential lay-off occurs. Most union contracts specify that people whose positions are cut can only 'bump' the most junior person in the system. This prevents any cascade effect. Apart from this there are myriad ways to structure the system and minimize the uncertainty. Although Nick Smith doesn't blame anybody directly it appears to me that he feels Schools Boards or 'The Government' are to blame. Sorry, but the Teacher's Union should share responsibility. Is it possible that the Union feels it benefits from it's members' feelings of uncertainty ? Support the Union or you'll be in trouble ?

Anyway apparently one district and one union chapter are trying to
make things better. In School District 68 (Nanaimo) both sides are working on changing the system and they are to be commended for even trying. Now if they could just get rid of the stupid idea of only 10 paychecks a year, instead of 12.

Teachers have to be part of the solution

Like it or not, the Campbell Government seeks to ruin public education so middle class families will leave and go the private route. So they will encourage settlements and then not fund them, or not crack down on all the crazy grievances brought forward.
Ironically the BCTF is playing into the Liberals hands. Look when the BCTF and Teacher locals always talk like meeting teachers needs always results in better education, people start turning them off. I am in a union, and don't pretend that my extra day off benefits our customers. When teachers aren't fired for poor performance, etc. etc - the Liberals are just licking their chops.
Hey most teachers are great, but the bad ones never leave.
The comment about the School Board people not fitting layoffs into a spreadsheet - uh, the concept of seniority is what unions are based on! But let's hope SD 68 and the local union can figure something out.

Not much disagreement here...

Nick, as usual you've written an excellent article, and on such an important topic of which many people don't have an inside understanding... However, as your neighbour in our small district as well as chair of the board, I must point out the obvious that this "needless shuffling" is clearly not to the benefit of the board/management.

The post and fill system is negotiated between bargaining teams for the board and your teachers' union. You correctly summarize the criteria for bumping: qualifications and seniority... We emphasize the qualifications side, and the union emphasizes the seniority side. I acknowledge that sometimes the qualifications can be controversial, too, but qualifications issues typically only come up because bumping due to seniority has happened FIRST.

Clearly in the examples you describe, district administration has already indicated its preference for where the teachers should be placed by the original staffing plans (meaning BEFORE they were bumped). But then the teachers who were placed in positions by their principals were bumped by other teachers with more seniority. Having our principals' staffing plans juggled is definitely not a result of the board's intent or priorities.

We do, however, need to honour our process that was bargained in good faith with your union. It may not be exactly what the board wants, nor exactly what the majority of the union membership wants (which might actually be even MORE bumping, but I'd be happy and relieved to be corrected), but it was faithfully bargained between the two parties…

Secondly, as a couple of other comments have pointed out, what is a better alternative to seniority, as a means for deciding who is going to get work in the next year? I would certainly be very happy to see less bumping, so our teachers with 10, 12, 15 years of experience should not have to worry every year... But on the other side of it, if they have seniority and want a fulltime position at a different school, how else can they pursue this?

Secondly and more seriously, it'd be wonderful to have "merit" be a larger determinant as someone mentions, but whose idea of merit? Does the board get to rate the teachers? Principals? The union? Personal popularity? These are perilous paths... and I can't imagine many teachers would want to entertain it.

Alternative suggestions are welcome. And I'm sure you have some. But in order to accomplish any change—which again, I would love to see—you will need to get your local union onside far more than you will need to convince the board, our administrators, or the public. The impression has certainly been presented to me over the last two years that the majority of your membership favours the strong bumping rights associated with seniority... If this "collective" opinion is shifting, I definitely look forward to working at the bargaining table to change the process for next year.

Silas White
Board Chair, Sunshine Coast

All Things Need to Be Considered...

which they are not - neither in the article or in the comments. First of all, not all districts have this "bumping system". Lay offs are done on a seniority basis, yes, but according to projected classes for the next year, and surpluses are done according to needs in schools. In my district last year, ALL of the laid off teachers found jobs after the district was "reorganized".

I would ask nolanrh how merit-based lay offs would work. Remember that different personalities are appealing to different students; while one student may not be inspired by one, another student is. And, why would people out there assume that it is the youngest, newest teachers who are MOST appealing. In fact, in one school I worked at, it was a man close to retirement who stood up at an assembly to pass out one of the awards, and the students went wild. His lessons were... traditional, and included a lot of seatwork, which people tend to see as boring (I was doing experiential, and I thought 'fun' learning). Students not only liked him, they LOVED him. He didn't do extra clubs or teams, but he did take kids up to the mountains skiing a few times a year. He left at 3:30pm almost every day in his last few years because he was able to coast on the lessons he had built up. But, on the surface, the people in these postings would mostly see him as NOT AS GOOD as a younger teacher.

I ask all of you how is it actually possible to compare? Which actions would you reward? Kid's clubs, administrative extras, field trips, those whose students got good marks, those who were never late, or stayed until 6pm?

I knew and know a few teachers who were very active DOING STUFF, committees and planning staff development and helping administrators, THEY were busy. But were they good teachers? Many of them were trying to get hired as Vice Principals, so they had to put as much on their resume as possible.

Student-teacher relationship

Nicely written. I have a lot of experience with this kind of thing in the private school industry, and sad to hear it is happening in the public system as well. The people who make the decisions to shuffle teachers around will never get what goes on in the classroom; the bonds that form and the importance of those connections. Especially for kids in alternative programs.

From The Beginning

I was "fortunate" to be involved in negotiations on the management side for the first contract following the vote by teachers to become a union. I recognized and said at the table that the contract language proposed by the union was not only cumbersome and very unwieldly but also unfair to both BCTF members and students. This argument was to no avail in our school district and all others. Seniority was the aim and seniority teachers achieved. The chickens have now come home to roost.

no heroes here

Seniority-based lay-offs are the union's strategy for serving its members' interests. It's meant to protect teachers from the capricious whims of nasty administrators but it's ultimately stupid because enthusiastic,energetic and progressive get hung out to dry- everyone with less than 5 years experience gets laid off and added to the list
of existing Teachers-on-Call is is lucky to work one day a week. Good luck paying that mortgage.

The government, the school boards, the union, a plague on all their houses.

Merit

How is that this forum has so much trouble understanding merit? How did the very teachers we are discussing earn their teaching degrees? Or the respect of their peers, students, community etc.

Mr. School Board chair - judgment.

If not for their ability to assess, consider and ultimately summarize the many variables or attributes that go into teaching..what else is a principle for?

The layoffs/firing would..and should only be a rarely used heavy hand. But without this authority, day to day leadership is much more difficult.

Merit

Who makes the decision on which teachers are good and which aren't?

Merit systems are misnamed, they're for brown-nosers.

One has only to look at other industries to see how merit systems fail us all. Brown-nosers rise and hard-working regular joes that like seeing their kids at supper instead of putting in unpaid overtime stay mired on the bottom rungs.

Re: Merit

Assuming you mean "principal," I agree, and this indeed is part of our process. The principals of every school place their staffs for the next year, based on variables, attributes, etc. The rest, as described in Nick's article, is more complicated. "Layoffs/firing" do not tend to happen when a "heavy hand" is needed to address some kind of incompetence or misconduct, but rather occur because of less funding to keep as many teaching positions, often due to declining enrollment.

Therefore, the process for deciding who ultimately loses work becomes a negotiation between the board and union. The provincial collective agreement for the BCTF is strong. As for your last sentence, you're absolutely correct, and also correct in pointing out that this reality is particularly challenging for school principals.

Welcome to the regime

This is a good read, if for the wrong reasons.
I find the process disgusting but true to the Campbell regime. Did you think fleeing to the Sunshine Coast would exclude you from all the suffering in B.C. that preceded this complaint?

A constant threat and shuffle is unstable enough to degrade what little good there is left for kids in the BC public school system. If you thought about the big picture a bit harder, you might get it. But nimby is as good as it gets, apparently. Complain away; the government counts on nothing else from teachers. You only strike for money, right?

Similar situation in our Health Care system

My spouse works for a Health Authority in BC. In her department, there are two people who retrained from housekeeping into a technical field. They routinely trump other more qualified and motivated employees for new positions. They displace someone, try them out for 6 weeks and decide they don't like them. All hell breaks loose.

I dread those nights when the bump happens and I get to hear about it. My spouse is highly motivated, has a degree, is very intelligent and committed to her job, but does not really have a job or any benefits. She is a casual. They get a bunch of casuals to fill what should be several full-time jobs, pay them no benefits and expect them to appear at work at a moments notice.

Education and Health Care workers face similar issues. They do important work but are ruled by seniority and collective agreements which do not reward strong performers. They reward the number of years your butt has been in a chair.

Until that changes, don't expect any miracles.

jross

And of course you prefer a system where the manager's cousin or girlfriend gets promoted over the person that's worked hard for 20 years.

The Day Teachers Dread

In 1983 there was a recession in BC and I was teaching in Kamloops. During this Social Credit era there were 400 layoffs in the School District; the first ever seen of that number in any District in BC. The job market tanked and the interest rate was 13 % on mortgages. There was no such thing as a 2% line of credit, or short term loan.

There was no such thing as a seniority list nor was there a protocol for layoffs.
Principals marked certain teachers as "protected" based on some vague criteria which differed from school to school. In other words, their friends were protected but anyone else was fair game.

I was laid off twice, in 1983 and 1984...
I had to move to get a job. I went to the Sunshine Coast where, ironically, no teacher had been laid off.

Many Districts had layoffs but none had as many as Kamloops.
When I moaned about how difficult it was to get another job and move for the 5th time, a colleague said "How else but by Seniority can you lay anyone off?" Cruel... but reality bites.

umm, try the private sector

Declining birth rate and lower enrollment figures means less schools. Go by credible stats and not those provided by the BCTF. Things are tough in many areas of society so hearing teachers piss and moan over and over makes me ill.

Declining birth rate

Interesting that according to the Liberals the declining birth rate only happens to some schools and not others.

And of course, its permanent. No chance of the birth rate increasing and studies saying we'll need those schools again are somehow biased.

it's so very, very wrong.

I have spent the last two weeks being ground down by this system. My family has suffered, my friends have suffered, and my community has suffered

I am a veteran of the private system. I have worked contract to contract in a "merit" based system (ie. based on student/employer evaluations every 2 months) and never have I experienced the stress and anger that our post and fill process has wrought, year after year.

I support my union, though I am starting to wonder why. I am a labour historian, and I believe in the principles of organized labour. I am not even ideologically opposed to the concept of seniority, though I have almost none.

What I am mainly opposed to is the way this process is used and exploited by members to take their pick of jobs in the district before anything gets posted. Less senior members get used like pawns in this game. It's terrible when someone of 15 years experience gets “surplussed”. They should have the first pick of the new postings.

You described it as a cascade, though a tsunami would be more like it, because the process goes on and on as grievances get lodged, and the fighting gets really bitter. Jobs get offered, then taken away, and then offered back, and maybe you'll get transferred back to your old position anyways, or not.

The uncertainty and fear has driven a painful spike between many in our small community, where we have to take jobs from our kids' friends' parents, and then see them in the supermarket and pretend like it wasn't anybody's fault. It's just the system. Nothing personal.

It seems like the comments have focused on merit vs. seniority, or “suck-it-up” stories of even worse systems. How about using a bit of logic and thought? This is OUR system. We need to fix it.

Every teacher knows who the bad apples are

Though I do not disagree that the Campbell government is strangling the school system and setting up a process of privatization, I believe the BCTF needs to take some of the responsibility when it comes to issues like the one discussed in the one Nick Smith discusses.
I myself and one of these low seniority teachers who could not find any meaningful work in BC for two and half years. I was newly certified as a professional teacher with over 15 years working with children and youth in everything from youth at risk, to daycares to Outdoor adventure education. None of this experience is seen as beneficial in the current BC school system. So I moved myself and my family into the international school system where I was hired on my merits and experience as an educator. Not on my seniority in a system.
We all know who the good teachers are: they are lifelong learners, collaborators, and constantly seeking out professional development. They are not afraid to open up there classroom to an administrator, or their peers. Students respect and remember them, but they are not necessarily the most popular. Teachers in a school also know who the slackers are. The ones who sit at the back of staff meetings and snicker while the VP introduces new research the school would like to implement. Those who refuse to participate in school wide initiatives because it's not in their best interest, and hide behind their "teacher autonomy". I could go on, however my point is easy to find out who the teachers worthy of a position in a classroom are. My favorite quote from a VP, "Would you go to a surgeon who didn't have time to be up on the latest surgical techniques and research? Absolutely not. So why would we send our children to be taught by teachers who don't have time to be up on the latest professional development?"
Seniority does nothing but create a culture of entitlement, and discourages innovations and growth. Considering the BCTF rhetoric I'm familiar with, the irony is amusing.