The best way to reduce class size is to give competent parents substantial tax breaks and other support so they can both afford to work part-time and spend more time at home helping their own children learn. I emphasize the competent part. If both parents earned mostly D's when they were students, then their kids would be better off getting a classroom education.

A study done in the UK about 5 years ago found that children who receive a lot of close one-to-one eye contact from their parents get a significant and permanent boost in intelligence. Even with an unaffordable 10:1 student-teacher ratio, that can't happen in a classroom environment unless we use genetic engineering to mix spider genes with human genes and create teachers with 10 independent pairs of eyes. For this reason alone, so called "enriched" daycare centres are a scam. After stripping the nutrients out of natural grains, junkfood manufacturers replace some of the nutrients with chemicals. They try to pass-off the resulting crud as "enriched." Enriched daycare is the same type of scam.

Children with incompetent parents can benefit from one-to-one classroom help from older students who have a very strong grasp of the subject matter. Several years ago, a UVic study found that both groups of students benefit from this approach. The struggling younger students get the help they need. Top-of-the-class older students benefit through increased retention of knowledge when they explain to others the underlying concepts they have recently learned themselves. Universities employ senior students as Teaching Assistants. It makes even more sense to do this in grade school where the material is much simpler.

In the UVic study, the older students didn't have teaching certificates. But they still were able to significantly improve outcomes for struggling younger students. The reality is that a highly-motivated older student with an IQ of 145 and no teaching certificate will likely have a stronger grasp of the subject matter than a unionized teacher with an IQ of 90, a teaching certificate, and a crack pipe in his tweed jacket pocket.

My parents helped me learn to read when I was less than 2 years old. They decided to let the public education system teach my younger brother to read. By the time he was about 9 years old, he still couldn't read. So our parents created a simple card game using chunks of cardboard with letters of the alphabet written on them. I pitched-in to help. After several months of playing the game, my brother was reading just fine. Within half a year, according to the school's own tests, he was reading at a level several years ahead of his own grade. There was never any problem with his intelligence. The school's tests indicated that his IQ was in the 130s.

A couple of years later, the teacher who failed to teach my younger brother to read was assigned to teach higher grades. She became my English teacher. I hated being in her class. She forced us to spend a lot of time analyzing poems that were written by someone under the influence of LSD. The poems were just a bunch of meaningless, scrambled garble. But the teacher insisted that they contained brilliant insights. If teachers want to drop acid on Friday nights on their own time, I don't care. But praising and promoting LSD in a grade 6 English class was totally out of line.

Class is in, teachers are too busy to reply to this drivel. Tell someone who cares.

Rafe, visit the classrooms, both private school and public. I eagerly await your report after visiting both.

In private schools, do smaller classes, healthy budgets and a streamed clientelle make a difference? Find out, Rafe. This one's a no brainer.

And read "How Big Money Covered the Teachers' Dispute."

rafe, you are waffling on your previous stand.

shortly after moving to bc, i went to a high school where most students shared a locker with 2 others.

each locker was designed to be too small for one student.

my elementary aged brother had to go to school on the afternoon shift.

was this when you were a socred minister?

are you looking for work from the gordon campbell socreds? (thst is who they really are)

the education system is a mess, and the only ones who can fix it are politicians.

they will not do so, until they are forced to, by the electors.

vince ready's recommendations are weak weak weak. (like your column this week).

as long as bean counters like gorddumb are in control, our education system will never be close to what it should be.

education shoud be funded as needed.
bean counters should just count beans, and offer suggeations.

they should never be in control of how and where the beans are distributed.

please excuse spelling errors.

Yah, Rafe, your entrepeneurial specter will always cloud your vision to the ditch side of the right lane of life. Mackenzie King and R.B. Bennett both refused the obvious of a Depression actually being in progress; you refuse the reality of CLASS WARFARE in it's closing rounds. Gordo resumed firing with his imposed contract ammunition. With both sides firmly entrenched in long held positions, Ready's shuttle diplomacy will define whether "publc education" becomes "the" casualty. It's clearly wounded now, and further bludgeoning by the Lieberals may end it all.
Is it possible that the ELITE of the New World have come to the conclusion that they no longer need a publically educated consumer class to milk drier? The baubles the ELITE'S are consuming now are cherry picked from around the world. What part of the world will they choose to be their safe haven? CANADA? Brrr, I think not.
Hey, Rafe, protect your environment, it's yours to lose.

Yes this struggle has been long, difficult and without results for either side.

Both sides have used wrong-headded methods.
Both sides have ignored what is best for their separate constituents, the indvidual teacher for the union side, and parents on the government side; children have lost out from actions of both sides.

As I believe both sides are WRONG, both sides MUST BE REMOVED from the situation.

As Rafe has promoted before, this may be by some sort of binding arbitration. However this has been ignored by the Government in the past, beacuse they can. The voting public has permitted Government this power. Thus there can be no sort of mechanism like this.

I propose something more radical.

Stop the system for 4 months (Sept-Dec), during that time the 'Closed shop' of the public-funded classroom is re-designed to become an 'open-shop' where ANYONE may teach. If they have no credentials, they are paid less or perform a lower function (such as teaching aids).

Permit the Parents and Children to choose (through some sort of directed 'voucher' system or other means of audit and control) which classroom, school, district etc that they - THE PARENTS AND CHILDREN choose to be part of and learn from.

The EDUCATION system is what is broken, not the childrens' ability to learn, nor any single teachers' ability to teach.

Even if some other means can be devise to make this learning operation work, then let us use our ability to bring it into being and STOP using OLD methods of thinking.

Let us allow merit to walk freely.

Oh no! Rafe is turning Good on us.

The fact is that the taxpayer is putting more money into education than it has ever! The problem is that insufficent money is getting to the classroom level.

Could it be that we have created too much micro-management of the education system?

Administration at the School District levels and at the Ministry level needs to be reduced. The whole question of School District roles need to be assessed. Why do we need so many School Districts?

There is absolutely no excuse for lack of desks and text books or other supplies.

There needs to be a hard look at where the education dollars are really spent and reallocate same to the 'must haves', 'should haves', and if anything is left over, to the 'could haves'.

Perhaps we are spending money on questionable programs. So we need to look at all the education programs to test same for validity.

For sure the 'special needs' kids are a challenge, and I think this program needs a serious review. Certainly the teacher administration in support of these kids is overwhelming. There has to be a better way.

Cycling Commuter,

I agree whole-heartedly that loving, intelligent parents can be more meaningful than a school system. Teachers know this.

During the strike, my wife and I were able to home-school our son, a 5 year old boy in Kindergarten. It was quite the luxury for him. He does not have any cognitive problems -as far as we can tell - but he moves at a slower pace than the others, and the kitchen table was a great place for him to be, as he worked at a pace that suited his needs.

But I can assure you that the benefit of this brief bout of home-schooling is no discredit to his regular teacher, because....

His teacher is his mom.

I am truly sorry that your brother (and later, you) got stuck with a lousy teacher.

I had a lousy meal in a restaurant once. I once had a poor mechanic "fix" my car.

But most of my restaurant experiences and car repairs have gone well.

And I had awesome teachers growing up.

And if I can abandon all modesty for a moment, I suspect my high school students feel much the same way about me and most of my colleagues.

(Today, my kiddies have a TOC, as I'm battling a nasty flu bug. Most of our TOC's are great, too.)

If you have the time, Cycler, please check out what's really happening in the schools these days.

That hippie English teacher retired a long time ago, and the guy with the crack pipe... well, let's just say I appreciate the hyperbole.

Did your English teacher teach you that?

Take care.

Not one of your finer pieces, Rafe. It's fortunate indeed that the wild salmon haven't unionized yet. Clearly they'd lose their biggest advocate if they were ever to take that foolish step.

SDGreen, how many times must we endure your facile arguments "...but we're pouring more money than ever into education!"

We're also pouring more money than ever into home decor, dental care, highways, housing, garbage collection, petrol, Sweedish massages, swimsuit fashions, yoga and just about everything else.

You & Ron & CanWest & the Fraser Institute & your BC Liberal friends want to spend less on education so that you'll have more of your tax dollars to spend on all the above.

OK, fine, we all get it! Now you can stop pretending that you care about our children's education because no one here is stupid enough not to see right through you.

Rafe are you knocking on canwests door?

Yes Rafe, the teachers have got into a few spats with governments in BC.

So have all unions and that's really what it's all about.

Your former Socred government loved teachers but hated unions.

Gordon Campbell's Liberals love some teachers( especially those who will cross a picket line), but hate unions and has a special hate on for the BCTF.

One of the primary reasons?

Simple!

The majority in a group of professionals have recognized the government really doesn't care about public education except that it's a financial drag on their friends.

They have crossed to 'the dark side" in neocon think, a scary thing, because other "professionals" may soon catch on they have more in common with teachers than with the Howe St. manipulators who finance and control Campbell's Liberals.

Rafe and most media commentators gloss the fact obvious to most mere citizens — that this game was played entirely with the Liberal government's ball.

And Gordo swinging the bat.

Rafe, you've been in a few jams where you could have used a union. Surely you've figured out that sometimes the boss is a bully, plain and simple. The teachers didn't gain any ground economically, but they didn't lose any ground in hanging on to their dignity. Can you relate?

You and your former colleague "reminisced about the day virtually all the teachers in the land came to Victoria, clogged traffic (great example for the kids) and marched upon the Parliament Buildings."

Well, yes, it IS a great example for our kids. Standing up to a bully is a good thing B.C. teachers just taught our kids — again.

Rafe,For discussion purposes your theory has an interesting point about teachers not wanting to be grouped in with the lunch bucket crowd.
My opinion is; Yes there are still remanents who are still snobs, but not the teachers,I observed at the BIG rally.
Your other point about being proud poor proffesionals, would resonate with those who do not want teachers to be paid commensurate with their skills and classroom problems.
I'll let the teachers answer that one.

Allan -- you make a good point. I think about nurses and doctors--who've had their own nasty spats with the BC Liberals. University educators and teachers' unions across Canada stood firmly behind the BCTF, which is hardly out there on the fringe as you suggest. Nor are any of the frontline teachers that I meet out of step with their leaders. Then we have the lawyers and prosecutors--we've just learned that the BC Liberals did the exact same thing to crown prosecutors as to teachers.

Ooops, misleading pronoun use...

"University educators and teachers' unions across Canada stood firmly behind the BCTF, which is hardly out there on the fringe as you (Rafe--not Allan) suggest(s).

Rafe,
Your column this week is crap. You've got dates wrong for starters, plus all sorts of other factual errors.
But down to the nitty-gritty--if Campbell really believed in free enterprise he would allow free collective bargaining for teachers, health care workers, etc., etc. The recent exercise was more about Gordo trying to show the world who's boss than settling a management-labour dispute. I'm not holding my breath on this one either, as the present bunch of tree-hugging, granola eating, whale kissing NDPers are just as obnoxious and afraid of embracing free collective bargaining--just look at their record while in office. Bad cess on both their houses. Hooray for the teachers!

Once again, usurious union ececutives like Jinny Simms 'create' a crisis then foist the blame onto teachers in the classroom and the sizes of them, teachers who must be less than brilliant taking orders from someone who tells them to break the law, someone who isn't even their boss, just another special intereat group executive looking to justify their expensive existance. Amassing $15 million to 'fight' the government would have been better spent training their members on the finer points of being of good behavior and abiding by the law. Jinny Simms should resign for setting back the cause of education in B.C. by a decade.

Gee Rafe, an article about that phony parent's association might be nice. And the taxpayer funding they receive, plus a much larger per diem rate than the leader appears to warrant. (I've heard this, would love to get the facts)

Why are my taxes going to a 'parents' group for anything other than coffee and photocopying costs? Especially a partisan one.

You know a militant teacher's union would chain themselves to MS Bond's office and set fire to something. lol

Let's get real.

And, what was it? 2 billion in tax cuts for corporations and 140 million for educating our children? Seems like there is a wealth of topics to write about that are more relevant.

Rafe are you knocking on canwests door?

Willy, that was my reaction, too. Rafe's article today isn't so much re-visiting the BCTF strike, as he's trying to drum up a new job. It's unseemly that he'd do so by seeming to toss his own principles overboard. Or is this a normal Socred/Reform/BCLiberal habit?

Doesn't Rafe have a nice Cabinet Minister's pension to go home to, or something? Why this?

Markalanwhittle: I am fairly new to this site, but your comment is the most ignorant one I have ever come across.Are you capable of analytical thinking? You obviously have no understanding of how the BCTF or other unions work. Perhaps you really don't have much understanding about how anything works.
Sorry to be critical, but your ignorance must be acknowledged.

Rafe clearly does not understand nearly as much as he thinks he does. His bland and overconfident conclusions about the composition, goals, attitudes of teachers and their union demonstrate the kind of attitude that got the government into this mess in the first place. Such generalizations as the idea that if you disagree with much government policy you are left wing, that a union is automatically controlled by those with a leftward political agenda, that many teachers do not want to be in a union (less than 5% when we were given our options in 1989), etc., are the cocky maunderings of a journalist who believes that if he has an opinion on something it must be a capital T truth that others are bound to believe if only exposed to his infallible rhetorical flourish. Try again next time, Rafe.

Of course the BCTF has disputed with all governments; that's their job! It doesn't necessarily mean that anything is wrong with the system, but if that air of contention dissipates, one side or the other becomes complacent and that's when things go wrong. Disputes, in this context, are healthy. But no government in BC history has forced a two week, province-wide teacher's strike. Except for this one, I mean.

As for the teacher's strike accomplishing nothing, the government just got a serious lesson in the consequences of pushing public sector unions around. Of course it took every teacher in the province to teach it. The real benefit of this strike will be seen when the next public sector contract comes up for negotiations. That's CUPE, isn't it? And in the next few months, I believe. We'll see how much Gordo has learned.

Rafe, how do I de-resister from your blog?

The Tyee is supposed to be a serious site. That kind of effort must be noted by the publisher. Contrary opinion sure, but lets get serious here. Cowboy Jon Ferry or Wee Mikey Smythe could stew-up better tripe than that.

I'm sorry man, but you deserve to take it on the chin for this cods-wallop.

I just got back from a week in Alberta. After a close-up look at the mess in Brooks, I have never felt more strongly about Unions standing up to the strong arm tatics of Gordon Campbull. The one thing the BCTF and supporting Unions showed him is that we are still a long way from becoming Alberta II, (dispite his best efforts) Keep up the fight, round 2 is coming this spring.
Rafe, just when I was beginning to believe you had seen the light you let us down with this crap... better luck next time.

markalanwhittle opines:

"usurious union ececutives"; what the hell does THAT mean?

In case you weren't paying attention at the back of the class, the teachers were more than willing to go out WITHOUT any leadership from the BCTF. Strategically, I'll say that Jinny blundered by talking to eagerly to media microphones. All she had to say -- over and over and over -- was; "I leave it to the teachers to act as their conscience dictates." And the teachers would have done exactly that: continued to walk out!

What has also not been assessed in terms of this strike is the demographics of the teaching force. How many are 50 years or older? A huge percentage! How many have their mortgages paid for? A significant number! How many have seen their kids through school and off to post secondary careers? Plenty! How many have had 20-plus years of crap from successive governments? All of them!

That makes for a toxic brew! That makes for a collective with very little to lose. And until these teachers retire, the dynamics will remain volatile.

For all that has been written about the baby-boomers, I'm surprised no-one has picked up on their impact on labor relations. We saw a bit of a similar dynamic with the nurses. There's more of this to come when there's nothing to lose. Let's re-write that old hippy tune "Freedom's just another word for very little to lose!" or ""Freedom's just another word for 'I don't give a fig'!"

I have to agree with Birch on this one:

I'll keep this in mind if I ever revisit Rafe's 2005-09-19 column.

Rafe reflects:

Rafe, methinks times have changed.

In the 70's, the almost-retired teachers of today were just starting their careers and likely not sure of exactly how they felt about being in a union or not. Those teachers actually "opposed to, being a union along side the lunch bucket crowd" as Rafe puts it, were likely closer to Rafe's age cohort than today's opinion leaders in the BCTF and leading the picketers at local schools.

NOT being opposed to being a union along side the lunch bucket crowd is what happens when you've had it put to you for 20-30 years. Having it put to you for that long makes teachers realise they have much in common with the lunch bucket crowd.

Careful Raif. You're messing with a group that really doesn't like to be criticized much. They may just boycott you now. After all, they do know best, don't they?

Interesting angle, Grub. You are right: some of us are sitting pretty, economically speaking. And most of us have been around awhile.

Yeah, that 90% plus strike vote came as no surprise.

It's a sea of grey hair at my staff meetings, and everyone's full of piss and vinegar.

Thanks for the tangent.

Couldn't stay away Elliot/Nemesis/Sir John?

Ah, shucks. Rafe, you make one little snipe at the unions and look what happens. You try to question their mentality, and look out, "solidarity", "solidarity".

How dare you be critical or union tactics, I mean, they're perfect, innocent, democratic organizations who care only about the children. I mean, thats why they ran those lovely adds during the last election.

Thats why every september during the ndp's term, everyone spent the year guessing when the teachers would walk out, was it their district next?

I mean, you must have sympathy for teachers, surely. They only get raises annually for the first 10 years.

The silly thing is, there are unions all over the country, but there are only a couple who seem to make it an annual tradition to walk off the job. I mean I can relate to truckers striking when fuel prices double and there contracts don't compensate that for them. I see forestry unions renegotiating for lower wages when they see a decline, (as the automotive industry out east) in order to reduce layoffs. And even with Telus or the CBC, I can at these see a reason for them striking when there jobs are on the line even if I think a certain TWU has shot themselves in the foot by not going back to work. (Telus is surviving, its stocks are up, and it just goes to show the management is right about restructuring). As far as as teachers go, there strikes almost seem trivial. It is total politics, and has always been. Half of the teachers won't go anywhere near the union meetings as they are disgusted with the politics and chest thumping, and the other half just takes it up as their duty to keep up the fight.

For you who are complaining about teachers getting kicked around, you're not badly paid and you know exactly what wages you will be making from the minute you enrol in the faculty of education. You know the conditions of the schools as you attended them. But as soon as you get the job, you get dragged into this conflict. You're not in some small town where the mill is the only thing sustaining you, and you've been working there since you were 16.

You are in field where you can find a job nearly anywhere on the planet.
.
My advice to you, is to dump these ideological generals who are experts at planning strikes, and instead hire someone who is a good negotiator, who will suck up to he provincial government, and who will work to better allocate resources where they are needed. Have locals delegates be chosen by lot to get the hotheads out of your ranks. If they want to be politicians, they shouldn't use you profession as a stepping stone.

Every battle has two opposing sides, but it doesn't matter who is on the governments side, the teachers will be up in arms.

"I mean, you must have sympathy for teachers, surely. They only get raises annually for the first 10 years."

That is a great example of spinning the facts to make your point. Congratulations Dangrice!

And Rafe:

"The problem with the teachers is that they're still not quite sure what they want to be."

Where is your proof of this? The BCTF has a great deal of support among working teachers. My advice to you is to actually do some research before writing an article like this. Bumping into a buddy on the street doesn't count!

dangrice:

I think the reaction to Rafe was NOT about his criticism of union tactics but, rather, his outdated notions of the general sympathies of teachers regarding unionization. Rafe's view harken back to a by-gone era and hardly reflect the opinions of the teachers who were most recently on the picket line.

I know a number of Teachers who are quiet fed up with the union tactics, such as their intent to use parent teacher interviews to talk politics rather than to actually talk about the progress of students.

However, the pressure tactics of the raving unionists make it hard for moderates to show any dissent. Nearly every other modern workplace limits politics because it makes some people feel very uncomfortable, but this is not the case with the schools.

If they try to speak out against the tactics, it is much like this discussion board in which some of there colleagues will jump on them. Threatening ostradization.

In the end, many of these will be the silent voices, who do agree with Rafe's notions, but will bite their tongues. Yes these are the 50% of teachers who did not participate in the original strike vote.

I have always found unions are basically reactive organizations. If union members are basically happy with their wages, working conditions, and feel they are appreciated by the community, they tend to elect more moderate leaders. If, however, they fall behind in their wages, are told they have no control over their working conditions, and are berated by the words and actions of social and political leaders (e.g., like Christy Clark), they vote for more militant leaders (e.g., like Jinny Simms) who then challenge their employers and the government. Newton's third law seems to be operative here. If a provincial government wants a teachers' union to stop attacking them, then treat teachers decently and - especially - stop appointing education ministers who primarily see their task as keeping the teachers down - given time, teachers will be quite reasonable.

dangrice professing ignorance of life in organzations:

and further:

SOCIOLOGY 101 - Lecture 05: Michel's Iron Law of Oligarchy.

Please note (this will be on the final exam): 'It is organization which gives birth to the domination of the elected over the electors, of the mandataries over the mandators, of the delegates over the delegators. Who says organization, says oligarchy.'

Thus the BCTF is no different than your church ladies' auxiliary or your kids' Boy Scout troop. The leaderships of virtually all organizations are "radicalized" in some fashion insofar as only those who completely buy in to the value system of the organization run for office or those who fervently wish to establish a new value system do so.

Thus Jinny Sims is no different than the ladies auxiliary president who actively organizes bake sales and advocates missions in all heathen parts of the globe or the pocketknife-wielding, shortpants-wearing leader of the scout troop. These are radical or passionate examples of the more hum-drum memberships of their organizations.

If you think that somehow, based on your exhortation, BC teachers are going to overturn this particular paradigm, then I'm afraid you're mistaken. There's a reason it's called the Iron Law.

dangrice, either sadly mistaken or sadly deluded:

Are you sure that's who the 50% are? Do you have evidence of that?

I know several teachers in that 50% group, and everyone of them would have voted to strike, had the meeting and subsequent vote been held at a more convenient time. Doesn't the fact that there were very few scabs tell you anything?

And if that doesn't convince you, why don't you chat with the teachers at your local school? See if you can find your 50% there.

Again, evidence of Rafe's tendency to run at brick walls and splatter himself all over the map. Though his "old Socred" politics which underly his view of the world have never been a mystery.

While I am really unfamiliar with the minutia of internal BCTF culture, their underlying material/social reality is that, while they may have a big toe on the bottom rung of the true "professional-managerial" middle class, and perhaps, some of them, even aspire to be raised up on a cloud into full Middle Class Heaven, the main aspects of their body politic are rooted in working class reality. And eh, it is not unknown of classical proletarian strata, or even the broad working class, to delude themselves that they are part of the Middle Class. (The System in fact encourages this delusion.)

Illusion is rife everywhere within capitalism, with everyone aspiring, save the ruling class, already at the top of the class poop pile, to be a 649 millionaire and transported up the class ladder on a magical escalator.

It flows out of the nature of the competition and inequality that has likely gone on internally within all class divided societies, certainly from the time of the great slave societies to the modern variant of wage slavery.

So nothing new here Rafe, for the political culture you seek to ascribe to teachers. It is a new universal culture across class society.

As for unions attempting to control teachers by keeping them in an internal state of turmoil with the State, that is patent Neocon drivel. If one doubts that the great issues that have teachers locked in conflict with the capitalist State come out of their own dynamic, and are not externally manufactured and interjected into their midst, one only has to study the evolution of the most recent dispute.

continued next post...

from previous post...

Whilst their own union, as well it should, for it is what it is being paid to do by teachers, raised and fought for their issues, in the end they were pretty much abandoned as quickly as The Fed leadership, the "cabinet" of the Parliament of Labour could begin to distance itself from the strike. Though they did it a little too hastily, and exposed themselves in front of a few too many teachers and supporting citizens at large.

Now everyone formulates their own read of what goes on between the lines of events of course, my own personal read of the message being sent everytime the leading bodies of Labour have done this is, in fact, and the record is considerable and reaches back at least to the 70s, we can do precious little for you, so if you can't do it on your own, and few unions can in todays Neocon Capitalism, being picked off one by one as they are, you are going to have to change the government. Vote NDP. It is your only hope. (Itself a wan hope I know, for reasons outside the scope of this piece of writing, but it is what comes out of politically partisan and non-self reliant institutions with very particular affiliations.)

So, not only do you get the "culture" of teachers wrong, I think, Rafe-, but you get the specifics of the underlying political realities wrong as well. You too are looking at the world through politically partisan eyes, only Neocon tinted ones, further modified by your own individualist crankiness and eccentricities.

Myself, organized labour, teachers, and the broader working class have things to learn, no doubt, Rafe, but not from such as yourself. Maybe on fish farms, but not in this realm. :-)

{Now there are signs that this political affiliation of the labour leadership has hit a rough patch, with their dance partner wanting a trial separation to test the bed of someone else with less coarse hands. Which, I think, would be a good thing. Though are they going to continue to provide financial support for her, even in her infidelity?

We shall have to see.:-)

The lives of teachers and the rest of us in the working class is way more complex even, than Rafe is capable of imagining.

greengreen 14 hours ago -

you took the words from my mouth.

except for one thing.

never apologize for being critical.

after all, that is what this is all about - free speech.

if those who have it wrong are not criticized, then they have every right to believe they are correct.

lord knows, some people cannot be convinced, no matter how much evidence faces them.

dangrice - how many teachers do you know?

reportedly there are some 38,000 of them.

what fraction of 1% have spoken with you, the same 'many teachers' who contacted lyin'gord before the strike, to say they wanted only to teach?

markalanwhittle, are you really mike de jong, aka krusty the kabinetminister?

rafe, it is all but unanimous, this week your grade is F.

F for content, F for effort, F for intellectual value and stimulation.

if this is a sign of what is to come from you, i hope the aspers hire you, as you will deserve each other.

dangrice singing an oldies tune:

Hmmm, like so many on the right-wing, dangrice sees the employment relationship as uni-dimensional. Why is that?

Could it be that, through the 60's and 70's, they all grew up singing from Merle Haggard's, Okie from Muskogee, "Love it, or leave it", songbook?

I have news for you: THERE ARE MORE OPTIONS! If you'd paid attention to your current events and history classes, you'd recall that there were protestors in the 60's who opted to neither love nor leave it. Rather, these protestors opted to try to change the system for the better.

News flash to the right-wing: Employees do not have to "love" their employment situation like sycophants. Further, they will not "leave" just because they refuse to be sycophants. They will stay and try to change the situation. I know that doesn't fit into your rather narrow framework of employee options, but who says employees have to play by your rules?

And, should the system try to force employees into your rather narrow set of options, there's a 4th option left to employees: obstructionism (have you heard of work-to-rule?). You want employees to "loveit, or leave it". Push them hard enough (as almost happened in this last teacher strike) and employees will acquaint you with their preferred game plan: "change it, or screw it!"

Indeed, I see on page one of the Globe and Mail this morning, that the BC Fed has "officially" agreed to be the cuckolded party to the NDPs romp, AND will continue to finance her bed hopping. (Assuming the accuracy of the story, of course.)

In classic cuckold dreaming style, one can assume the Fed will be wanting to watch? :-) How far from there to being a third party participant? :-)

Could be quite a spectacle.

Presumably they will all be practising safe sex.

And get used to it, wingnuts.

Well said, Grub.

Looking for work at Canwest??? Anti teacher?
perhaps many teachers should take a course in basic reading!

I supported, in the column and before, the right of teachers to have class size and assocuated matters as part of the bargaining process. Because it is so complex I have suggested that a permanent arbitration panel be set up, one appointed by teachers, one by trustees with the two of them selecting the chair. Though no fan of compulsory arbitration in cases of money dispute it seems to me that when schools differ within themselves, and with other schools in their district and with other districts, this might be a good away to fairly evaluate each situation.
My criticsm of the BCTF using their political leader as their negotiator scarcely is mine alone - you might wish to check with David Schreck's website, strategicthoughts.com
- it was his opinion that helped me form mine and the last I looked David was not a supporter of the Fraser Institute nor the Can West organization.
On the issue as to whether taking classroom sizes etc off the table is a gross breach of civil liberites, I have made this simple point - if one is going to the wall when they perceive that their rights have been taken from them they do it contemperaneous with the event, not months later.
The government's behaviour was appalling with the Labour Minister not being the peacemaker but throwing the bombs.I have stated on many occasions that the Premier and the government baited the BCTF - and handled the whole affair very badly.
As to the suggestion that not all teachers like being "workers", the low turnout on the strike vote confirms what many teachers have told me - the union is seen by many teachers to have a political agenda that is not theirs. .
Do my opinions change as events unfold? Your damned right they do! What would be the point of appealing to public opinion if that opinion woould never change?
Finally, this quote puzzles me. "You & Ron & CanWest & the Fraser Institute & your BC Liberal friends want to spend less on education so that you'll have more of your tax dollars to spend on all the above." Having supported the teachers on the class size issue, and expressed no opinion on wages I find this puzzling. I think any suggestion that I'm in bed with the Fraser Institute or the Liberals would come as a shock to them.
I might just add that I know something about special needs kids in school - my grandson is just such a kid.

Rafe, you know this government is ideologically blinded. You have to know they want to set into motion the privatization of the public system. You have to know that this is really what this is about, not the union and that the union is being scapegoated for this purpose.

Doesn't it offend and alarm you to see this group of elected officials abuse their power in this way and so many others?

Rafe says:

Compulsory arbitration IS the solution to money disputes. Why not?

It is NOT the solution to nonmonetary issues as they are far too complex to be dealt with by arbitrators unfamiliar with the nature of the workplace. Just look at the silly notions about "average class sizes" thrown about on these forums. There's no way arbitrators could make class size decisions that would be relevant in Vancouver and still work in Burns Lake.

As to arbitration on remuneration: bring it on!

Rafe,

I have no quarrel with most of your article, but your insistence that the lower turnout for the strike vote had anything to do with politics is a complete crock.

The turnout was exceptional, given the short notice and the need to get everyone in the district to a single meeting place.

Sure, there are a few teachers who shy away from political meetings. And such teachers may have been absent from the meetings where the final strike vote occurred. But this accounts for only 2% or so.

My wife was unable to attend because she had to pick up the kids, take one to skating and the other to violin lessons. I attended the meeting, and no proxies were allowed. The result: my family (two teachers) had a turnout rate of 50%, thus bringing down the average. We knew the vote would be 90% anyway, so we weren't too concerned.

Rafe, you didn't do your homework on this one, that's all.

Again I say, I really think it's time Rafe hung up his microphone and sailed off into the sunset never
to be heard from again.

Sorry Davey-boy, homework has nothing to do with this - opinion does. In your opinion there is an explanation for a low turnout that is different form mine. When an organization's political bosses are asking for a mandate to break the law, a move which would likely draw huge fines and jail time for leaders, and there's a low turnout it's a fair guess to say that the stay-at-homes didn't want to support their leaders. I don't remember a BCTF meeting that was more important with more long term implications. Since your wife and you would have had to explain to your kids that their parent's were going to break the law, why not explain at the same time that they would have to miss skating and the fiddle that day!
I find it so interesting that I, one who supports the teacher's position, must defend himself for saying the obvious - the teachers cause is right but they handled it like it was planned by the Three Stooges. They were lucky that the government was even worse

rafe,

Ignore the others calling for an end and bring your voice and views back to the airwaves.

Such a forum is clearly needed.

Davey-boy

I should like to note that BEFORE the VOTE you mention that there was a RALLY with many loud and angry speakers that presented a very militant position. Shouting out into mega-phones and at the crowd about the many evils of the government.

I found it very intimidating and imagine that many did not wait for the poll to open, but simply walked away, as this is the simplest way out of a difficult situation.

Such a rally before polling has not been allowed in Federal or Provincial elections, they are the tactics of lesser minds.

Rafe:

WRONG!

Please, Rafe, talk to teachers in staffrooms. Ask about the turnout. The answer lies in a hastily called vote. Many teachers did not have time to make arrangements to attend.

Further, surely the fact that very few (VERY, VERY FEW) teachers crossed the picketline speaks volumes about their feelings about the strike. They didn't have to cast a vote; they voted with their feet.

Rafe:

Homework has EVERYTHING to do with this. Do the homework and, as I've said before, do some polling (reasonably statistically significant, if you don't mind). This has absolutely NOTHING to do with opinion; this can be factually determined. And, I repeat myself, the lack of scab action supports Davey-boy's "opinion".

murdock:

Are you and Rafe talking about the "same" vote? Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick. I'm assuming we're talking about the STRIKE VOTE (no big rally that I'm aware of).

The "back to work" vote was preceded by a rally.

The rally I saw and watched for some time was before the vote which gave the 90% mandate that was announced.

I wanted to know how many had turned out and it took three days to find out that 47% of the total membership created the 90% that was shouted so loudly.

My math says that less than 50% or 42.3% supported going out on strike before bill 12 was proclaimed.

grub,

you state:

Yes there were teachers on the picket lines, and while I may only be able to claim anecdotal evidence, as I am not in the business of counting all those on the picket lines, I am aware of at least 3 teachers who NEVER walked the picket line. They also voted with their feet and refused to participate, they stayed home, or in 1 case left town for the week.

As with many human interactions, especially with such a well-educated group such as teachers, not all is so black and white.

murdock,

i'm confused - are you a teacher? the "meeting" i attended before i voted yes to walk out was a serious and thoughtful one. no one was "bullied" - the vote was private. don't know where you got the rally thing, unless you watched the rally in vancouver or perhaps the one in vitoria - they were uplifting to see, for sure, but not voting occured at either.

well, here's a funny thing. ctv is sponsoring a special segment on their news program this week called "multiple" choice. they want to tell you all about private schools, how much better they are, and how you can afford to send your child there - wow, who would have thought ctv would run a series like that!

By Murdock

And Gordo was elected in his own riding with a 46% share.What does your math tell you? Piss-All

Rafe: This fight is not over, so why are you doing a post mortem?

I see, most of the teachers actually support the gov't who wish to disempower them on issues of their own school rooms, take away their dignity, give them a 0% increase, change their association so that they are the only profession without their own body made up of those very members.
Andthey dislike their union who they directly vote for or against, because that union is asking for dignity, more resources for their classrooms and a reasonable pay increase.

You're telling us that this generally educated body of people are against the very union that fought for their adequate (I think their pay is far too low at this point) pay rates and benefits and is standing up to a bunch of frightfully ignorant MLAs who care nothing about public education and who are determined to privatize via financial neglect and dishonest legislation.

And, you're telling us that they would be more vocal about this but they're just too intimidated by their coworkers to say so.

And, now the gov't rather than learning a lesson are planning on disempowering the electorate further by messing around with the elected school boards because some supported the teachers. This gov't is determined to lose the next election and possibly be the first one with many MLAs recalled.

My post isn't clear, suffice it to say, I don't buy that any more than a very few teachers are against their union. And, I think this pretend gov't won't be stopped until we the people stop them. Which will happen sooner than later, as they continue with their inability to learn the most basic of lessons.

murdock:

100% of teachers were free to vote. Just as 100% of citizens are free to vote in our political elections.

What's your point? Have you never been a member of an organization that votes on issues? Your church group? Your gun club? Your soccer association? Surely you're not about to tell us that you always get 100% turnout?

murdock:

OK, murdock, I may not advocate scabbing (I'm very much against it!) but I'd respect those teachers more if they had had paritcipated. Fer Chrissake! Stand for something! Even if it means crossing the picket line.

You say, "They also voted with their feet and refused to participate, they stayed home, or in 1 case left town for the week."

COWARDS!!! Why don't they say where they stand?

The obvious problem with figuring out the actual amount of support for the issue at hand is the fear and intimidation aspect.

Teachers who openly go against what the Union bosses want are immediatly ostracized by the radicals in the group. Should any of you read forums at teacher.net you will see how the radical teachers are treating those who crossed or stayed away, it's disgusting and obscene.

It's no wonder that those opposed to strike action, either say nothing or leave town. It's called fear.

As a side note, has anyone realized that a signifigant number of parents feel that if they speak out against the teachers, thier child/ren will be abused or neglected?

I am not a teacher, but I have spoken to a number of parents who suggested that they fear retribution too, only to see them cheerfully supporting these dissidents when in thier presence.

P.S - I accidentally honked at a friend/teacher that I know and suddenly realized that my action's inadvertantly showed them support...Oh well.

Micky:

I'm more inclined to admire the teacher of a large Vancouver high school, who, when interviewed on TV while on the picketline, noted that he was there supporting his colleagues but that he'd voted against the strike and would rather be working.

I'm happy to report that he's still as respected by his colleagues as he was before the strike and before the interview.

In our district the strike vote was called with one day’s notice on a day that parent/teacher interviews were being conducted. Some teachers had to leave their schools between conferences, travel to the meeting, vote, and get back to their schools to continue conferences into the evening. Others had conferences scheduled right through to 6:30 but were able to vote until 7:00. We have one school which is a 3-hour drive from the polling station. This district is geographically big, but nowhere near the biggest! In the interior of this huge province, distance AND timing were definitely contributing factors to the “low turnout”.

How sad. Now Coyote, who is no longer taken with much more than a grain of laughter, is resorting to sexual innuendo to try to flog his tired and failed theory.

Would you be suggesting the BC Fed might be bedding down with the leader of the NDP is it were a man, Coyote?

Oh, I know, it's only for shock value, but it certainly is quite tacky, a trait you seemed to have picked up while on your short sabatical away from the Tyee.

Let's face it Coyote, you have really blown your cover over this teachers' dispute.

The least you could do is add a bit of polish to those jack-boots you are prancing about in waiting for trade union leaders to surrender to your neo-fascist regime.

Coyote, wake up, it's only a dream. They haven't elected you or put you in charge of anything.

Mickey,

Fear and intimidation?

I have only ever belonged to one union in my life, so I cannot generalize about the experiences of others, but I can state emphatically that the BCTF is exceptionally democratic.

More to the point, I have never seen anything even remotely resembling intimidation at any meeting I have attended.

Fear? That's a huge insult to the people who were unable to attend the meeting, or who chose not to for whatever reason.

In my district, we have approximately 270 teachers. Only one crossed the picket line. And only two refused to picket. And one of the teachers who chose not to picket brought the rest of us coffee and donuts. Gosh, she must have been trembling with fear.

Your assertion that we are an intimidating, anti-democratic group filled with radicals who ostracize the moderates would sting... if it were true.

I should know. I'm one of those moderates. I have been vocal in my opposition to a number of BCTF positions over the years, the introduction of grade ten and eleven provincial exams being a recent example.

But I have never felt ostracized or intimidated for taking any stand on any issue.

But, like 90% of my colleagues, I was full of piss and vinegar going into this job action, because for the last few years, I've seen the destructive effects of this government's recklessness.

And a broad collection of others on my staff got their tails in the same knot. Many of these teachers were politically active for the first time. In times previous, they had chosen to take a passive approach, leaving the political work to those with an affinity for such things.

Not this time.

Two members of my staff stand out in this regard. Both entered the education business on the late side. One is a retired hockey player, and the other a former Bay Street money manager.

Both are conservative by nature, but they were extremely active in our campaign.

And here's the part that you still don't understand:

When you saw Jinny Sims on your television each evening, telling you that teachers cared about their students' learning conditions, and that they cared about being treated unfairly, it wasn't a radical fringe group she was representing.

It was 90.5% of us, many of whom were madder than we've ever been. It was the retired hockey star. It was the Bay Street guy. And it was me.

You see, the success of our job action was the direct result of our democratic determination to say "enough is enough".

And the fact that public support (an indication of a broader democratic shift) was so strong made our action that much stronger.

I'll let you in on little secret, girl: the rest of us posting on this site already know that your accusation is categorically false; it is the product of an ideological prejudice, not a conclusion arrived at after a careful examination of the facts.

Your frustration and anger are clear, and they clearly don't stem from a concern for any democratic shortcomings - real or imagined.

You are angry that teachers were so successful (this time) in communicating their message. And you are angry that the general public has been increasingly supportive as a result.

Yeah, we can see what's really pissing you and every other neo-con off: a democratic group took an adversarial position, and the larger democratic body joined the fray.

And intuitively, you know that all this democracy stuff is a threat to your agenda.

And you know what?

You're right.

Davey-Boy, you are absolutely right. Teachers who have very little experience at being militants have won an enourmous victory in this battle. Please don't listen to the nay-sayers.

When a group of moderate, middle class people get beat up and insulted long enough they too react and this time the brute has taken notice.

Keep your chins up and ignore those noise makers Davey-boy. It's their anger. Let them deal with it.

I think the lasting image here will be that the government and the courts shut the BCTF down but the teachers simply pumped life back into it and now a couple of institutions have lost credibility.

Rafe:

"the low turnout on the strike vote confirms what many teachers have told me - the union is seen by many teachers to have a political agenda that is not theirs. ."

What is many Rafe? Where are your numbers to back up this absurd assertion? Our first strike vote in September had an 80% participation rate and yielded over an 88% strike mandate. The second one was done very quickly and in the face of Bill 12, I find your conclusion that teachers did not overwhelmingly support the BCTF Executives' recommendation to go out on an illegal strike quite baffling. The relatively low turnout on the strike vote after Bill 12 tells me only one thing: that teachers have busy lives and we all knew what the result was going to be because we were all so angry. Those that didn't vote (and I am betting I know more than you) told me that is why they didn't make it out to vote.

It is remarkable that so few teachers crossed the picketline in an "illegal" strike. Why is that? You really think, like others here, that teachers were afraid? You've got to be kidding. Are the few teachers that crossed the line now cowering under their desks? Are they afraid to walk down the halls. That assertion is unbelievable.

Don't get me wrong, the teachers that put themselves up for office are in many ways politicians. They have to go out and sell themselves to the membership and get elected. Those of us that aren't fond of politicians of any stripe may look on them with some suspect. But ... did you see the standing ovations that Jinny Sims got when we voted to go back? Nat Bailey Stadium was full of Vancouver teachers, Rafe. When Jinny came in the crowd was on their feet with a very long standing ovation. Can you imagine any other politician getting that treatment from their electorate? I don't always agree with everything our union does, but I do know that I am part of one of the most democratic organizations that I know of.

The fact is that your assertions on the teachers' support of the BCTF are lazy at best and biased at worst. I have heard and read some good analysis from you on a variety of subjects, but your work here was very poorly thought out and very subjective. I suggest that you try and back up your assertions with some real evidence. I don't think you'll be able to do it on this point. Sorry.

Micky, do you really believe teachers will abuse the kids of parents that don't support them?

A little over the top eh?

As for the teachers, its pretty damn obvious that Jinny had their support. Very few crossed the lines, even less than voted against the strike. For those who claim look at all those who didn't vote, geez, you think Campbell wouldn't be partying hard in Maui if he got a 90.5% in an election? You think the Sun would even mention voter turnout as impinging on his mandate? Red herring

Campbell won, teachers and kids lost and life goes on. By the way, I'm still waiting for all those negotiations and classroom improvements to take place like Campbell said after the strike. Who knew he'd simply claim he has to study the problem first :-) Guess maybe he shoulda done that sometime over the past 4 years since the last imposed contract, or at least since that contract expired over a year ago and the teachers spent 5 million on advertising during the election claiming there was a crisis in education. Guess he just tuned that out and the problems are all new to him.

Rafe, I'm the only guy in BC that enjoyed all your salmon shows. I hope you have a resume in to a few channels like Discovery and Outdoor Life.
Either that or retire, its not like you need a job at this stage of your life. Regardless, good luck to you.

As much as I've got issues with unions, I think we should look at the Swedish Labour Court:

http://www.arbetsdomstolen.se/anpassad/default.asp?page=&lngID=143&lngLangID=1

"Micky, do you really believe teachers will abuse the kids of parents that don't support them?"

Yes, I do! I dont mean physical abuse, of course, more of a neglect.

I think that the view's expressed by teachers on that other site are quite obvious in what the teachers are prepared to do, espescially towards other teachers, who as they say (reap the rewards of those who fight). As for parents, I stand firm that parents have expressed that they fear, or let's say are concerned with the fallout if they are seen speaking out against teachers.

Your frustration and anger are clear, and they clearly don't stem from a concern for any democratic shortcomings - real or imagined.

You are angry that teachers were so successful (this time) in communicating their message. And you are angry that the general public has been increasingly supportive as a result.

Yeah, we can see what's really pissing you and every other neo-con off: a democratic group took an adversarial position, and the larger democratic body joined the fray.

And intuitively, you know that all this democracy stuff is a threat to your agenda.

And you know what?

You're right.

Davey-boy, you said it and very well. This is exactly what is going on with them.

grub,

My point is that the first reporting was done from the perspective of 90% support for strike action from the teachers union membership. This is patently NOT TRUE.

Yes I am a member of many organizations that vote, I have led some. No a 100% turn out is almost never to be expected, save on the MOST contentious issues, such as defying court rulings, Laws (just or unjust), or internal group disputes such as impeachments or ostracizing someone 'officially'.

Important moments such as these have required such things as a 'quorum' or minimum of positive votes of the total majority of the group. I cannot speak for the BCTF in their requirments, I find it strange that they are willing to take such radical actions as illegal strike (which is part of why the BCFed backed away from them at the end) with less than 50% support. I accept the earlier mandate of 80+% that supported the job action, and that may have stood as enough to continue the planned actions. The pantomime theatricals of shouting out 90% support! are what prompt me to politely point out that the support was not 90% at all.

The majority were not with the militants in this case.

grub,

Somehow grub I do not think that your respect will make any difference to them.

You are missing the other points being made here, that fear of reprisal (an unknow factor) may be at the heart of those teachers who chose to avoid this situation completely.

Yes you said earlier that all teachers voted with thier feet and walked a picket line.

NOT TRUE

With only a 43% vote there is no way that all teachers were on that picket line. The price of crossing that line would be too high for some to pay, as they are well aware that if they were to cross the line, then have to face the others who did not then the complications of interpersonal relations would be soured. Bad enough the strike itself, the results likely would make the working environment tough, no need to make it even harder for yourself. So a choice is individually made, walk the picket line (or just sit in a lawn chair with your mouth shut and nod a lot), stay quietly away (or lie to your union local boss and say that you are on some local small school picket line when you are not), leave town (so that you cannot be intimidated by phone, in person or at the supermarket), or ask for more trouble than it is worth by crossing the picket line to do ??? (nothing can be done in an empty school)

They stand for their own self-interest, as we all do in the end. Large organizations have no choice but to become embroiled with each other, but there are less and less rewards to be distributed to the rank and file of those organizations. Given that teachers are, by necesscity, well educated they must be able to see all of this logic.

Can sum it all up with:
Faschists: 1
Democracy: -1

Next step will be to go from "essential service" to compulsory service.

Murdock, in the style of democracy we live with in Canada and specifically BC, when 90 per cent of the people who vote support an action, then the action is to be taken.

Wake up fellow, who was the last municipal politician who managed to garner a clear majority of total potential support?

Go ahead, offer a couple of clear examples of your moving goalposts style of democracy.

A majority is a majority. Teachers had a great many reason for not voting the first time, from boredom, fear, constipation, disinterest, you name it, a teacher likley experienced it.

But guess what, you keeper of the democratic dream, those same reasons have been used in every municipal, provincial and federal election not to mention the dozens of democratic votes taken daily in unions, societies and any other place it might be expected.

Now, having reviewed the final wisdom in your post above (about self-interest , I think), I'm forced to ask why you are so negative.

You paint a picture of society in decline, rapid decline, as workers are beat up and squeezed, yet you suggest they ought to simply accept the abuse and, I guess, smile.

Please elaborate on "all of this logic" you refer to. I haven't seen any in your post yet.

In fact, all I see is someone attempting to justify others crapping on their fellow workers and then trying to claim the union made them do it.

I agree, RickW, lots of delusion and denial of late. Bill 12 still stands...for those who think this is what victory feels like - you have incredibly low expectations of the poseur in its place, perhaps conveniently lowered expectations...

Anyway, blissfully sail on...

Bill 13, The Civil Forfeitures Act passed third reading last Thursday with hardly a whimper by the public or the media...in it you can lose your house or assets just on the suspicion of unlawful activity...the act allows for the seizing of the property of a person who has not even been charged under the Canadian justice system.

More Bills to come I'm sure... but keep drinking the victory kool-aid...nothing to lose but your freedom ...

allan,

Rafe Mair, Kamloops, greater than 70% of voters turned out, with greater than 70% voting socred.

The point I continue to make is that they did not have a majority, neither does any politician in the current 1st past the post system. But screaming out 90% majority is a lie. Especially when it is not a majority.

All things grow and change, or they die. Living beings, plants, animals and aggregations of the same, such as communities and civilizations. I do believe that our society is in decline, will continue to decline, perhaps not as fast as you believe but then the opportunity for change and life continue, lest final death take the society away.

For more about this see:
http://www.buildfreedom.com/sovind1.htm
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684832720/103-9512049-9147062?v=glance

I repeat from earlier:

"Bad enough the strike itself, the results likely would make the working environment tough, no need to make it even harder for yourself. So a choice is individually made, walk the picket line (or just sit in a lawn chair with your mouth shut and nod a lot), stay quietly away (or lie to your union local boss and say that you are on some local small school picket line when you are not), leave town (so that you cannot be intimidated by phone, in person or at the supermarket), or ask for more trouble than it is worth by crossing the picket line to do ??? (nothing can be done in an empty school)"

That sort of logical analysis must have occured to at least some of the teachers, for I know of three (I profess no statistics to support my argument and admit this freely) teachers that would have nothing to do with the event.

If the state can coerce people to do things, and they are a large organization with means and opportunity to intimidate; then why not a large union or for that matter any group larger than 2 when that group decides to 'punish' someone?

Accept the fact that such tactics are part of the union movement, part of governance.

It is reality, not fantasy.

murdock on the strike vote:

When 90% of those voting support the strike, then you have 90% support. How else would you report it?

As to your contention that, "The majority were not with the militants in this case." You may be right. The majority were with the moderate MAJORITY in this case. In this case, it really didn't/doesn't matter where the militants stood on this issue, because they were irrelevant to what was happening.

The moderate, at times conservative, teachers are what drove this strike and it is they who very willingly defied court orders. And it was the moderates who happily had their strike pay taken from them.

What makes you think all those people defiantly walking the picketline were militants? If they were, then there's one helluva lot of militant teachers in this province. Which I doubt. But, guess what? There's one helluva a lot of pissed-off teachers out there.

Murdock says,

It is reality, not fantasy.

It is your fantasy Murdock. I've been in unions for 30 years and have never been intimidated or seen intimidation used amongst the membership.I have never felt that my democratic right of free speech at meetings was denied, no more than going to a political debate at the last election was. I work at one of your so called militant schools in Vancouver where two of the locals executive work, and I've heard nothing about retribution against teachers who did not picket. Stop the lies Murdock. Join a union

Thanks, Lynn!

Bill 13:

http://www.legis.gov.bc.ca/38th1st/3rd_read/gov13-3.htm#section2

Hmmm! Wonder what constitutes "before, on or after", especially vis-a-vis our politicians? Does this mean that Gordo can lose his property because of a certain Maui-related event?

murdock quotes and says:

If you take 70% of 70 %, you get 49 %. That is not a majority.

North of Hope:

It is the way we do our voting in this here municipality/province/nation........

Murdock:

Lets get the facts straight.

1. The majority of teachers in Vancouver did picket duty.

2. Jinny Sims had a standing ovation from Vancouver teachers at Nat Bailey Stadium. The majority of Vancouver teachers were there.

3. Whining and complaining that a lot of teachers didn't bother to vote on whether to go out on an illegal strike is childish. If you don't want to vote, no one can make you. We all wish more teachers had voted, but you are delusional if you think it would have changed the result. Over 90% of those that wished to have a voice in this decision voted to withdraw their services. Live with it.

4. Teachers know that they have to stick together if they want to improve public education in this province. That is why we are in a union.

douge,

not so, the entire planet is going through these same arguments regarding unions and their relationships with social democracies.

great for you, now ask a teamster if s/he have ever felt intimidated.

and I can guarantee that you will never hear about any sort of retributions, they will be quiet, more about ignoring or otherwise 'ostracizing' those who did not 'play along'. Those so finding work more difficult chose the simplest way out of a difficult situation, they will leave.

I shall not attempt to justify that comment, but ask you to do so.

NEVER AGAIN

Chris H,

1. The majority of teachers in Vancouver did picket duty.

agreed.

and Joe Plumeri got standing ovations at every rally he did too, irrelevant.

Yet in the end they all voted to 'go back to work' with no change in situation, other than more fines facing their executive, criminal charges being considered for that same executive. No real advantage or change made with that withdrawl of services.

Just parents made angry, children shorted on learning opportunity and others inconvienced (with unknown financial costs) due to support CUPE wildcat strikes.

I lived with it, I will continue to. So shall you with the lack of change that was the result.

Your union is part of what is in the way of change in this system in my opinion, yes my opinion.

All that it may be but I know I am not alone.

Why are so many participating in a postmortem when the body in question isn't dead?

cuinn, its called optimism.

Its a postmortem for the strike itself, and it is certainly over.

So, anybody heard how the negotiations have gone? You know, the big ones that were going to start right after the teachers returned to work? The ones the right-wingers said Campbell himself really really wanted to start? The ones that took 4 years to get to? The ones that were going to fix the educational system and the teacher's issues?

Anyone remember those? Its been 2 weeks, just curious how they went. What got resolved? Do all the kids have desks now? All have proper texts? No one being on a bus more than 2 hours a day? No classes of over 30 kids?

I tried to find out from the MSM but they don't seem to mention education anymore. Oh, except private schools, they're all over those.

Davey-boy say's: "Fear and intimidation?"

"More to the point, I have never seen anything even remotely resembling intimidation at any meeting I have attended".

"Fear? That's a huge insult to the people who were unable to attend the meeting, or who chose not to for whatever reason".

"Your assertion that we are an intimidating, anti-democratic group filled with radicals who ostracize the moderates would sting... if it were true".

"But I have never felt ostracized or intimidated for taking any stand on any issue".

Davey-boy, Intimidation is the essence that drives union's, any union, that is the primary goal entering into negotiation's - to intimidate the employer. Intimidation is the purpose of a picket line. To intimidate someone, so they do not enter the establishment. To intimidate customers as well as other workers who might disagree with the cause.

The BCTF breeds this attitude. Let's look at the evidence to be sure:

1)Threatning to strike is obviously meant to intimidate.
2)Teachers have openly intimidated the PAC woman that was on TV. - I think she was PAC.
3)They are calling out the BCFed and Jim Sinclair as being traitors. Making threats also to Mr. Sinclair.
4)They have openly criticized Baldry and Good as well as most of the media for a percieved lack of support.
5) Teachers have also taken several cheap shots at Carol James even. Making threats to her job as well.
6)Calling any citizen/parent a Neo-Con if they dont fully side with teachers - no questions asked.
7)Jinny tried unsucessfully to intimidate Ready.
8)Other websites where teachers openly admit and joke about those that they have ostracized in the past.

So Davey, With teachers running around with a hate on for just about anybody that they have contacted, Do you really believe that any teacher with an IQ above room tempature is going openly disagree with this dispute? C'mon, not on your life.
They will say all the right thing's or maybe nothing at all. Why? because the BCTF is an intimidating group.

The fact that you know exactly how many and who they are,that are not out picketing is very telling. The union is watching, and I pity the teacher who say's the wrong thing.

I'M surprised either you or Murdock leave your houses for fear of what you call intimidation. Grow-up. Your reading much too many Marvel Comics.

Murdock:

"All that it may be but I know I am not alone."

Not alone ... but certainly in the minority.

Frank:

The govt. has to strike (pun intended) a committee to investigate the possibility that a commission may or may not be required to examine the......oh, forget it (which is what they want us to do)!

Murdock, not so fast with the numbers please.

You say Rafe Mair was elected to municipal council in Kamloops with 70 percent support and that 70 percent turned out to vote.

I think you have Rafe's election experiences mixed up with some basketball score, but hey I'm willing to buy in if you can tell me in what year did he manage this fete?

Try the Guinness Book of Records.

Municipal elections always remind me of the opening scenes from Oklahoma where if you didn't have a horse or a buckboard or anything else, you just up and raced to the first plot of land that didn't already have a homestead marker on it.

But not even in Hollywood do people get that kind of endorsement out of municipal voters.

Of course, when I came to Kamloops 25 years ago Rafe was toiling as a cabinet minister in the mess we now remembers as Bill (2) Bennett's Social Credit government.

But within months he did the right thing and resigned, one of the view politicians that ever did what I wished and I didn't even have to ask him.

Micky presumes to schoo, Davey-boy:

Allow me to be a bit pedantic; I'd feel better about your assessment if you substituted "power" for "intimidation".

Essentially, then, you're quite right. So what?!

Life is a power struggle. PERIOD. FULL STOP!

Unless a union applies power tactics (OK, call it intimidation, if you like), the membership is unlikely to attain their negotiation objectives. Or are you going to suggest that managements will willing accede to the unions' demands?

Scabs undermine the power of the strike. What would you suggest unions do when some people are so underhanded and unethical as to sabotage legitimate efforts to bargain newer conditions of work? Such sabotage is serious business as it can prolong a strike and cause the strikers to lose increasingly large amounts of pay. You know what? If someone were to attempt to screw with my paycheque, do you know what I'd do? INTIMIDATE them (punch them in the nose - harass them - sabotage their car - etc)! And why not? TIT for TAT!

Intimidation by one side begets more intimidation from the other side. It's called a power struggle which, by any other name, is called politics.

grub; just so you know. a scab is a replacement worker. there were no replacement workers hired during the teachers strike. in fact teachers who crossed were not really crossing a picket line, they were crossing an illegal protest line. in such a case protocol does not really apply. that's why the local associations can't censure the brave teachers that didn't buy into this latest bit of bctf nonsense. the bctf is as good at bullying tactics as anyone is, and they aren't afraid to practice them. check out the front page of section b of today's sun.

OK so here's the thing. Voting at union meetings is done by secret ballot.
You go in, you fill in your ballot, you drop it in the box. Just like in any other election.
Nobody sees how you voted, nobody can challenge you. All you have to do is not tell anybody how you voted and hey presto you are safe from "intimidation".
You could even lie about it if you felt the need. Apparently nobody ever voted for Nixon.
Surely those of you who are suggesting that somehow fear stopped teachers from doing this don't really believe that all those thousands of imaginary "anti-union teachers" are too stupid to figure this out.
Some teachers may have chosen not to vote because they were conflicted, but it is ridiculous to think anyone will accept they would make that choice because they were afraid.
Having some experience with how hard it is to do anything on short notice, I am going with the "too busy to get there" theory myself, but the reality is unless someone has actually done some polling - the real variety, not the kind the Fiberals do - that all the suggestions about why there was a low turnout is just hearsay and speculation.
Having now having spent far more time on this subject than it deserves, I'm moving on.

Of course intimidation only applies to unions. Not to gov'ts that pass laws like Bill 12 and and businesses who fire anyone who even says the word union or raise a stink about unpaid overtime.

Of course you won't find any of that in the Sun.

Grub says: "Allow me to be a bit pedantic; I'd feel better about your assessment if you substituted "power" for "intimidation".

Well, another teacher convieniently spinning word's. It's not power, it's intimidation. That is the point. As far as the vote goes, grub, I'm sure some that didn't vote were pro strike, but several other's I'm sure thought it easier to not vote and not lie to thier collegues. Now, ironically or maybe not, we have an investigation into "intimidation" on the part of teachers on the picket line.

I dont entirely disagree with intimidation for some purposes, what I take issue with is the teachers intimidating students by threatning to cancel athletics, band and even christmas concerts because they are not paid for thier time. This is intimidation.

There are thousands of coaches and parent volunteers in this province who wouldn't even consider being paid. And would be ashamed to even consider the threat. Millworkers, loggers, cabbies, bus drivers etc. etc. And yet teachers, who care so much about the upbringing of our kids are threatning a christmas concert.

The only thing that bothers me about more than the actual intimidation is the fact that, all the while the want to play the miss innocent victim role and deflect all this negativity on everyone else.

BTW - I forgot to mention that the teachers are also criticizing the Judge and poor old Rafe, even though he actually brought up some good points.

P.S - Why was the original vote made in such haste anyway? Considering the severity of such an action, one would think Jinny would arrange her strategy better than that.

Oh, and yes Frank, the govt. has been known to intimidate too. Bill 12 is not actually intimidation though. It was a full out action to try to diffuse the BCTF's intimidation.

Micky stated....

Oooooooh.... those scary elementary school school teachers.... using "intimidation" on the picket lines. The images of violence during teacher strike really startled me.

Are you a mouse or something?

Moat: I actually spent some time in response to your idiotic dribble, but you obviously haven't read the thread - I hope, otherwise your just a moron. Go re-read it bozo.

"There are thousands of coaches and parent volunteers in this province who wouldn't even consider being paid. And would be ashamed to even consider the threat. Millworkers, loggers, cabbies, bus drivers etc. etc. And yet teachers, who care so much about the upbringing of our kids are threatning a christmas concert."

And yet, if those coaches and parent volunteers decide not to volunteer anymore, no one lashes out at them for it. However, if a teacher decides that she doesn't want to volunteer at her school anymore and instead spend time with her own children's activities, she's hurting the children. I coach two or three school teams a year and rarely get a thank you for my time from any parent. When I have coached community sports, it is unbelievable how thankful the parents are. Why the difference? Are extracurricular activities part of my job? No. Next time your child's teacher coaches a sport, spends countless hours after school setting up a Christmas concert, or takes your child to camp for a week, thank them for it. I know people like Micky will never give a teacher credit for their off-hours work, but yes, we do it for the children, and a thank you can go a long way.

Micky unclear on the concept:

How can it be intimidating if the time put in is voluntary?

Look, the band concerts, Christmas concerts, soccer games, etc can all go on; just ensure there administrators are doing it, or get yourself some parent volunteers.

Micky to me:

Sorry. Me a teacher? Nope.

Micky, actually Bill 12 was the gov'ts way of not allowing the teachers the right to use LRB essential service guidelines that were being defined against them (gov't). Nip it in the bud, so as to say. I'd say it kind of backfired.

Frank: I'd say he is. His ears show in just about every comment he makes.

Sorry, Frank, that was Moat's comment....

Micky:

Hmmm, I don't recall any millwrights, at the plants I've worked in, doing volunteer work for their bosses. Generally, when work beyond the general scope of the job description had to be done, overtime was paid.

Are you suggesting that teachers be the only workers in the province who perform extra work in the workplace without compensation?!

Extra-curricular, volunteer, work by teachers is pretty-much the best deal any employer ever got from their employees! Have you ever worked out those hours?!!!! Trying paying for that!

must be awful to be a teacher these days. human rights stripped away, gov't won't give you everything you want, a new fuel surcharge on the summer cruises....

Elliot...(favourite movie?) E.T...and Micky (ears definitely showing).... Gotta be the BC Young Liberals Club.

Micky:

Sorry to the forum for re-visiting Micky's comment above, but I never caught how ludicrous it was until I read it again.

Micky finds it odd that people would be reluctant to work for their bosses "because they are not paid for thier time"

Give your head a shake Micky; if not being paid isn't a good reason not to do work, praytell, what is a good reason?

I think Micky would have teachers working for free.

I'd like to see every teacher out there tally up all the free overtime hours they've put in, and send the bill to Victoria. And just so the micky's of this world don't get their knickers in a knot, let's ensure that only clearly visible overtime hours are counted. Hours like setting up chairs in a gym at 6PM for the band/Christmas concert. Hours like sitting on a ferry while on a field/sports trip (while your own children required a babysitter to stay alone at home for the weekend). Hours like those spent at practice with the basketball team at 8PM (when your own children could have used your help at their soccer practice). And the list could go on.

Let's send that bill to Victoria.

Grub Maybe this is the way to go. I work as a stationary engineer for a large school in the Van School District. With added overtime at double I make as much as a 10 year teacher without the Masters. I know most teachers would do at least 10 to 15 hour of overtime monthly. Yea send them the bill.We do.

The subtitle to Rafe's original title here was

Given the nature and focus of many posts here, I say that the subtitle was correct...

Chris H:

If anything, teachers should be forbidden to volunteer for extra-curricular school activities, as it could be construed as "conflict of interest". Let the parents volunteer, and committ themselves to three dasy a week throughout the school year (or some such). And if parents do not have the time or skills to do this, then HIRE someone who does. They would soon enough find out the bargain they have in teacher volunteers...........