Strategic Thoughts

bannerspacerAbout Me | Mail Me | Linksbannerspacer2

October 12, 2005

Voter Participation

BC's Minister of Labour needs to be reminded about his special role in government. Like the Attorney General, the Minister of Labour is usually expected to stand apart from partisan politics and play a peace-making role in disputes. Minister Mike de Jong is anything but peace-making as he moved from saying that the "contract" with the teachers is resolved since his government imposed it, and that the issue is obedience to the law, to his new position of attacking the BCTF over its member participation in its latest vote to continue its protest.

Global TV carried de Jong's comments on its 5 PM news, but dropped him in favour of doing its own report on BCTF voter participation on the 6 PM news. According to the story, exact membership in the BCTF is uncertain but, according to a leaked email to presidents of teacher union locals, 20,545 teachers voted to continue to protest while 2,145 voted to return to work. That means 90.5%, of those who voted, voted yes. According to the Ministry of Education website, there were 36,331 educators last year compared to a BCTF claim of 42,000 members. Depending on which number one picks, the voter turnout for continued protest ranged from 49% to 56%; Global said 55% to 60%.

Those who live in glass houses ought not to throw stones. Minister de Jong needs to be reminded that the BC Liberals won the May election with 45.8% of the popular vote. In that election, there were an estimated 3.05 million eligible voters, 2.76 million registered voters, but only 1.76 million who voted. In other words, less than 64% of eligible voters voted, meaning that less than 29% of eligible voters voted to continue the Campbell government. Using the lower turnout of only 49% for the teachers, they got a vote of 44% (.905x.49), half again as much as the Campbell Liberals, to continue their action.

Rather than engaging in teacher bashing, the Labour Minister should put his mind to ending the dispute. He needs to review Bill 28 (2002) which stripped the teacher contract of protections on working and learning conditions. As a sign of good faith, the government that now calls for respect for the law could rollback some of its contract breaking legislation.


October 11, 2005

More Civil Disobedience

The courts will determine the penalties teachers will pay for their strike, but only the Campbell government can resolve the dispute. Unions from across the country will show solidarity and help the BCTF with any fines. If Jenny Sims or her colleagues go to prison, it will create an even bigger political problem for the Campbell government. The last BC labour leader to go to prison because of his role in a strike, Paddy Neale, was subsequently elected Member of Parliament.

Both sides need to step back and give a little to end the dispute. The teachers could agree to return to work and cease all strike activities including the withdrawal of voluntary services; the government could agree to meaningful discussions with the BCTF on working and learning conditions leading to the amendment of Bill 28 (2002). The more likely outcome is that the government will stand back and hope that the courts "squish the union like a bug". That will not be good for teachers, students, parents or education, and it could produce consequences far beyond the ability of the Campbell government to control.

The Campbell government is not known for being gracious; it is known for being bullheaded and for abusing power. In 2001 it denied the existence of the official opposition. In 2002 it used its legislative might to break contracts, including Bill 28, the Public Education Flexibility and Choice Act, which invalidated provisions in collective agreements that set learning and working conditions such as class size and number of assistants required for special needs students. When the BCTF was successful in court in overturning some of the Campbell government's contract breaking legislation, the government responded in 2004 with Bill 19, the Education Services Collective Agreement Amendment Act which said:

"For certainty and despite any decision of a court to the contrary made before or after the coming into force of this subsection, nothing in this section is to be construed as authorizing a board or the Provincial union to enter into a collective agreement that includes a provision that is prohibited under section 27 (3) or void under section 27 (2), (5) or (6)." (emphasis added)

Having used its legislative might to break contracts and overturn court decisions, the Campbell government now lectures the teachers about the "rule of law". Labour Minister Mike de Jong said it is no longer about a contract, it is about the law and "it's a hell of an example to set for our children". Children need to learn more about how the rights many take for granted were won. Union recognition didn't come about because employers woke up one day and decided it would be good for workers. Critics are quick to say that BCTF President Jenny Sims is using the wrong analogy when she speaks of those who are world renowned for civil disobedience and what that accomplished. For those with short memories, recall Clayoquot Sound. As an MLA I was in my seat in the legislature on March 18, 1993 when demonstrators broke the doors and stormed the place; Gordon Campbell was an unelected visitor that day sitting behind me to listen to the Throne Speech. It was demonstrations like that and blockades of logging roads that ultimately made the Harcourt government change its position on Clayoquot Sound and develop the forest practices code. At the time it is occurring, those who are involved in the legislative process or the legal system cannot endorse civil disobedience, but it takes someone who is ignorant of our history to say that civil disobedience has not resulted in important gains for British Columbians.

Rather than test how far the teachers might go, Premier Campbell should allow the teachers to negotiate learning and working conditions. Enter "teacher strike" in Google and you will see that BC is not alone when it comes to disputes. In Alberta teachers struck for 5 days in 1992; in Ontario teachers struck for two weeks in 1998. In the Marysville School District in Washington State in 1993, teachers struck for almost two months! There are lots of precedents for teachers' strikes; this is a time when setting new records is not a good thing. The government that promised to make education an essential service has already produced the longest provincewide education shutdown in BC history.


October 6, 2005

Teachers' Civil Disobedience

"They could threaten to put me in prison."
Jenny Sims, BCTF President, quoted in The Province, October 6, 2005

There is one important ambiguity in what Sims said; who are "they"? They are not the government. Governments used to include nasty penalties in back to work legislation, but modern labour law puts the really mean stuff over to the courts.

Sims and the BCTF executive may be stubborn but they aren't stupid. They know that the employers' association will attempt to get a ruling from the Labour Relations Board by Thursday afternoon, and that the employers will certainly succeed in getting an order by Friday afternoon that a full scale withdrawal of services is an illegal strike. The order will then be registered in BC Supreme Court where the union will be called up on charges of contempt of court for failing to abide by the order. If the union directs its members to return to work immediately, it might get off with a finding of civil contempt and relatively minor fines. If the job action continues, the union and its officers could be found in criminal contempt of court with substantial fines and jail sentences.

Case law on "illegal strikes" was made in Alberta when the United Nurses of Alberta went on strike in January, 1988, contrary to directives made under the Alberta Labour Relations Act forbidding the strike; they were found to be in criminal contempt of court and fined $400,000. In 1992 the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the criminal contempt of court; a dissenting opinion said:

"The conduct of the union leadership was not sufficient to transform the civil contempt into criminal contempt. The element of public injury was missing from the breach of the order. The nurses neither flaunted their disobedience of the order nor presented any threat of violence. The diffidence of their spokesperson in discussing the matter with press indicated that the union did not intend to bring the administration of justice into a disrepute or hold it up to scorn."

The fact that the teachers are willing to risk fines and jail shows how angry they are with the Campbell government for using legislation to break their contract and remove their right to bargain working and learning conditions, class size, number of special needs students per class, whether special needs students must have assistance and other matters that are crucial to how classrooms function.

Many of the civil rights we take for granted were only achieved because someone was willing to take on the establishment with civil disobedience. The teachers are at the threshold of deciding how far they will go with their civil disobedience. The government could defuse the conflict by agreeing to discuss working and learning conditions at a separate table, as recommended by its fact finder, or it can stand back and let the process unfold, complete with the court process. Those who engage in civil disobedience have to be ready to accept the consequences. It looks like the teachers are prepared.

 

About Me | Mail Me | Navigation | Top
© 2005 David D. Schreck. All Rights Reserved.