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
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.