On any list of matters that premier-designate Christy Clark would sooner not have to confront straightaway, contract talks with the B.C. Teachers' Federation would surely rank near the top.
Clark, serving as education minister in her previous stint in government, took on the union on several issues. She did not emerge the victor, in the view of most independent observers of those exchanges.
Today, seeking to turn the page on a contentious year-and-a-half in the life of the B.C. Liberal government, she can't be welcoming the prospect of another go-round with the famously scrappy teOn any list of matters that premier-designate Christy Clark would sooner not have to confront straightaway, contract talks with the B.C. Teachers' Federation would surely rank near the top.
Clark, serving as education minister in her previous stint in government, took on the union on several issues. She did not emerge the victor, in the view of most independent observers of those exchanges.
Today, seeking to turn the page on a contentious year-and-a-half in the life of the B.C. Liberal government, she can't be welcoming the prospect of another go-round with the famously scrappy teachers' union.
Still, the BCTF's five-year contract is set to expire June 30. And today's date has been circled on the calendar for many weeks as the official start of talks between the union and the B.C. Public School Employers Association, bargaining arm for the K-12 education sector.
Judging from the issues on the table, the talks will be hefty and contentious even by the unarmed-combat standards of earlier rounds in the sector. The union, in a gesture of openness (or defiance, some might say), has tabled enough of its position on the BCTF website to indicate where the lines are likely to be drawn.
Parity with teachers in Alberta and Ontario heads the list.
"Teacher salaries in B.C. continue to lag behind most other provinces," according to a recent bargaining bulletin. "In Vancouver, the city with the highest cost of living in Canada, we are $9,981 behind our colleagues in Toronto ... Closer to home, the situation is even worse. We are $11,311 behind our colleagues in Calgary and $11,580 behind teachers in Edmonton."
The union reckons B.C. secondary school teachers would need a 12.5-per-cent pay increase to catch up with their counterparts in Toronto, almost 20 per cent to pull even with those in Edmonton.
Standard bargaining fare, and sure to be disputed by the employers' side. But it needs to be contrasted with the opening position dictated by the B.C. government, which is basically "nothing."
Or, to be more precise, "net zero over two years," meaning any improvements in pay and benefits must be offset with savings elsewhere so that there is no net increase in cost to the provincial treasury via funding for the K-12 education sector.
The B.C. Liberals laid down that position for the entire public sector in the fall of 2009 and have successfully maintained it to date through some two dozen settlements, ratified and tentative, with unions representing almost 130,0000 public sector workers.
But the BCTF refuses to be bound by what it regards as an arbitrary mandate, cooked up following the last provincial election. As evidence, they note how before the 2009 election, the Liberals reached a cosy settlement with the nurses' union that provided six per cent over two years. In response, the government's position can be boiled down to "that was then, this is now."
As if the gap on money weren't yawning enough by itself, the union also proposes to throw some other high-profile issues into the mix.
"We believe that it is our right to bargain workload," argues the BCTF. "As a priority, [we seek] the ability to bring class size and composition back to the bargaining table. ... Class size and composition is an issue that is of the utmost importance to our members and to our students, and is placed at the start of our negotiation process."
The union has also signalled a determination to return a share of bargaining to the district level. That option was largely eliminated in the mid-1990s, when the then New Democratic Party government imposed provincewide bargaining to curb the practice of "whipsawing" wherein union locals would play off districts one against the other.
Starting today, the BCTF intends to approach individual districts seeking talks at the local level while also pursuing its goals in the provincial talks with the BCPSEA.
If past practice is any guide, the government is no more likely to countenance a return to local bargaining than to give up control over class size and competition.
Clark, as a self-styled candidate of change, would not on taking office later this month be bound by a mandate inherited from the outgoing premier and his cabinet.
But in any round of bargaining with one union, the talks have implications for the broad public sector. If the province abandons "net zero" with the teachers, it can expect that when the bulk of other public sector contracts begin expiring next year, it will be hit with catch-up demands on behalf of everyone who agreed to hold the line.
Then again, should Clark refuse to budge on any front - pay, working conditions, local bargaining - the school system would almost certainly be headed for one kind of labour disruption or another.
The union, for all of its clumsiness on some issues, has proven to be remarkably successful in building sympathy in the past, something Clark knows from experience. And if the school sector is plunged into a labour dispute later this year, even the most favourably disposed observer would have to say it looks less like "change" than "business as usual."
vpalmer@vancouversun.com
achers' union.
Still, the BCTF's five-year contract is set to expire June 30. And today's date has been circled on the calendar for many weeks as the official start of talks between the union and the B.C. Public School Employers Association, bargaining arm for the K-12 education sector.
Judging from the issues on the table, the talks will be hefty and contentious even by the unarmed-combat standards of earlier rounds in the sector. The union, in a gesture of openness (or defiance, some might say), has tabled enough of its position on the BCTF website to indicate where the lines are likely to be drawn.
Parity with teachers in Alberta and Ontario heads the list.
"Teacher salaries in B.C. continue to lag behind most other provinces," according to a recent bargaining bulletin. "In Vancouver, the city with the highest cost of living in Canada, we are $9,981 behind our colleagues in Toronto ... Closer to home, the situation is even worse. We are $11,311 behind our colleagues in Calgary and $11,580 behind teachers in Edmonton."
The union reckons B.C. secondary school teachers would need a 12.5-per-cent pay increase to catch up with their counterparts in Toronto, almost 20 per cent to pull even with those in Edmonton.
Standard bargaining fare, and sure to be disputed by the employers' side. But it needs to be contrasted with the opening position dictated by the B.C. government, which is basically "nothing."
Or, to be more precise, "net zero over two years," meaning any improvements in pay and benefits must be offset with savings elsewhere so that there is no net increase in cost to the provincial treasury via funding for the K-12 education sector.
The B.C. Liberals laid down that position for the entire public sector in the fall of 2009 and have successfully maintained it to date through some two dozen settlements, ratified and tentative, with unions representing almost 130,0000 public sector workers.
But the BCTF refuses to be bound by what it regards as an arbitrary mandate, cooked up following the last provincial election. As evidence, they note how before the 2009 election, the Liberals reached a cosy settlement with the nurses' union that provided six per cent over two years. In response, the government's position can be boiled down to "that was then, this is now."
As if the gap on money weren't yawning enough by itself, the union also proposes to throw some other high-profile issues into the mix.
"We believe that it is our right to bargain workload," argues the BCTF. "As a priority, [we seek] the ability to bring class size and composition back to the bargaining table. ... Class size and composition is an issue that is of the utmost importance to our members and to our students, and is placed at the start of our negotiation process."
The union has also signalled a determination to return a share of bargaining to the district level. That option was largely eliminated in the mid-1990s, when the then New Democratic Party government imposed provincewide bargaining to curb the practice of "whipsawing" wherein union locals would play off districts one against the other.
Starting today, the BCTF intends to approach individual districts seeking talks at the local level while also pursuing its goals in the provincial talks with the BCPSEA.
If past practice is any guide, the government is no more likely to countenance a return to local bargaining than to give up control over class size and competition.
Clark, as a self-styled candidate of change, would not on taking office later this month be bound by a mandate inherited from the outgoing premier and his cabinet.
But in any round of bargaining with one union, the talks have implications for the broad public sector. If the province abandons "net zero" with the teachers, it can expect that when the bulk of other public sector contracts begin expiring next year, it will be hit with catch-up demands on behalf of everyone who agreed to hold the line.
Then again, should Clark refuse to budge on any front - pay, working conditions, local bargaining - the school system would almost certainly be headed for one kind of labour disruption or another.
The union, for all of its clumsiness on some issues, has proven to be remarkably successful in building sympathy in the past, something Clark knows from experience. And if the school sector is plunged into a labour dispute later this year, even the most favourably disposed observer would have to say it looks less like "change" than "business as usual."
vpalmer@vancouversun.com
