To withdraw report cards unions must be on a legal strike position having jumped through all the hoops to get there. Believe me it is complex.

However, once they ARE in a legal strike position they can withdraw any or all services with impunity. The only legal response from the board is negotiate or lock the teachers out. Of course once the boards lock them out, the disgruntled public relations are all on them.

If a school year is at risk the ERC can advise the government who can then order an end to a strike or lockout. However, there are 2 options to follow. One is arbitration, or the govt can use the nuclear option of imposing a contract.

The government hates arbitration because arbitrators tend to say ” well the CPI is 2% annually, the private sector unionized wage increases averaged 2.4% this year so we recommend 2.2%” If the govt says “bbut we have a deficit we can’t afford it” the arbitration board says ” the deficit was of your own making, you are the government -raise taxes”.

If the government says ” look we are the government, we are going to impose a contract” The unions will instantly withdraw all voluntary services like extra curricular and mass picket all government party events and make the government’s like a trip to the dentist.

Of course they will spend millions to defeat that government in the next election.

This, SQE, is by far the best blog post I have ever read.

- law around custody and guardianship
- school is compulsory has ramifications under the Charter
- the law around parents’ relationship with the school system is not as well developed

Love it. Thank you Karin Litzcke

Our government is only as good as it bends to the will of our Unions.  If our government had any wherewithal they would impose a contract but won’t because, as I previously mentioned, it comes down to the all mighty dollar, and it is the union party that got them their majority, not the people of Ontario.  Big bucks buys government = corruption, which is what we have in Ontario.  And voluntary services - go ahead - withdraw them.  It paints a true picture of what it’s all about - and that’s not what is in the best interests of Ontario students.

We live in a democracy. Unions are a legal part of the system.

Clearly up to this point we have the system we voted for more or less.

The most anti union party is falling at both the Ontario and National level.

You have a perfect right to your views Karen but you need to consider the fact that they are minority views.

Last night I listened to Sam Hammond, President of ETFO (Elementary teachers Federation of Ontario) and he said the teachers have supplied the Principal’s with the marks for the report cards.  He said it was now up to the Principal and the School Boards to ensure they were completed.  Basically, he said teachers have done their job now if your child doesn’t receive a report card its because of the Principal/Admin. and School Boards.

Sam is correct. Usually there is a lot of extra teacher labour stuffing envelopes etc… most boards dumped this on support staff and principal VP. Others refused.

And I should believe my view is in the minority because you say so Doug.  Show me on paper that they are and I might believe you.  And regardless of whether they are or not…you are correct…..I am entitled to them.  Your posts are not going to change the minds of the majority who post on this venue.  If I were going to listen to an expert that might try to change my mind - well it wouldn’t be you as I believe the only reason you post on this venue is to agitate, deflect and put words in peoples mouths.  Beyond your popular belief, the majority of us here are, in fact, intelligent people.

Corinna, that’s very interesting news, and as I see it, somewhat confirms my analysis.

Something similar happened in BC in 2011-2012 when the Labour Board permitted report cards to be withheld. But… wait a minute, said some public commentary. Isn’t it sort of illegal to withhold report cards? This suggestion seemed to make its way into the bowels of the government legal department, and it came back out as a directive to school districts that first report cards had to be produced in November as scheduled even if the teachers did not supply the progress information. Parents subsequently received report cards that provided only attendance and registration information. This suggested that if there was going to be a legal challenge, the province didn’t want to be on the wrong side of it.

This union action now gives the same impression, that there are lawyers in the back room telling the leaders that withholding student progress information is a legal vulnerability.

So the vested parties are figuring out that they’re in the wrong, but no one is telling parents or citizens that they have rights. And you can see how nicely it serves them that parents and citizens are not in court demanding that their rights be codified. The less we know, the less we demand. And the less codified our rights are, the harder a battle we have if we ever do go to court to defend them. The force of law is contained in the body of existing case law: the common law. And so far, the common law in both education and public sector labour relations has developed without parents or citizens being explicitly defended in the courtroom.

Karen, I found that law was the first lens I applied to education that really brought it all into sharp focus. Economics, political science, sociology, organizational behaviour, history, psychology, and pedagogy itself always left something unclear in my quest to understand why all this nonsense was being so successfully and so consistently foisted on us.

Doug, thanks for getting my point: that if student progress information is withheld from either administration or parents, or from both, that should force a lock-out, either at employer or labour board instigation. I didn’t word it that way because I don’t use labour relations language to describe matters of public policy. And by the way, whether a view is minority/majority opinion is irrelevant in law. It is either legal or illegal. In law, a minority can win.

SEDITION As It’s Practiced In Canada

When teacher unions in Canada can counsel their members, who are public servants in a government service, to deny parents a regular report of their child’s progress while in that public school institution, I state that that is an act of sedition. 

In British Columbia 4 classes of independent schools get issued certification only if the inspector is satisfied the school does not promote or foster social change through violent action or sedition.  Anyone found guilty of sedition in Canada is liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years.

Unfortunately, such farsightedness is not in public school legislation. 

However, the notion of sedition should apply to all government schools in Canada.

In Aug 2011 the BCTF (BC Teachers Federation) applied to the Labour Relations Board for release from 31 teacher assigned administrative duties in order for them to engage in work-to-rule, a form of job action and popularly referred as being on strike.  Of the 31 demands 30 were accepted, including not writing progress report cards to parents.  The only thing the LRB did NOT approve was teachers not recording and transmitting to the office the attendance or absence of students.

Both these two items are key to parental duty in education — knowing they’ve consigned their child to a safe place and that the child is there for a service and report cards will inform them how the child is doing to enable knowledge of whether the parent should take further action — ask for more service or withdraw from this chosen institution.

I contend that the LRB, as an agent of government, was derelict in its duty to fulfill the law regarding the specifics of reporting to parents as clearly stated in the School Act.  I further contend that the Ministry of Education and BC Government and BC School Trustees Association were complicit in this dereliction of duty.

The teacher union seditiously undermined the law, displaced the government-of-the-day and were allowed their way by all the agencies of government mentioned. 

This would have been a ripe time for a parent to have sued and asked for remedy of imprisonment for all those responsible for this insult and illegal move.

Why is this sedition?  Well, the government laws were there but they were willfully transgressed.  The law was disobeyed and a non-elected agency, the teacher union, successfully undermined the law and the biological imperative of parents. It is, ultimately, the parents’ primary duty to see that their child is educated in Canada and that biological and legal notion stands to this day.

Although I applaud Ms Litztcke’s moxie, I was puzzled what could possibly be the change she wanted.  Her comment “could force a lock-out, either at employer or labour board instigation” seems to crystallize it. 

That isn’t going to happen.

It is fantasy to imagine the slightest daylight between the Ontario Liberals and the teacher’s union.  They are performing an elaborate opera, with full costumes, heroines and scoundrels, violins and drums, and at the end of the third act they will agree to a large retro-active settlement, and some enhancements to teacher perks. 

The next contract negotiations will be scheduled AFTER the 2018 elections, because the quid quo pro is massive union contributions to the Liberal’s re-election campaign - both in the form of 3rd-party advertising, and in teachers soliciting support from the parents of their classroom wards.

The kids are thrown under the bus, but they don’t vote, and enjoy time off school.  Minimum wage cashiers will pay higher taxes, desperate citizens on welfare will eat less, but we’ll do it cheerfully in order to fund well-deserved summer cottages for those long tranquil months of teacher holiday. 

In spite of a 6-month leadership campaign that should have been full of ideas, the provincial Conservatives (in both meanings of the phrase) have thrown their entire intellectual weight into opposing sex education.  They have already set themselves up for the next election debacle.

Big settlement coming.  BFFs in the next election.  Count on it.

This is fabulous conversation and I learn more every day about our education system.  Thank you Karin for the blog.  We really do need CHOICE in this province.  Unions have way too much power and it becomes more and more evident in Ontario.

The concept of “duty to report” is part of the Education Act. The purpose is to tell boards, schools and teachers tat they cannot decide to just not report. In Ontario 2 report cards are required but many boards or schools offer 3-4. There has always been controversy of whether attendance at ‘parents night’ reporting is a must do or a nice to do.

When a union is in a legal strike position however, the ‘duty to report’ is out the window. The union can choose exactly which duties to strike. The employer has the right to lock out.

There is no such thing as ‘duty to report’ DURING a legal strike.

I think some people need to understand that teacher strikes are 100% legal.

If someone wants to legislate an end to teacher strikes by removing g the right to strike but every jurisdiction that does this brings in binding arbitration and as you may have noticed binding arbitration has actually moved the position of police fire and EMS wages forward.

Governments COULD decide that they will impose all future contracts and not allow arbitration.

This would run them afoul of international labour agreements the UN and the ILO and would dynamite the government - teacher relationship kill extra curricular in a long term sense and signal to teachers to do the absolute minimum. The best and brightest will look elsewhere for employment.

Many reformers believe the answer is “choice”.

This will result in an election based on “no public funding for private education”. The party that proposes it like John Tory will suffer.

The number one principle associated with statist propaganda reads “The Bigger the Lie The More People Believe It” So there you have it folks

The most famous propogandist of that POV was Joseph Goebbles. A Nazi, in other words a member of the extreme right. The Nazis massacred thousands of socialists communists and trade unionists.

Fascism is the result of panic on the far right about the left coming to power. They seize power themselves and cancel democracy.

You haven’t suffered Doug Little.  You receive a teacher’s pension and own your own private school so…..best of both worlds.  How come parents don’t have that CHOICE?  Maybe some of SQE’s readers need to know a little bit more about your private school. 
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.thelittleeducationreport.ca/&h=DAQGsPs8v

I am a parent of three children who attend public schools in Toronto.  I can tell you that i have about 5 friends who teach for TDSB, and the deal that they have is quite sweet, kinda like that of a lot of government employees.  They teach for 9 months of the year, are often out of the school before 4pm and still have a lot of paid sick days compared to most of the rest of us.  After their magic number of “30”, they retire with 70% of their salary for the rest of their lives.  Not bad, eh?  And, please, don’t get me going about their hiring process or the fact that it is very hard to ever get an incompetent teacher fired.  It is pretty sad, actually.  My youngest daughter has had 61 supply teacher days this year.  Her teacher during first term was pregnant and somehow was allowed to take 1 to 2 full days per week off from September to December.  If she was unable to teach, I would think she should have been asked to go on short-term sick leave rather than have the children suffer due to a lack of consistency.  I am very disappointed in the Union.  From my experience, they talk a lot about caring for the kids, but generally, they care more about the teachers, and raising their salaries and benefits.
I have a masters degree and work in a hospital, and I can tell you that my profession does not make as much money, have as much time off or sick days, and definitely are not able to retire with a pension by their mid-50’s. 
I have a hard time not feeling really ripped off by the teachers union, and my kids are suffering as a result.  Shame on them!

They should learn from the garbage workers in Toronto who saw their jobs go private when they got too greedy! 

For people who post on this venue, Mr. Little, in his recent post, has effectively accused those of us who don’t confirm to his way of thinking are fascists. Individuals forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism. This insult from an individual providing school CHOICE to families by owning and or running a private learning institution. When individuals like Mr. Little start name calling (even if it’s between the lines) you know you’ve hit a nerve.  I don’t think I will post here any longer.  I can’t tolerate the way Mr. Little tries to antagonize.  It’s all in the delivery and his delivery method makes me ill to my stomach.

Doug, the duty to report goes out the window not when teachers are on strike, but when students are not in the classroom for any reason. A strike that leaves children in the classroom does not obviate the duty to report and therefore if it interrupts reporting is NOT 100% legal. The thing is, no parent has gone to court to ask a judge just how legal it is, which is why it’s on my to-do list.

The Nazis were socialists. One reason they victimized Jews was because they perceived Jews as capitalist. They were also big fans of the state raising the young, hence the Hitler Youth. They did oppress the communists, but then they violently oppressed anyone who stood between them and power. I have a little excerpt posted on my blog about the conflict between the Nazis and the communists: http://edrogue.blogspot.ca/2014/11/excerpt-from-hitler-by-ian-kershaw.html .
Then there’s this Hitler quote: “When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already… What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.” Thus the political advantage of those who have daily access to the children.
Further: “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”
Sorry for the detour, but I find the comparisons informative.

There are always Dougs in these kinds of discussions. There were two or three of them on the Educan litserv, the first Canadian electronic discussion forum in the 90s; one in particular who used to ooze absolute contempt for parents to the point, if I remember correctly, of suggesting that a parent must have had a sexual advance to the principal refused to be so bitter about their children’s school. Or some such charming thing.

That Doug owns a private school is interesting, but it doesn’t differentiate him substantially from people within the system itself. It’s important to realize that economically and politically for the people whose income derives either from it or around it (ie the owners of Kumon, Sylvan, etc), the system is not a failure but rather A BRILLIANT SUCCESS. The point is less whether they make money within the system or outside of it, but rather, whether have a pecuniary interest or not.

Parents and students are the only people in the usual listings of “stakeholders” who are unpaid and who have real stakes in the pageant that have to do with Charter rights - specifically, probably Section 7 rights but there are others, such as equality, that are useful to examine. It’s my opinion that compulsory schooling would not survive a Charter challenge that was carefully structured to capture the fact that there is a vast cohort of people who not only profit, but profit specifically from student failure that students and parents are powerless to evade - along with the incontrovertible evidence that failure is deliberately induced.

Indeed, Doug fears an election about education funding, but a LAWSUIT about education funding might be a far more threatening entity.

On another note ....                                Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section of the Constitution of Canada that lists what the Charter calls “fundamental freedoms” theoretically applying to everyone in Canada, regardless of whether they are a Canadian citizen, or an individual or corporation.[1] These freedoms can be held against actions of all levels of government and are enforceable by the courts.

The fundamental freedoms are freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association.

Question - Should the forced dues taken by government and given to unions (bargaining agents) not be split between organized labour associations and organized parents associations? Don’t parents have a guaranteed right to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and freedom of association? Don’t they have a right to representation at the bargaining table?

Well there you have it folks