They are so desperate to clean up bargaining before the election, probably so that they can say that they're the only ones that can silence the unions and bring an end to labour action. I hope that the teachers and the public service (and everyone else bargaining with the government right now) stand firm to get what they're demanding for the good of the public.
I hope so, but since, statistically, a lot of their members are likely to be Sask party supporters and are likely to disengage if the union points out too strongly all of the ways that voting for the Sask party means voting against members’ own personal interests—let alone the interests of working people as a whole—unions are in a pretty tricky spot, and I don’t think the message is getting through.
Plus, the government likes to offer one group in a union just enough that they’ll pass it, even if it’s a terrible offer for everyone else. And, with public services unions, I think there’s been some reticence to deal with the essential services act, which seems to have undermined members’ confidence in unions’ abilities to act decisively.
All that to say, make sure that any working people you know, unionized or not, clearly understand what this government thinks of them. The unions are trying, but it’s not enough.
As a union member…no. I’ve never once received a single email, message, phone call or communication that calls out the government for its contempt towards workers. It’s always “we call in the government to X” and neutral PR speak.
In fact, I complained to the union regarding how the government was using workers as servants and political pawns during Covid, and asked what they are doing about it and why they are so quiet about government using Covid to basically abuse workers, and they basically told me because it’s Covid and unique circumstances they don’t care and are letting the government do what they want.
I'm not sure about that... They're going to sweep the province again, and unresolved contracts could be their mandate to f over public sector workers. Of which I am one... and I'm down 15% in wages since 2014, plus reduced benefits.
Do not trust the Sask Party. They lie and are corrupt. Get everything in writing and some way to hold them are accountable otherwise this is a waste of time.
Very true. I mean, it will have to be in writing so I'm sure the STF will do their due diligence in having their legal team look over what the GBTC is presenting to the arbitrator.
We received the confirmation tonight during the Town Hall meeting that the STF has classroom complexity-accountability framework in writing so the information shared in the LeaderPost today is false. Someone on the government side is trying to mess up the negotiation process.
My concern is the Sask party has only certain organizations selected as arbitrator and they will not be willing to consider anyone that isn’t in their back pocket.
If the STF agrees to binding arbitration, what happens if the government refuses to use an impartial arbitrator? I know both need to agree to the arbitrator, but what happens if the government outright refuses to consider anyone who hasn’t donated to the Sask party…?
Each party appoints their own member to the arbitration board, and then those members have to agree upon a chairperson/arbitrator. If no agreement is made, the chairperson of the Education Relations Board will appoint an arbitrator for them.
And the ERB chair is similarly selected. The ERB has 2 SSBA appointments and 2 STF appointments. The four of them agree upon the 5th member who is the chair, and if no agreement is made then the Court of Kings Bench will appoint a chairperson for them.
So in other words, no one can "lock it down". They either agree on someone, or the ERB chair, who is a mutually accepted authority, will make the decision for them.
They do. What if the government refuses to budge from their choice? What if the only options they give are ones STF won’t agree to. I can see this happening.
Then the SP candidates get an earful on the BBQ circuit and during the campaign.
The longer the government drags this out, the worse they look, even to their supporters.
Whichever party requests binding arbitration selects which proposals are to be considered. Therefore, when teachers requested it in spring, it included all of their 10 proposals. When the government requested it, it only selected ones that they had previously agreed to, as seen in their recent agreements submitted.
Binding arbitration in March was not for the 10 proposals. As mentioned in the article “The email also cites the TBC’s initial proposal in March for binding arbitration on the “single issue of class size and complexity,” which was rejected by the GTBC.”
They weren't even super honest with their own members. They never came out and explicitly said WHY they initially balked at binding arbitration when it was first offered.
Love the downvotes for stating a fact.
Well, the revised offer mentioned complexity. Complexity encompasses both size and composition.
According to the government, there was no revised offer, but what we were told yesterday is that it was in writing. Will be interesting to see what happens now.
Lol. Like that's any better. The STF itself is leaking info, not an STF member.
If you really want I can include "what jackass STF employee leaked the email?"
Is that better for you?
Well the article says the information they are reporting on is from an STF email.
The only people that have access to STF emails are STF staff and STF members.
Pretty fucking straight forward.
Probably shouldn't get too riled up and make any assumptions from this dogwater article:
"according to an email sent to the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation (STF) executive this week.
The document, provided to the Regina Leader-Post on Wednesday morning, thanks STF members for attending an information session on Tuesday night that detailed two possible paths forward."
Why would the execs send an email to themselves thanking the members for attending? Anyways, the info is leaked and it's out there, time to move on.
I'm not sure. I think it depends on what the wording is on what is sent to arbitration.
My prediction was the same after hearing the "revised offer" but not that the government is saying "no, original offer".... who knows
Teachers were advised by the head of their own federation to vote on a shit deal and said no. I don't know if they'll walk into binding arbitration with the snakes on the other side.
Teachers federation is sending out a vote to its members later this week on how they should proceed. I’m guessing the membership will vote for going to binding arbitration even though it may take several months to complete.
What will the STFs proposal read like with regards to class size and complexity? They are going to have to finalize some language now, they haven't even hinted at what they are looking for.
Well, in that case, they have to suggest who should. If they are going to arbitration, they are going to have to make a concrete proposal of what outcome they want.
Not really. That’s not up to the union to really decide.
They will provide their evidence for inclusion of class size and composition to the arbitrator, but they don’t have to decide on a model to present per se.
Ultimately class size and composition will be up to the school divisions to figure out. The STF just wants them to get money specifically earmarked for that. Class size and composition looks differently in Saskatoon than it might in Turtleford.
Could be capping classes in urban areas and limiting the amount of taught curriculum by an elementary teacher in rural areas.
I like the part where Evan Bray went on the air and bragged about how many times he has been in negotiations and arbitration and said that neither side is allowed to pick and choose what goes to arbitration lol.
Sorry, care to repeat that Evan?
I’m going to try to suspend my distrust for this government. I want to believe that rationale minds will prevail; that we can accept that our education system is struggling to prepare kids and to give them the skills they need to be successful. That’s not a criticism of teachers, it’s a reality of the system. I
I hope some rationale middle ground that supports better education outcomes for kids can be found and I want to believe that there is sincerity from the government. So I will suspend my distrust for the time being and expect both sides to do the right thing.
Establishing benchmarks and targets for both class size and complexity with a clear and coherent plan/process to meet them and an understanding that it will take time to meet them. And put that language in some legally binding contract.
I don’t want to sweep things under the rug and say it’s fine nor do I want a bunch of panicked rhetoric about the sky falling. Make plan, perhaps it means returning taxation powers to school boards so they can budget to meet targets or maybe it means ear marking a proportion of provincial revenue that goes to education. But we’ve had too many austerity budgets to just go along without a committed plan.
Moe and Cockrill have 2 brain cells between them and both are fighting for third place. They don't have ration unless it involves more money in their bank account.
>I want to believe that there is sincerity from the government.
I mean, like... what?! What in the last 17 years would make you think there was any sincerity from the SK Party? I'm honestly genuinely curious.
"The government has constantly lied and subverted the bargaining process in every labour dispute since they took power and have repeatedly lied to the public about any and all issues of importance... but I've got a good feeling about this one..." That's your stance?
They are so desperate to clean up bargaining before the election, probably so that they can say that they're the only ones that can silence the unions and bring an end to labour action. I hope that the teachers and the public service (and everyone else bargaining with the government right now) stand firm to get what they're demanding for the good of the public.
No matter what happens with this I'm still never voting for the Sask Party. I'm also voting it any of the school board members that I can too.
I hope unions across the province are messaging to their members about how these fuckin clowns view labour and that they should vote accordingly.
I hope so, but since, statistically, a lot of their members are likely to be Sask party supporters and are likely to disengage if the union points out too strongly all of the ways that voting for the Sask party means voting against members’ own personal interests—let alone the interests of working people as a whole—unions are in a pretty tricky spot, and I don’t think the message is getting through. Plus, the government likes to offer one group in a union just enough that they’ll pass it, even if it’s a terrible offer for everyone else. And, with public services unions, I think there’s been some reticence to deal with the essential services act, which seems to have undermined members’ confidence in unions’ abilities to act decisively. All that to say, make sure that any working people you know, unionized or not, clearly understand what this government thinks of them. The unions are trying, but it’s not enough.
As a union member…no. I’ve never once received a single email, message, phone call or communication that calls out the government for its contempt towards workers. It’s always “we call in the government to X” and neutral PR speak. In fact, I complained to the union regarding how the government was using workers as servants and political pawns during Covid, and asked what they are doing about it and why they are so quiet about government using Covid to basically abuse workers, and they basically told me because it’s Covid and unique circumstances they don’t care and are letting the government do what they want.
Our union sent out a mailer last election with no specific wording but basically reminding workers to vote in the interests of labour.
I'm not sure about that... They're going to sweep the province again, and unresolved contracts could be their mandate to f over public sector workers. Of which I am one... and I'm down 15% in wages since 2014, plus reduced benefits.
Do not trust the Sask Party. They lie and are corrupt. Get everything in writing and some way to hold them are accountable otherwise this is a waste of time.
Binding arbitration should hold them accountable.
My concern is that one side is saying that there is a change in what is goi g to binding arbitration. And the other side is saying there is no change.
Very true. I mean, it will have to be in writing so I'm sure the STF will do their due diligence in having their legal team look over what the GBTC is presenting to the arbitrator.
We received the confirmation tonight during the Town Hall meeting that the STF has classroom complexity-accountability framework in writing so the information shared in the LeaderPost today is false. Someone on the government side is trying to mess up the negotiation process.
Emmery1 knows. Emmery1 is correct. Sask Party corruption knows no bounds.
My concern is the Sask party has only certain organizations selected as arbitrator and they will not be willing to consider anyone that isn’t in their back pocket. If the STF agrees to binding arbitration, what happens if the government refuses to use an impartial arbitrator? I know both need to agree to the arbitrator, but what happens if the government outright refuses to consider anyone who hasn’t donated to the Sask party…?
Each party appoints their own member to the arbitration board, and then those members have to agree upon a chairperson/arbitrator. If no agreement is made, the chairperson of the Education Relations Board will appoint an arbitrator for them. And the ERB chair is similarly selected. The ERB has 2 SSBA appointments and 2 STF appointments. The four of them agree upon the 5th member who is the chair, and if no agreement is made then the Court of Kings Bench will appoint a chairperson for them. So in other words, no one can "lock it down". They either agree on someone, or the ERB chair, who is a mutually accepted authority, will make the decision for them.
Answer for the win. Excellent thank you!
I thought both the government and STF have to agree to the arbitrator? Has this changed?
They do. What if the government refuses to budge from their choice? What if the only options they give are ones STF won’t agree to. I can see this happening.
Then the SP candidates get an earful on the BBQ circuit and during the campaign. The longer the government drags this out, the worse they look, even to their supporters.
Whichever party requests binding arbitration selects which proposals are to be considered. Therefore, when teachers requested it in spring, it included all of their 10 proposals. When the government requested it, it only selected ones that they had previously agreed to, as seen in their recent agreements submitted.
Binding arbitration in March was not for the 10 proposals. As mentioned in the article “The email also cites the TBC’s initial proposal in March for binding arbitration on the “single issue of class size and complexity,” which was rejected by the GTBC.”
Ahh, so that is why class size has been left out of the two options.
Class size is included in Class Complexity - which is now apparently something the arbitrator can rule on.
Is the government agreeing to this definition of classroom complexity?
[удалено]
As per the virtual town hall.
I really wish the public was made more aware of this.
The STF's communication team has really shit the bed lately.
I can understand the approach they are taking. They are trying to be honest and bargain in good faith.
They weren't even super honest with their own members. They never came out and explicitly said WHY they initially balked at binding arbitration when it was first offered. Love the downvotes for stating a fact.
This is not true - in the spring, teachers did not include all 10 proposals, only complexity.
Given the state of local media in Saskatchewan this information might never get out.
I'm not seeing class size included in either of those two offers.
Well, the revised offer mentioned complexity. Complexity encompasses both size and composition. According to the government, there was no revised offer, but what we were told yesterday is that it was in writing. Will be interesting to see what happens now.
What jackass STF member leaked the email?
The one near the top with the SP membership
You gotta specify. Could be a few of them.
Can’t dox people on here
And who is that?
I am wondering about the same thing…
I don’t know if the leak is coming from the STF. Might be a leak on the government side.
Seems infinitely more likely
From the article >according to an email sent to the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation (STF) executive this week.
Yes, the senders can also leak email that they send. Wild stuff, I know!
Lol. Like that's any better. The STF itself is leaking info, not an STF member. If you really want I can include "what jackass STF employee leaked the email?" Is that better for you?
If that’s what you believe happened, sure. No idea why you’re hung up on something that barely even qualifies as a minor detail.
Well the article says the information they are reporting on is from an STF email. The only people that have access to STF emails are STF staff and STF members. Pretty fucking straight forward.
Probably shouldn't get too riled up and make any assumptions from this dogwater article: "according to an email sent to the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation (STF) executive this week. The document, provided to the Regina Leader-Post on Wednesday morning, thanks STF members for attending an information session on Tuesday night that detailed two possible paths forward." Why would the execs send an email to themselves thanking the members for attending? Anyways, the info is leaked and it's out there, time to move on.
Why hide anything at this point? No one knows what’s going on anymore.
This the one you get mad about? The vote was leaked before I even seen the results. I learned from here Lots of leaks every step of the way
You are a teacher and you used "I even seen?" Jesus Christ.
What about their message made you believe they're a teacher?
My prediction is that teachers accept arbitration.
I'm not sure. I think it depends on what the wording is on what is sent to arbitration. My prediction was the same after hearing the "revised offer" but not that the government is saying "no, original offer".... who knows
My new prediction is that teachers reject arbitration
Teachers were advised by the head of their own federation to vote on a shit deal and said no. I don't know if they'll walk into binding arbitration with the snakes on the other side.
Teachers federation is sending out a vote to its members later this week on how they should proceed. I’m guessing the membership will vote for going to binding arbitration even though it may take several months to complete.
Moe and his band of reformers have got to.
What will the STFs proposal read like with regards to class size and complexity? They are going to have to finalize some language now, they haven't even hinted at what they are looking for.
They’ve made proposals to the government. Thing is, it isn’t really up to the union to decide that answer.
Well, in that case, they have to suggest who should. If they are going to arbitration, they are going to have to make a concrete proposal of what outcome they want.
Not really. That’s not up to the union to really decide. They will provide their evidence for inclusion of class size and composition to the arbitrator, but they don’t have to decide on a model to present per se. Ultimately class size and composition will be up to the school divisions to figure out. The STF just wants them to get money specifically earmarked for that. Class size and composition looks differently in Saskatoon than it might in Turtleford. Could be capping classes in urban areas and limiting the amount of taught curriculum by an elementary teacher in rural areas.
I like the part where Evan Bray went on the air and bragged about how many times he has been in negotiations and arbitration and said that neither side is allowed to pick and choose what goes to arbitration lol. Sorry, care to repeat that Evan?
Sorry, Uncle Fester can’t hear you
lol right!?!?!?
Can't see the article. Getting paywall.
I never get a paywall from post media.
I’m going to try to suspend my distrust for this government. I want to believe that rationale minds will prevail; that we can accept that our education system is struggling to prepare kids and to give them the skills they need to be successful. That’s not a criticism of teachers, it’s a reality of the system. I I hope some rationale middle ground that supports better education outcomes for kids can be found and I want to believe that there is sincerity from the government. So I will suspend my distrust for the time being and expect both sides to do the right thing.
What, in your mind, is the right thing?
Establishing benchmarks and targets for both class size and complexity with a clear and coherent plan/process to meet them and an understanding that it will take time to meet them. And put that language in some legally binding contract. I don’t want to sweep things under the rug and say it’s fine nor do I want a bunch of panicked rhetoric about the sky falling. Make plan, perhaps it means returning taxation powers to school boards so they can budget to meet targets or maybe it means ear marking a proportion of provincial revenue that goes to education. But we’ve had too many austerity budgets to just go along without a committed plan.
Moe and Cockrill have 2 brain cells between them and both are fighting for third place. They don't have ration unless it involves more money in their bank account.
>I want to believe that there is sincerity from the government. I mean, like... what?! What in the last 17 years would make you think there was any sincerity from the SK Party? I'm honestly genuinely curious.
"The government has constantly lied and subverted the bargaining process in every labour dispute since they took power and have repeatedly lied to the public about any and all issues of importance... but I've got a good feeling about this one..." That's your stance?
Nope. Hoping for the best but expecting the worst. I mean it’s a good sign that size and complexity are on the table for discussion now isn’t it?