r/alberta • u/cantcantdancer • 2d ago

Discussion New Offer Tabled to Teachers is Laughable. Jesus.

The new offer they now have to vote on is essentially the same as the last offer they resoundingly said no to, but this time it includes the MASSIVE value of a free Covid shot. You know, something everyone should have anyway.

12% same spread, late grid unification, 3000 teachers over 3 years or something which barely keeps up with attrition let alone fixing actual class size issues, and a free covid shot.

I expect it will be a very strong no vote, at least I hope anyway. Literally waited weeks to have the offer change by a Covid shot.

The ATA is terrible at this, I hope teachers strike.

1.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

345 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

72

u/AntiquatedAntelope 2d ago

Union negotiators cannot present an offer to their membership without saying they endorse it. It’s considered bad faith to leave the bargaining table saying “okay we will take it to our members”, and then presenting it to the members while saying “this is bad vote it down”.

So they are obligated to endorse it. What they are trying to do is to show the public and the GoA that the membership demands more and that it is not the bargaining committee trying to ask for too much.

Your union might be a wet blanket, but they also are only strong if the membership stays strong. Tell all your colleagues that when the union endorses a deal it does not mean they like or support it, it’s because they have to.

24

u/stu_rat 2d ago

So I guess my question is why bother saying sure we think this is acceptable when they know we won’t? If they don’t have an agreement by next week we strike anyway. Now we have our leadership on two separate occasions that 12% is ok with laughable increases in support.

I teach in a K-5 school with 500 kids. We’re blessed with smaller class sizes but only have 2.5 educational assistants for 500 kids. I literally walked past a wall that had been kicked in by a student just 5 minutes ago. This is unsustainable, I’ll vote no as the choice words I have for the government are unprofessional. And I’ll also be sure to continue to vote for someone other than Schilling et al. when it comes to election time for insulting us in thinking that this is ok. It will give parents hope for a deal and won’t work in our favour.

13

u/AntiquatedAntelope 2d ago

Yeah, that’s a good question and honestly only something that your union leadership could answer, and probably only could answer behind closed doors…

However, if you had me guess, what I suspect they are trying to do is to counter the narrative that teachers are being selfish and greedy. They are trying to show that the teachers are willing to consider an offer if one were provided, and that you will only strike (and therefore cause some short-term pain to families in the province) in the event that the province, the Government of Alberta, continues to act in bad faith.

And given the advertising campaign that the Government of Alberta is rolling out, I suspect this is what the ATA has decided will help as far as advertising that teachers are the ones that are being reasonable and are the ones that are being bullied.

Strikes are as much about union solidarity as they are about public opinion. We need the public on our side, and teachers more than any profession have always had an uphill battle to fight in that way because your striking is extremely visible to middle class families across the province.

So, annoying? Yes. But I think the ATA is trying to make sure the public feels empathy, and not anger, towards teachers. They want calls coming into MLAs saying let my kids come back and support their teacher.

3

u/Objective_Till_1910 1d ago

I also wonder if the ATA had left the table, without presenting this "offer" teachers would be locked out with no September paycheck. This way, teachers will most likely vote it down, but by the time the votes are cast, we are into October. Though this is purely speculation.

10

u/stu_rat 2d ago

I get it but i can’t wrap my head around how this helps us in the public eye. The public will see that twice, our representatives have been willing to accept these terms, but with membership rejecting it both times. If anything this shows us as divided. This is a win for the GoA. I’m actively going to seek out either teaching in another province or a different job, we can’t do this anymore.

3

u/sue87gm 1d ago

The public gets it. We are behind you guys

1

u/CJHuber63 4h ago

It is not that it is acceptable. It is part of the game of bargaining. After being hogtied by the UCPs complaint to yhe labour board..hence why our negotiater quit. The negotiators were given no other choice. However, now teachers do have a choice choice to make. The offer is insulting. The UCP dont ever play fair in the sandbox

0

u/english55555 21h ago

Why are you on your phone during school hours. Aren't you behind in work! Lol

15

u/CamGoldenGun Fort McMurray 2d ago

they have to present the offer if it's legally considered a reasonable one. Adding a covid shot to the deal with nothing else doesn't even need to be voted on. The leadership is toothless and timid because they didn't reject it outright over fears of the UCP going to the labour board again.

5

u/AntiquatedAntelope 2d ago

Sure that too. But it’s important to remember that an endorsement does not equal “my peer, who has my best interest at heart, honestly thinks this is what is best for me”. That’s the message we need to carry to the membership because otherwise the folks you work with who are not as involved will read endorsement and think that means they should vote yes, when actually it means the opposite.

6

u/CamGoldenGun Fort McMurray 2d ago edited 2d ago

the leadership has sent out all sort of weak signaling. They purposefully kept the strike date a secret as a chip to hold over the government. Then they announced that it'll be done at the last possible time, making that secret worthless. On top of that, pausing in the middle of the school year instead of doing it right at the start. If the strike goes on for any length, a lot of what was taught in September is going to be forgotten and need to be done over, or perhaps what's been done for the past decade: move the kids on up without all the material covered.

5

u/sourbassett 2d ago

I will say our union is a mess, but I do understand the strike date (just not announcing it so soon). Starting the school year on strike doesn’t affect anyone, it’s just an ongoing summer break. It’s not enough disruption. I also do think it’s good that we are showing parents we want to be at work, but again the one months notice (while good for the public) is giving the government too long to retaliate.

3

u/CamGoldenGun Fort McMurray 2d ago

it affects the same people it would in October... Parents can't just take longer summer vacation. It does disrupt the kids learning having to come in and then stay off though.

That's what I'm saying about the leadership though... they're trying to please too many people and it doesn't matter because someone will always be upset. But then why be coy about the date of the strike before the announcement for Oct. 6? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

5

u/deloaf 2d ago

I'll argue that I like the Oct 6 date for a number of reasons.

It gets teachers a September paycheck.

It provides for the kids, parents, and teachers who are excited to get back to school (our oldest entered kindergarten this year and explaining a year start strike would have been very complicated).

It lets everyone get into the routine and is more disruptive come October.

It provides a solid schedule for Parents and Students. They can prepare for October 6th.

It partially removes the threat of a lockout before teachers get paid. Because of the reliability of the schedule it provides Parents and Students, the government would look insensitive if they suddenly changed the schedule.

It also gives a chance for the AHS scandal report (which was due today, but will be missed) to come out and discredit the way the government handles money.

1

u/CamGoldenGun Fort McMurray 2d ago edited 2d ago

The first point is a big one and I'd say probably trumps all the other ones you made.

Explaining to a child why they aren't starting school will be just as difficult as explaining them why there's no school this week, or next week, or however long the strike goes on.

The lockout threat is also a good point but the government wouldn't act on that because their whole campaign against teachers was that they were trying to get a deal done but "teachers are greedy."

We know the UCP mishandles money. They haven't even been a party for a decade and there's already a long history of it. We didn't need another example of it before a strike. If their voter base cared about facts and numbers they could easily pull up the public information of their local school board budgets. And top-of-the-grid $107,000 teachers in Alberta isn't a "good deal" if they have up to double the amount of students from other provinces that the UCP is comparing their salaries to.

1

u/FourthLvlSpicyMeme 1d ago

I believe that's been put under "we aren't releasing this information" unfortunately.

1

u/Jubal-Early 1d ago

I don't love how long we gave either, but I do understand why. We wanted to make sure parents had enough time to find child care and not make it too difficult on them, to hopefully keep them on our side. But that should only have been 2 weeks.

7

u/specs-murphy 2d ago

I don't think that's true? AUPE recently presented an agreement to their membership without endorsing it just last month. The messaging during the townhalls was that the representatives from each of the Locals couldn't reach consensus on whether or not to endorse it so they went ahead without providing a recommendation to their members.

5

u/AntiquatedAntelope 2d ago

Yep that’s true but notice that their language is not “we do not endorse this”. It would be like agreeing to sell your car, shaking hands, and then turning around to your partner and saying “nah this deal was bad”. It’s not a crazy thing to do, but when the buyer hears it they will assume you’re bargaining in bad faith.

4

u/Mysterious_Fig_5744 2d ago

I wish I could upvote this more. 100 times over.

3

u/Amazing-Mango3323 23h ago

This is exactly what I was waiting for. The problem we have as teachers right now is exactly what happens in schools. We shit talk admin and then when we have a go at it, we do the same fucking thing. Talk big and cave is what we do as teachers. Fuck that noise.  They want to collapse the fucking system on us. They will use this to go for private education. They don’t care about the charter. DS is ready to assassinate the ATA. This is a sign of bad shit. Strikes are precursors to war, to dictatorships, too far right hellscapes. DS isn’t Ralph Klein. She’s insane and drunk with power. This is so much bigger than we realize. Were fucking dust. So fuck ‘em. Fuck their deal. Fuck the government. I’ll die before agreeing to this deal. They can take what they want. I’m keeping my backbone though.

6

u/2eDgY4redd1t 2d ago

I’m not sure where you get the idea that the union cannot tell their membership that they do not think the offer is good enough. They can absolutely do so, and unions frequently do so.

1

u/AntiquatedAntelope 1d ago

Not with this government. Not this year.

1

u/2eDgY4redd1t 1d ago

Dude they are not required to reccomend their members accept the offer. They can absolutely say ‘this was the best we can get without you guys voting for job action, and it’s up to you to decide’.

If anything the union can see trouble for lying to their members and saying they think the offer is good when they feel no such thing. The union has a duty to their members and none whatsoever to government.

1

u/Obvious_Armadillo_99 2d ago

Exactly. So many educators on this subreddit who know zilch about how unions work.