The only way to fix this mess with the teachers is to send it to arbitration. The government and the union would identify the key compensation issues—wages, long service award and retirement health benefits and then establish a floor and ceiling for potential choices for the arbitrator. For example, the parties could agree to having an arbitrator choose a wage increase somewhere between a half percent to one percent per year. The arbitrator could choose between $0 for a long service award or up to $800 a year for years of service. The arbitrator could choose between $0 and $300 a year for teachers to pay health benefits. They should bracket the arbitration, get on with it and get a fair settlement by an independent third party operating under mutually agreed parameters/constraints. —The I want a fair solution person
This article appears in Jan 26 – Feb 1, 2017.
Mess…?…what mess…?
The teachers are teaching. Fuck hockey and school trips. Organize that outside of school if you want it. Let the teachers hang themselves or go on a full strike.
As far as arbitration: no to a third party splitting the difference. That just pushes both sides to the extreme, to move the middle ground toward them. The only arbitration that works is Final Offer. Arbitrator selects one of two final offers (not split the difference). That forces both parties toward the middle ground, hoping their side is chosen.
Finally, why would you have an arbitrator when there is a deal about to be voted on…?
Go Go Gadget Arbitration!
I suggest if you don’t know much about the process, you say nothing because the suggestions and comments coming from the peanut gallery here are clearly stupid and uninformed.
I think you need to learn the process and understand what arbitration means. typically it is desired to avoid going to binding arbitration, not encouraged and it won’t necessarily make a resolution either.
“comments coming from the peanut gallery here are clearly stupid and uninformed” doesn’t pass for argument.
Besides, everybody’s entitled to my opinion…
“comments coming from the peanut gallery here are clearly stupid and uninformed.”
Using insults to try to suppress the opinions and comments of those you disagree with or consider ill-informed is rarely a good idea. The only time it IS acceptable is when someone is promoting prejudice, hatred or violence.
If you disagree with someone present your counter argument or provide the information you feel they are lacking. Calling people “stupid” reflects worse on you than them.
I fully support that issues around class size, special needs kids, and administrative data entry need to be sorted out. I’m not convinced that these issues need to be articulated in the contract, as long as the “committee” assigned to them can AFFECT REAL CHANGE.
But the argument around the maintaining the Public Service Award is a non-starter. That was a perq when public service jobs were inferior to the private sector (4O+ years ago?). That hasn’t been the case for a long time now. I think public service compensation may even be unsustainable. The Toronto Sun recently published an article to this effect called “Public Sector Has Become An Unsustainable Monster”. The PSA is going the way of the dodo, as it should. Taxpayers are on the hook for this and it’s UNCONSCIONABLE that it should continue.
Also, there was the recent national news story about having to pay Federal workers some two or three billion in compensation for severance. It sounded alarming, and yeah, it should be! But what would be more alarming is what the cost would now be if that Federal PSA perq was not discontinued five years ago BY THE FEDS AND PSAC. Sure the Feds have to pay out what the liability was, but it would be a lot worse today if the perq continued!!
Get real folks. We had a good contract last time. Full disclosure – I’m an NSGEU member, and last time we got seven and a half percent over three years. If this newest contract proposal is more modest… ok. I get it. This is an economically depressed province, and costs for everything to run this province are going up while revenues are going down. This contract may underwhelm salary-wise, but we’ll revisit it next time. I heard one “key representative” from the NSTU say that the province will have to “come up with the money from somewhere”. What little regard for the taxpayer.
There are so many things to worry about / consider, regarding the finances of this province. I’m ok with my current salary, and benefits, and defined benefit pension, and public service award that I’ve earned up to the end of the last contract. Bleeding the province for more salary and benefits at this time is just pure greed. And being a taxpayer, I feel concern about the posturing of groups like the NSGEU, NSTU, and the shills from the Parents for Teachers Facebook group pushing these aspects of the agenda. Get a deal done folks. One that is reasonable in this day and age. IMHO