Why This Guy Cannot Ratify

I dont drink enough alcohol.

And in an effort to address this problem, I sometimes look for an occasion in which to
imbibe. Last year, I found myself at a rousing union meeting, all the important OSSTF
acolytes were walking the dais, wearing suits and enjoying the aura of a hefty gravitas.
They outlined the big plan, the blue print for the Promised Land, that would take us out of
the shadows of austerity and into the milk and honey of real improvements and labour
victory. Titillated by the plan, I vowed to crack open a bottle of expensive vino when the
government acquiesced under the pressure of organized edu-labour.
So here we are. The deal is done, the fight is fought, and the spoils of victory are upon us.
But now that I can see the deal, the LCBO will have to wait. This is more of a kool-aid
occasion and I would have to drink a whole lotta OSSTF executive-flavoured kool-aid to ever
think this deal is tasty enough to ratify.
Let us examine the deal from two perspectives. The deal itself and the message it sends.
From the very beginning Paul Elliott, OSSTF president, said we would not settle for anything
less than real gains or real improvements. Insert war metaphor here, perhaps
something about the magnificent seven. We would fight until real gains and real
improvements were realized. These non-specific terms were never defined and are
essentially meaningless, but as the students say, thats what he said.
So as I sift through the deal in search of real gains, here is what I can find: NOTHING. Real
is a really interesting modifier. When our president uses the modifier real he is suggesting
that the improvements must be measured against some sort of standard that would quantify
the improvement as being tangible. By the way, somebody call my parents, they would be
thrilled to know that I just made use of my Linguistics degree.
So when speaking about real money in the real world most real people tend to speak about
real purchasing power. I decided to check the Canadian Dollar against other currencies and
it turns out that I make over a million dollars a year in many countries, (heck, in Belarus and
Vietnam us teaching types are billionaires - wowza). But being a Billionaire in Hanoi is not
the same as being a Billionaire in Forest Hill. Its about how far the money actually goes.
Thankfully, there are tools that let us track the purchasing power of a teachers salary.
According to the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator, $100 of goods in 2012 would cost
$104.77 today. So inflation over the past three years has been 4.77%. Therefore, a top
earning TDSB teacher who earned $94 707 in 2012 would need to earn $99 227.99 today,
according to the Bank of Canada, to have maintained her or his purchasing power. At the
end of this deal (June 2017) the top earning teacher will be making $96 132.34 and it
should be noted that the Bank of Canada's calculation of $99K plus change does not take
into account two more years of inflation before the end of this proposed deal.
So how real is this raise? Your raise really does exist, you just wont feel it in any real
world sort of way. In fact, it will feel more like a pay cut than a raise. Is this what the OSSTF
leadership meant when they said real improvements and real gains? Somebody please
tell me they werent just playing word games when they were selling us a strike strategy.
That Blasted Chart
Yes, that chart, created by the OSSTF to seal the deal. It compares our tentative contract to
the first offer made by the government and the Ontario Public School Boards Association.
Why would the OSSTF compare the offer they accepted to the one they originally deemed
offensive and unacceptable. Doesnt that legitimize the offer that was so problematic it put
three boards out on the picket line? Its a little like comparing apples to vomit - you could do
it, but why would you? Why not compare the proposed contract to our current contract, or
the OSSTFs original offer, or the contract negotiated in 2008. It seems like theyre trying to
sell us something.

Grid Movement and Benefits

The return of grid movement at the beginning of the school year as opposed to the middle of
the school year would on the surface seem to constitute a real gain. But history and truth
are demanding bedfellows. The Liberal candidate for London West, Ken Coran, told us
delayed grid movement was a temporary salary restraint that would only be in place for two
years, and at the conclusion of the two year period it would automatically disappear KAZAAM - it would be gone. I guess the former OSSTF President/Liberal Candidate failed to
mention this fact to the current real gains president of the OSSTF. Mr. Elliot allowed grid
movement to become a bargaining chip and allowed those on the grid to endure three years
of delayed grid movement as opposed to the originally agreed upon two years, that sounds
like a real loss to me.
As for the benefits, I dont see much to put up party streamers about. The notion of the
OSSTF taking over our benefits has been around for a while. Originally, it was an idea that
was intended to save the government money without having to gut our contract. They
gutted our contract anyways. And after the MOU was implemented we were told there was
a commitment from the government to explore and implement an OSSTF administered
benefits plan. And that commitment is all that exists in this proposed deal. So where is the
elusive real gain? Is it in the 4% inflationary trigger contained in the proposal - no. The four
percent is only available if we take over the plan, the language of the tentative deal, says
funding for benefits will remain status quo if the OSSTF does not take over the benefits plan.
When did the OSSTFs administration of a provincial benefits plan move from being an idea
to avoid massive strips to our contract (which happened anyways) to just a nice idea with a
bonus of two years of inflation funding if we actually take over our benefits? And about that
four percent - it galls me to no end that the parties that put this deal together acknowledge
the significance of inflation when it comes to our benefits but not when it comes to our
actual pay cheques.
The PD Day and the Signing Bonus
The signing bonus is NOT a raise, as it will not change the salary grid. Its a bribe, and a
pathetic one at that, as most of it will go to paying off the .73% that will be deducted from
your salary this year for the strike action that barely happened last year. And by the way,
that lump sum, is more of an drippy sum as it will be paid out 1/26 th at a time, adding one
percent to every pay cheque you receive throughout the year. My take home pay will go up
about $23 per cheque, before the $16-18 (estimated) deduction to finance last years
strikes. Now fellow teachers, try not to spend that signing bonus all in one place (like at a
Dollar Store).
And seriously, somebody negotiated one more PD day? Is that a concession on our part?
What did we get in return?
But with all that being said, my biggest issue with the deal being proposed is the message
that ratification would send.
The Message to the OSSTF leadership
If the leadership of our union wants to talk tough as nails, old school labour thuggishiness
and then cave with a token fight, we need to tell them its simply not good enough. Mr.
Elliot and his cadre said that we would wage war, they didnt tell us our armaments were
comprised of squirt guns and potato cannons. We had a strike plan that could have been
executed early last school year and renewed for this year, it wasnt. At AMPA we were told
seven districts would be on strike if we didnt have a deal by May 1, 2015. Three districts
walked the pavement. A no vote will tell the leadership not to overpromise and radically
under-deliver. Especially, after our sick days and gratuities were lost, grid movement was
delayed, and we had to take unpaid days in the previous deal.
The OSSTF is telling its membership that this is the best deal were going to get (without
much of a fight). And that may be true. But, in the midst of Bill 115, our leadership went to
the teachers of Guelph, York and Niagara with a deal that they said was the best deal they
would be able to negotiate. Two of those districts, York and Niagara, voted no to the deal
and a few months later, the teachers of Ontario were presented a deal that was better than
the rejected deal. There is always a better deal and we were told to expect a fight for it.

The Message to the Government

Dont fund power plant closures, minor league Olympic boondoggles, ORNGE fiascos, and
raises for cops, doctors, hydro employees, and the LCBO (an aside, the LCBO is an essential
service) while picking our pockets and telling us the cupboard is bare when it comes to
education. Oh, and dont you dare go to the media and vilify teachers and tell the public
that we and our blessed gold plated pension are the essence of the economic elite.
The Message for Everybody
What do South Korea and Finland have in common? They are typically held up as two of the
top performing school systems in the world by the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD). But they have radically different approaches to education. They
differ greatly when it comes to standardized testing, to hours spent in the classroom, to
notions of curriculum and teacher autonomy. Really, the common denominator between the
two is the respect the two systems afford the teaching profession. In fact, in Finland,
teachers are so respected that it is harder to get into Teachers College than it is to get into
Med. School.
If we ratify this deal we are indicating that it is okay to devalue education; that it is okay to
come to the bargaining table with a ludicrous proposal that undoes many of the advances
that have improved education in our province. And that we are okay with the continued
slide towards a more American system of education and the exploitation of education for
political purposes.
If we ratify this deal we are abdicating our responsibility to work for the improvement and
betterment of education. Teachers must be the vanguards of education and if we accept this
deal, we are turning a blind-eye to the continued slow motion destruction of education in
Ontario.
The single biggest variable in a childs educational experience is the adult standing in front
of the blackboard. Its not the policies, nor is it the total hours in class, nor the curriculums
nuances, and it certainly is not in the administration of standardized testing. Its about real
people working to create real moments and real value for students. And every time
education is devalued in our society, whether through reductions in our compensation
package, or strips to contract language, or suggesting publicly that teachers are overpaid,
underworked, entitled public servants with gold-plated pensions - we lose something. We
lose a good person who leaves the profession. Or we lose the young man or woman who
was considering a career in education and opts instead for engineering, or law school, or
med. school, or business school, or some other more respected higher-paying profession.
We lose, and the students lose...and these losses are harder to regain than a couple of
percentage points on a salary grid.
I will vote no for my ideals, for my finances and for my daughter who will enter the system in
a couple of years.
On second thought, I think maybe I will have a drink (alcohol, not kool-aid).
Rob Scott
September 12, 2015