Contract talks between the government and B.C. teachers are moving along nicely — by our standards.
There are phoney reassurances, delusional optimism and some passive-aggressive, self-interested leaking.
So we’re right about where we should be if B.C. is to follow the historical trend.
B.C. Teachers’ Federation president Jim Iker made some reassuring noises last week about how a strike vote hardly means anything at all.
Did you think a strike vote was a vote on whether teachers were actually in favour of going on strike and affecting the education system?
You don’t have a thing to worry about, according to him. In media interviews, including one with Global B.C. last week, Iker tried to soothe everyone’s anxiety about the idea that the strike vote that ends today has anything to do with a strike.
“We have no plans for any disruption in the classroom at this point in time,” he said. “If we go into any action, it’s not going to disrupt classes in any way ... Our teachers will continue doing voluntary activities, and parents will continue to have report cards and communication with us. We’re not planning any kind of disruption such as that.”
The clanging qualifier in all that is “at this point in time.”
Iker’s idea is that the BCTF will sit at the bargaining table next week with a dangerous-looking mandate (90 per cent plus is a given). Then the union will finally present its opening position and the government will roll over and start capitulating, without the union having to use the weapon.
But without getting all metaphysical, how long does a point in time last?
Are we still at that point in time? Or will we soon be at a new point in time, which voids all the reassurances?
The government floated a document into reporters’ hands on Wednesday that tried to raise doubts about the promises of no disruption, continued volunteering, routine report cards and communications.
It was headed “Strike Info 2014” and included a piece on “Strike Action Chosen by BCTF executives (no longer debatable at this point)” and it detailed plans for what looks a lot like major disruptions to classrooms.
Phase 1 is no meetings or communication with administration and a curb on extracurricular activities.
Phase 2 is “rotating strikes across the province.”
Phase 3 is a “full walkout across the province.”
The timing depends on labour rulings, but the document predicts rotating strikes within two weeks.
Under the BCTF war plan, the vote in question is about approving phases two and three. Going to a full strike would require another vote.
But the source of the document is murky. It’s a blank piece of paper with typed notes on it. The BCTF denied that it was an official strategy. Nonetheless, similar versions have been reported elsewhere.
It was enough for Education Minister Peter Fassbender to start ringing alarm bells.
“When I see a document like that, I’m very concerned.”
Fassbender said it flies in the face of the BCTF’s public position.
But it’s a bit naïve to be surprised that the union would have a battle plan all set to go once they get the vote results. Even if Iker is downplaying it, for the moment. Strike votes are about the potential for strikes.
Fassbender returned to the theme that both sides are still negotiating, and he desperately wants a negotiated solution.
Which makes you wonder about the wisdom of leaking the other side’s secret war plan, then expressing alarm about it.
If he wants negotiations to get productive, this isn’t the way to do it.
In a normal world, a union’s strike plan would be considered fairly standard.
If someone wanted to make an issue of it, it would be brought up privately with the message that it is unhelpful to plan for war while you’re still at the peace table.
That’s not how we roll in B.C. When it comes to contract time in the education world, it’s cross the other guy, before he can double-cross you.
