Teachers Strike

[Esoteric]

ARG! I knew I should have added this. Yes, you are absolutely right that the government can say, "Class sizes have gone down." This is absolutely FINE with me, and fine with the union. The problem is that the instances where class sizes have gone up, it's not fair to the teachers.

First of all it's not fine with the union. They are fighting this every step of the way. My fvourite part of this sentence is where you make it clear that it isn't unfair to any students, but rather that it is unfair to teachers. The teachers aren't using that as their arguement, they are saying it is unfair to the children. The union position and your explanation of it do not match.

It's not public policy, it's a labour contract. And, yes, you can. If I'm the only labourer who is working in a class of 100 kids and everyone else has 20, then something is wrong and the union should fight for my rights.

A labour negotiation between THE GOVERNMENT who spends THE PUBLIC'S tax dollars and ALL TEACHERS IN THE PROVINCE who teach ALL CHILDREN in the province is not a public policy issue? Have you been drinking? And No for the love of GOD you cannot base public policy on "certain cases". If there are certain cases you try to mitigate them, not screw everything else up by trying to make it all perfectly even. If everything else WORKS, and if you read my previous post on BC's Scholastic Achievement you would know that IT IS, then why would you mess with it because of a few "certain cases"? Just so a few teachers don't have to work a little bit harder than some other teachers?

I never said the government was hurting children! I never said anything about the government and I never said anything about kids. The government is hurting teachers, I believe the BCTF shouldn't bring kids into the fold.

I know you aren't personally saying these things. I'm not mentioning any accusations you yourself may or may not have made. I'm referring to the union rhetoric that somehow government decisions are hurting children, yet they do not want to be accountable for their own actions if they happen to hurt children. Merely pointing out the dichotomy there.

After-school programs are not mandatory, but they provide good education for the kids. Teachers aren't 'punishing' kids by withholding them, they are merely trying to show that they go above and beyond the call of duty and look what happens when you screw them even further -- you are going to miss out. Call that immature, but what else can they do? Bargaining isn't working. They tried reasonable methods, they didn't get what they wanted, so why should they have to do anything for free AND get screwed doing it?

Of course those programs are not mandatory. Regardless, most children have come to expect them. Without a basketball or football team, many students will have no way to get a scholarship. Students suffer. If the government won't give teachers a pay increase and the teacher's strike, the government doesn't suffer! CHILDREN do!

Also, I'm curious to know how teachers are getting "screwed". Screwed because the government refuses to pay them an addition 15% over 3 years? School enrollment is DECLINING. There are too many teachers. The market is not there for teachers to make more money. If they want more money, find some place else to teach or pursue another career avenue. Many teachers are having to do this just as many typewriter technicians find themselves strangely out of work. Having an education does not ENTITLE you to a job and constant pay raises.

This statement is absolutely wrong. Governments change ministries all the time. I work for one, I see what governments can do. Policy changes have a DIRECT impact on ministries. To say there is no political interference with ministries is nonesense. On top of that, I never said the numbers were WRONG, I only said the averages were MISLEADING.

For someone who claims to work in the government, you know precious little about how it operates. When a new government comes in, they do not fire the 500 people who work in the Ministry of Education and hire 500 new people (I'm guessing the numbers, I have no idea how many people are employed by the ministry). The department heads might change, obviously the minister himself changes... but the VAST VAST majority of civil servants outlast any and all governments and just put their heads down and do as good of a job as they can. They have political views as diverse as any in the province. You insult civil servants by asserting that they are spineless toadies of whatever government is in power.

Also, how are the averages misleading? What is the REAL truth in your opinion if the averages are misleading? Are there any numbers you can produce that would refute the ministry's numbers?

Allow me to ask you some direct questions then:

1) If it is true that many classes have more students than other classes, how many more students do they have than the other classes?

2) How many classes have too many students?

3) How do you determine what is the proper level of students per class?

4) What were class sizes in 1999? How much larger are they now? What was the average student achievement of those students in 1999 versus the achievement of students now?

As before, I said this was a labour dispute. It is not ALL about the children. Teachers care both about their pay and their children. However, I think bringing children into the discussion detracts from the main issue, which is pay and work conditions.

Then we agree that bringing children into the labour dispute by withholding their services from children is wrong. I'm glad we agree.

Yes I have, you just keep misreading me.

I'm sorry for misreading you. I must have missed the large body of evidence you supplied. My mistake. Could you direct me to it?

And I'm telling you that 1) the average is not larger and 2) the BCTF is misrepresenting the facts just like you were with your 'Average Class Size' numbers. Some are larger, some are smaller.

I'm sorry. Where have I misrepresented any facts? The numbers are clear. There is no misrepresentation. Those are the average class sizes in the Vancouver School District. Period. There is no arguement. The reason I am not misrepresenting is because I never claimed that they were anything other than what they are: average class sizes. It would be misrepresenting the facts to say that ALL classes have that many students because that was the average number, but that is not what I did. Please back up your statements with some facts. Thanks.

As I said in my first post, the agreement states that average class sizes should remain the same. The teachers say, fine, but that means that some class sizes increase -- which is not fine, it's unfair to those workers. You are just misreading whatever propaganda is thrown at you from the media.

The media? Your ability to offer a legitimate arguement is fading rapidly. What does the media have to do with anything? My numbers come from the Vancouver School Board, which last time I checked, was not a member of the media. Nor are the numbers "propaganda", they are scientifically validated and unassailable numbers.

Two sides to every coin. If you stopped misrepresenting your research, you wouldn't have such bad logic.

While I'm delighted that you think me so capable as to conduct all of this research on my own, I cannot take credit for it. All the numbers I have cited are readily available from public and unbiased sources. I merely took the time to find them and put them up here to dispell some of the misinformation that people like yourself continue to speak. When confronted with these numbers, you shrink away and offer rhetoric like "averages are misleading". Well if they are, then what are the real numbers? You have yet to offer those.

Look, if you want, it can all boil down to this one question, which is at the heart of the teacher's debate: If you are getting screwed around by your employer, would you take action if you could?

Yes I have been screwed by employers in the past, fairly recently I might add. Do you know what I did? I left. I'm currently going back to school in order to find other work. What I didn't do was take my employers child hostage and demand more money. Teachers are not stupid people. They are well educated and do a great deal of reasearch. If they are not content with the wages they will earn as a teacher there is a simple solution: don't become a teacher.

Having said that I believe teachers are entitled to fair wages. But teachers are well compensated for the work they do. Perhaps if the market were different then they would earn more.

Allow me to draw a parallel with nurses:

The population is aging. As people age they require MORE healthcare and LESS education. Because they need more healthcare, there is a greater demand for nurses. Nurses must be paid more in order to meet this demand. Contrast that with the fact that fewer children are enrolling in school. That means less of a demand for teachers, as I'm sure some people on this site can attest. There are too many teachers and not enough students. Why should the taxpayers keep increasing their wages over and above inflation? There is no need to do so. Teachers receive decent pay, EXCELLENT benefits and more vacation than you can shake a stick at. If you want to get rich, I suggest you don't be a teacher... or a poet... or an artist... or a DJ... and yet many people still choose to do these things because they enjoy them.

One final question: anyone know if Jenny Sims is refusing her pay as a union leader (which I believe is well over $100,000) and earning the same strike pay as her fellow union brothers and sisters?

[Jingles]

Originally Posted by Esoteric

[size=-1][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][size=1][color=#000000][size=2]2000-2001 Average Class size: 23.4 Students
2001-2002 Average Class size: 23.4 Students
2002-2003 Average Class size: 24.1 Students
2003-2004 Average Class size: 23.9 Students
2004-2005 Average Class size: 23.8 Students

as intended as a slight on teachers. It is a critique of their union leadership.

HA! You know what those numbers include? ALL CLASSES - for example the special ed. class with 3 kids in it. The resource class with 5 - 10 kids in it...all the elective classes with 20 kids in it . It includes the schools from the north districts and island districts with 15 kids in a class

..this is not an accurate representation of what CORE CLASSES look like in the lower mainland, particularly in highschool. I just finished my practicum last spring average class size 30
and that is on the rise. It is easy for the liberals to manipulate numbers in their favor.

some classes are so full of OLD desks with chairs attached and teenaged students (think 35 15 year olds) that is is near impossible for a teacher to bring in a projector because the class is too full. It is hard to get from one side of the class to the other because there is no room to move

it is an issue that has been ignored too long
PICKET ON !!

[Esoteric]

Anyway, I'm done here. Quote all the research you want, it might well be in fact all very valid and after I read it I may come to the same conclusions as you regarding whether class sizes hurt students or the makeup of them does.

Well in the absense of any of your own quoted research, perhaps looking at mine would be alright.

What I won't agree with is your post that highlighted average figures over the last few years and claimed that class sizes weren't increasing. Obviously, this is a falsehood as some are increasing and some are decreasing, which is consistent with your data. This I acomplished in my first post.

Class sizes aren't increasing. On average they are the same. That is all I have ever said and that is all the ministry has ever said. The BCTF makes it sound like classes everywhere are getting massive when obviously, for the averages to stay the same that means that some classes are bigger and some are smaller. Funny how the BCTF never mentions that some class sizes are smaller. You haven't accomplished anything in that paragraph but reiterate what I previously stated.

You then attributed a whole list of things to me which I didn't say and asked me for my opinion, which I gave.

Get over yourself. I didn't attribute them to you. Every arguement I have made up until the point you went and took it personally was levelled against the BCTF. I never said your name once. I addressed the multitude of people who were posting in this thread as a whole and descrying the fact that no one could come up with anything substantial on which to base a rebuttal.

I love these next few snippets...

If you want to continue arguing menial facts and superficial issues

The Union does not share your belief that these are "menial facts" and "superficial issues". They are basing the entirety of their contract demands on these so-called "menial facts".

while avoiding the broader picture of union philosophy and the 'real' issues,

Now you're changing your story. Before you said that obviously the AVERAGE class sizes were the same (big picture) but that in "certain cases" they were larger and/or smaller (little picture).

How am *I* avoiding the big picture? That is EXACTLY what I was dealing with! I think you are confused...

you're bringing a knife to a gun fight.

If this thread was a gun fight, I'm afraid you are the one who brought the knife. In fact, you didn't even bring a knife. You didn't bring a SINGLE number to this thread. Not a single shred of evidence, not one objective fact and not one source to support your claims. Not one. Ever. Zip.

I've enjoyed our discussion but now you're shifting your positions when they become inconvenient and you're accusing me of personally attacking you when the only accusations I have levelled are towards the BCTF.

I am levelling one accusation towards you. You don't know what you are talking about. If you are a teacher, you have not said so. How many students are in your class? If you are not a teacher, then where are you getting your ideas? Cite your sources. Thanks.

[Esoteric]

Mariah please try to understand the real points I'm trying to make. I'm getting so frustrated because it seems non of you can see past the numbers I'm citing to get at what I'm actually saying.

HA! You know what those numbers include?

Yes I know what they include. I'm familiar with the process by which "average class size" is determined. They are averages taken over years and years ALL using the same methodology. It's not like there is a class size from 2000 that is 24 and the class size in 2005 of that same class is 30 and I'm saying "See? That class' size has not gone up!" That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that while there are certain cases in which there are a higher than average number or students in a class, there are also certain cases where there are FEWER. That flexibility within the school districts is what is giving them the ability to meet their budgets.

FOR THE LAST TIME PEOPLE. AN AVERAGE ISN'T THE BE ALL AND END ALL. I UNDERSTAND THAT. IN 5 YEARS THE AVERAGE CLASS SIZE HAS NOT INCREASED BECAUSE NOT ALL CLASSES ARE GETTING LARGER. THE BCTF SAYS ALL CLASSES ARE GETTING LARGER. THE NUMBERS SHOW THAT IS AN INCORRECT STATEMENT.

Please read carefully.

..this is not an accurate representation of what CORE CLASSES look like in the lower mainland, particularly in highschool.

I don't see anyone saying that those figures WERE a representation of core classes. You're jumping to defend a point that I'm sure all reasonably intelligent people know already. I never said "this is the size of every core class in British Columbia" I said they are average class sizes and the statistic is only used to demonstrate that. You're jumping all over my point like I was making a completely different point from the one I was in fact making.

some classes are so full of OLD desks with chairs attached

I agree with you. Some of the desks are very old. It was like that over a decade ago when I was in highschool and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. I agree that children should have better learning surroundings and I wouldn't necessarily want my child sitting in some rickety old desk either. Having said that, nearly every school in the province is undergoing a seismic evaluation and upgrade. As a teacher Mariah you should be familliar with this. Which would you rather? A structurally sound school capable of withstanding an earthquake? Or a shiny new desk for your student?

It is hard to get from one side of the class to the other because there is no room to move

That is partly a function of old school buildings. You simply can't tear down every school and build a new one in it's place. The costs would be astronomical. I'd also venture to say that for every classroom where what you are saying is true, there are several classrooms where this is not the case. Should we ty to do something about it? Yes. Can it happen overnight? No. Can the BCTF do anything about those conditions in a labour dispute? No. Does striking free up any space in classrooms?

It is easy for the liberals to manipulate numbers in their favor.

No you're just being irrational Mariah. First of all, the "Liberals" didn't come up with those numbers. The Vancouver School Board did. Second of all, how would they "manipulate" the numbers? It's an average. To demonstrate nothing in specific. There is no manipulation going on that is simply a fact. Do you have any evidence to substantiate the fact that "Liberals" are making these figures up or misusing them? Or are you just repeating union rhetoric to which I'm sure you've been exposed over the past weeks?

Teachers look at their working conditions from a very personal perspective. They see something around them and they assume it must be like that everywhere. They don't work for the ministry and don't see the success stories. Nor do they have to budget out and plan for an entire province. Things become much more complicated at that point and I'm glad we have the dedicated ans skilled civil servants that we do because I certainly don't have the capacity to plan out and organize 600,000 students and 20,000 teachers.

[Ree Fresh]

I think theres a huge point that needs to be adressed. That is that when the last contract was sighned with the BCTF, the teachers choose smaller class sizes (or remain the same) INSTEAD of a pay incress as there way as bargening with the government.

HOWEVER... the government has not really followed through on that agreement as this new rule with class average still means some teachers are teaching in over sized class's.

Therefore teachers have not gotten anything out of there last contract and have been going on 10 years with out a pay incress. Which I think is insane considering that min wage has gone up and we all know how fast the standard of living is incressing. Also take into consideration with the cut backs they face each year has left many thoughtful teachers digging into their own pokets to provide students with the suplies they need to teach the way they were tought to in university.


Myra:
I can totaly understand and can agree when looking at this strike. In the big picture it seems like a petty popularity fight for the publics suport. Both the BCTF and the Government have spent money on advertising trying to get their points accross. Pathetic...

Realisticly I dont see anyone winning in this stirke. However with continouse cut backs the teachers cant take it anymore. And I think anyone can easly agree that our school system cant take it anymore.

What has really gotten the teachers in such a stuborn risky mood is the fact that the government wont even nagociate with them. It's not only scaring the BCTF, but all the unions and other workers out there. As why im such a big suporter of the teachers. It's sad that its come to this... but if we cant get through to the government on this... then who will?

So many ppl are sick of Gordon Cambel running this province the way he wants. People should be shaming him for giving all his cabanet ministers a $20,000.00 a year raise when they first got into parlament!!!

And the public thinks the teachers are being whiners asking for a raise???

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by Tayfoon

When I was in highschool not 1 teacher has taught me anything usefull or anything I didnt already know, so why the fuck give them more money ?

You are a fucking idiot.

We have teachers to thank for EVERYTHING.
EVERY fucking thing each of us knows has been TAUGHT to us by SOMEONE.

I thank my lucky stars EVERY DAY for the amazing teachers I had especially in grades 8 through 10. They made me the person I am today - they allowed me to be myself, encouraged me to learn and grow, helped when I needed it and let me do my own thing when that was best. I saw the three of them out picketing today in front of their new school (my old school was closed...funding cuts - shocking!) and it brought tears to my eyes when I honked and they cheered.

The bottom line for me is THEY DESERVE BETTER. Better facilities, better wages, better support, better (read: smaller) class sizes.

My mom is an EA. Right now she is making $0 because she can't cross the picket line to work, and even if she could, there are no kids for her to teach! So at this point in time I'm the breadwinner for my family - if this strike goes on MY bills will have to go unpaid to support my FAMILY and as much as that sucks I will do it for as long as it takes until our teachers get what they deserve.

Think about it, people.
WHAT KIND OF AN EDUCATION DO YOU WANT YOUR CHILDREN TO HAVE?

I want mine to have the best possible, that's what they deserve.

[mugsy]

^ is your mom with cupe?
if so starting monday if she goes down to the picket line and signs in she'll receive $50 a day as oppsoed to the origional $10 they were supposed to receive.

im in the same boat, mortgage payments, car payments, food, bills.... i'll be happy when the teachers and the cupe members (support staff - caretakers, SEA's.....ect.ect.) both receive better contracts and the rewards they deserve for the job they do.

[galaxie]

^ Right on.
CUPE members can also go on EI.

[the_77x42]

Okay, for the last time, because this is getting very irritating:

You said that average class sizes are staying the same. They are. I agree. I also agree that while some are getting larger, some are getting smaller. We both agree on this.

What you are saying is that the BCTF 'sounds' like they are saying ALL class sizes OR the AVERAGE class size is increasing. I haven't heard them say either point explicitly; it's something that they are trying to get people to think is happening, but it isn't. I think you agree with me on this as well.

Now here's where you are missing the 'big picture': in those few/some instances were class sizes are increasing, the teacher is being given more work with no increase in pay. This is what the union is fighting for.

I agree:
- It's not all about the children
- The BCTF's statements are misleading

I don't need to give you any research or whatever you think you are calling me out on, this has all been my position from the very beginning. You are trying to affiliate me as being a huge union advocate, and perhaps that's where you are being blinded. I never made such remarks. I'm arguing a simple point: it's a labour dispute. It's about being given a raise when you are required to do more work. You continuously bring up irrelevant points when this is all I'm saying.

Now, you can say this isn't what the BCTF is saying and think that somehow applies to my argument, but it doesn't. This is what I'm saying. In case I haven't stressed this enough: I don't agree with things either the government or the BCTF is saying.

And with that, I hope you can say that we finally agree. Now go back and read my previous posts -- my position hasn't changed and I never said I supported anything.

[Ree Fresh]

Originally Posted by mugsy

^ is your mom with cupe?
if so starting monday if she goes down to the picket line and signs in she'll receive $50 a day as oppsoed to the origional $10 they were supposed to receive.

im in the same boat, mortgage payments, car payments, food, bills.... i'll be happy when the teachers and the cupe members (support staff - caretakers, SEA's.....ect.ect.) both receive better contracts and the rewards they deserve for the job they do.

1st 3 calender days cupe recives $0 a day
after 3 calender days cupe recieves $10 a day
on the 10th calender day cupe recives $50 a day

These days dont count untill you sign in! So if you sign in for the first time on Monday... then your on your first calender day of strike pay (so you get $0) Once you start, so do your calender days.
Also you only recive strike pay for the days you sign in. So you if you dont show up for a day it does'nt stop your calender days, but you dont get paid for that day.
As of today/tomorro you must also do 2 hours of picket duty to also earn your strike pay.

All cupe members are advised to apply for EI ASAP. I ran into 5 co-workers at the office today... and the lady's first question was cupe? :D

Teachers arnt getting fined anymore... instead there not getting any strike pay.

[Tayfoon]

some people have no clue

[mugsy]

Originally Posted by wellbelove's

1st 3 calender days cupe recives $0 a day
after 3 calender days cupe recieves $10 a day
on the 10th calender day cupe recives $50 a day

These days dont count untill you sign in! So if you sign in for the first time on Monday... then your on your first calender day of strike pay (so you get $0) Once you start, so do your calender days.
Also you only recive strike pay for the days you sign in. So you if you dont show up for a day it does'nt stop your calender days, but you dont get paid for that day.
As of today/tomorro you must also do 2 hours of picket duty to also earn your strike pay.

All cupe members are advised to apply for EI ASAP. I ran into 5 co-workers at the office today... and the lady's first question was cupe? :D

Teachers arnt getting fined anymore... instead there not getting any strike pay.

my mom said EI wont be possible until 28 days after the strike started, how are you guys applying? seriously any info would be appreciated. edit: just asked her about it again, she said you apply now, then 28 days after application you start to get paid. shes holding out a little longer.
she also called cupe head office and they told her that starting monday she would receive $50 a day as long as she signed in then. if they mis-informed her, i need to know asap as its not worth her time for $10 when my dad needs to be taken care of.
also will the no strike pay apply to cupe as well since its a slap for the unions?

p.s. she has a meeting with the province tomorow and is possibly putting in a few choice words about cupe members receiving nothing and how lame their contract is.

[Senior]

Originally Posted by miss.myra

I know a lot of the people I love and respect are going to hate me for this but as they know I am not a union backer.

The issue here is that teachers are not getting the wage increase they have asked for from the government. Teachers would not be striking if the provncial government has adimantly refused to provide funding for schools for special education programs, reduction of class sizes, etc, otherwise this strike would have happened long ago. The reality here is that the public is not going to give teachers a whole lot of sympathy if the only things they were fighting for were wage increases and collective bargaining rights. The public outrage and sympathy is born out of outcries for things like class sizes, funding for special programs, etc. I am not saying that funding towards things like public education is good enough in BC because it isn't, but let's all get on the same page here that the primary issue at the end of the day is PAY INCREASES.

Your dislike for unions aside you are missing some fundamental points here. Organized labour has traditionally gone on strike for two reasons; work conditions and wages. In this case wages (correct me if I'm wrong) have stayed the same for 11 years, inflation adjusted (3% compounded) that is just less than a 40% pay cut. Is there anyone that wouldn't be pissed about this? I don't know enough about this issue to know whether or not working conditions are improper but if they are that does adversely affect children. Whether or not teachers have egalitarian motivations in looking to improve classroom working conditions for themselves it will undeniably benefit children.

[Ree Fresh]

Originally Posted by mugsy

my mom said EI wont be possible until 28 days after the strike started, how are you guys applying? seriously any info would be appreciated. edit: just asked her about it again, she said you apply now, then 28 days after application you start to get paid. shes holding out a little longer.
she also called cupe head office and they told her that starting monday she would receive $50 a day as long as she signed in then. if they mis-informed her, i need to know asap as its not worth her time for $10 when my dad needs to be taken care of.
also will the no strike pay apply to cupe as well since its a slap for the unions?

p.s. she has a meeting with the province tomorow and is possibly putting in a few choice words about cupe members receiving nothing and how lame their contract is.

Well what I stated is what Ive been told and understood from CUPE local 389. The rediculouse thing is many times ive been told one thing by one person and another thing by an other. SOO if your mom did infact call the cupe office and was told she would recive $50... then there probly right and I would go with that.

As for EI... again Ive heard numours things. However the one thing I was told is that CUPE has contacted EI and there may be somthign set up especialy since there are thousands of CUPE employ's applying. Again this goes back to what I was told 'APPLY ASAP' I may or may not get excepted, but who knows? I have nothing else to do really :P

And yes I can agree it seems our lock out strike pay is redick!!! Especialy since the teachers were supose to get $50 a day from the 1st calender day. Were as we have to wait 10 days till we can qualify for a survivable amount!?! Not fair especialy since our union does'nt have a choiceand is being very loyal to the teachers unon.

[whited0ve]

teachers are doing this solely for money. i'm very, very politically involved and know this for a fact. i've gone to BCTF events, debates, etc.

for one, thank god they extend class sizes. if they didnt, i wouldnt have been able to take several classes i wanted to. especially an AP english course, which, if i pass the test at the end, lets me straight into 2nd yr english at univ. this wasnt the only class this happened with. sure they were a bit overcrowded, but thanks to that i got a chance to take the classes i needed most.

plus for people in situations like me (living on my own and desperately trying to finish my last year of school, a year later than im supposed to), the strike ruins my chance at finishing school. its awful. and i cant get help on starting cause theyre all on strike.

besides, its an ----> ESSENTIAL SERVICE. <----- our education is just that important. but no, apparently their WAGes are more important (?).

anyways its all bullshit.

[mugsy]

^ its not all bullshit.
yes its about wage, but its also about the quality of teaching.
anyone who has ever worked with kids knows how hard it can be to teach them anything with limited space and resources. i once had to deal with 35 kids age 5-10 in two swim lanes at the pool, keep them safe and give them a good practice involving all the strokes. every child was a different level, some not being able to finish a whole length, others able to swim better then most teenagers. i only had to deal with this for 2 hours tops, and i left practices crying from either stress or the fact that i wasnt able to give the kids everything they needed, that i wasnt able to give each child the attention they needed.
being a coach is no where near the fucking extent of being a teacher. every kid in every class deserves attention. everyone learns differently.
i took ap courses in highschool as well, and actually had one canceled due to lack of interest. and the ap courses i took, were not accepted by the college i went to.
quality of learning is neccessary wouldnt you say? i'd rather have a teacher who is not stressed out by 35 16 or 17 year olds, bogged down with marking and trying to get to everyone in a matter of an hour plus teach the lesson.
media and the government are basing all there coverage on money. if the government would just fucking sit down and start talking maybe this could be settled. also keep in mind that the price the teachers are laying on the table is just a starting price. obviously its high because they know that its going to a bardering situation.
having a mom whos been with cupe for so long and going through this process repeatedly it really sickens me how people dont support this. we can only hope that the teacher acheive some sort of success so as it can lead the way for the others involved in our education can receive what they deserve.

[diva]

I'm a nursing student. RNs aren't covered by the HEU. They're covered by the BCNU.
And LPNs aren't covered by the BCNU because the BCNU covers registered nurses. LPNs are not Registered nurses.

And the second letter you posted was from a care aide, i don't know how that proves the the HEU covers RNs.

I don't understand why you went through all that trouble to prove me wrong...without actually offering up proof...

edit: the newsletter is entitled "nursing team news", that doesn't mean it involves nurses. in a hospital setting, care aides are cosidred a part of the nursing team.

anyways, i'm replying to tell you that RN are not represented by the HEU.

[diva]

here

# the largest group of workers within the HEU membership provide direct patient/resident care and include licensed practical nurses, care aides, orderlies, activity aides and group home workers

[fable]

I pasted the wrong article! but this isnt about proving you wrong, that would be egotistical, and my ego is dead + buried, i defer to those who know, i think your getting ME wrong, but i digress!

LPN'S are not considered nurses? are there job requirements any different?

In your last link/quote, it doesnt say there ARE NOT RNS in the HEU??

im really confused..

at the end of the day did the BCNU support the HEU's past and present job action?

peace+'spect
fable

[diva]

^ When I refered to nurses in my first post i meant Registered Nurses. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

but you posted that RNs were covered by the HEU, and i'm just clarifying that they're not.

the HEU DOES IN FACT COVER SOME NURSES - BOTH LPN's and RN's

we're getting off topic here anyways.

[whited0ve]

geez ppl with parents in cupe have no idea.

[diva]

Originally Posted by fable

so LPN'S are not considered nurses?

and even in your last link/quote, it doesnt say there ARE NOT RNS in the HEU??

im really confused

The HEU covers all health care workers EXCEPT for RNs.

[fable]

Originally Posted by diva

The HEU covers all health care workers EXCEPT for RNs.

AHHHHHH! thx DIVA! So does this system work efficiently - pros/cons? I like to think that there should be solidarity between the striking unions, but the details may prevent this.

[diva]

at the end of the day did the BCNU support the HEU's past and present job action?

no, they haven't always supported HEU job action. HEU is a part of CUPE, that's why they're supporting the teachers.
i'm not sure what if the BCNU is affiliated with CUPE at all or what their stance on the strike is, but you can check it out on their site.

LPN'S are not considered nurses? are there job requirements any different?

yeah, for starters you need a 4 year degree to become a registered nurse.
i think it takes 12 months to become an LPN

[fable]

Originally Posted by whited0ve

geez ppl with parents in cupe have no idea.

can you elaborate?