British Columbia
Public School Employers’
Association
400 - 1333 West Broadway
Telephone: (604) 730-0739
e-mail: bcpsea.bc.ca
Vancouver, B.C. V6H 4C1
Fax: (604) 730-0787
http://www.bcpsea.bc.ca
Seeking a Resolution…
Reflecting on the State of
Teacher Collective Bargaining
Resource/Discussion Paper
January 2002
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Please direct any questions or comments regarding this paper to:
H. J. (Hugh) Finlayson, Executive Director ................................. 604-730-4515
hughf@bcpsea.bc.ca
J. R. (Rick) Davis, Seconded Assistant Superintendent ............. 604-730-4508
rickd@bcpsea.bc.ca
© British Columbia Public School Employers’ Association
Every effort has been taken to ensure that these materials comply with the requirements of copyright
clearances and appropriate credits. BCPSEA will attempt to incorporate
in future printings any corrections that are communicated to us.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Contents
Teacher Collective Bargaining in BC — The History .......................... 2
Phase 1: Pre-1987 ......................................................................................................3
Phase 2: 1988 – 1994 — Full Scope Local School Board – Local Teachers’
Association/Union Collective Bargaining .............................................................4
Phase 3: 1994 – 2001 — Full Scope Provincial Teacher Collective
Bargaining and Government Intervention .....................................................9
The Transitional Collective Agreement ...............................................................11
The Provincial Collective Agreement ...................................................................11
Summary ...................................................................................................................12
Perspectives and Perceptions: The Difference in Belief
Systems of the Negotiating Parties ........................................... 14
The Nature of the Dispute ......................................................................................14
The Political and Economic Climate ..................................................... 16
The Teacher Bargaining Project: Bargaining 2001 ............................. 17
Action at the Table...................................................................................................18
Resolving the Impasse: Options ........................................................... 19
Conclusion: The Potential for Perpetual ............................................. 23
Industrial Action?
Possible Actions That Teachers Can Take ..................................................................24
Appendix A — Teacher Collective Bargaining Project
Appendix B — Legislation
Appendix C — Fact Finder’s (Longpre) Report, November 29, 2001
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Seeking a Resolution...
Reflecting on the State of
Teacher Collective Bargaining
The purpose of this resource/discussion paper is to review the history of teacher
collective bargaining in BC, the processes the K-12 employer community followed in
preparation for the second round of provincial teacher collective bargaining and
explore the resolution options given the negotiations to date.
This paper provides a perspective on why events occurred as they did and attempts
to draw lessons from those events as we seek resolution to the current collective
bargaining impasse. As the paper illustrates the second round of provincial teacher
bargaining was approached from a different perspective both in terms of internal
preparation processes and bargaining objectives than was the first. It is these
differences that form the foundation for the resolution of the impasse and the
implementation of the resulting agreement. See Appendix 1 for the key Teacher
Collective Bargaining Project Plan summary resource documents.
School boards, school district administration, and the K-12 public education sector’s
accredited bargaining agent, the BC Public School Employers’ Association
(BCPSEA), knew that this would be a difficult round of teacher collective
bargaining. While employers preferred to arrive at a new collective agreement at
the bargaining table, it was recognized that this goal would be difficult to achieve in
view of:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The history of teacher collective bargaining in the K-12 public education
sector.
The differences in the belief systems of the parties — the nature of matters
likely to be at impasse during negotiations.
The changing and evolving political and economic climate of the province.
The directions established by the BCPSEA Teacher Collective Bargaining Project
and objectives approved at Teacher Collective Bargaining Conference 2001.
At the time of the publication of this resource/discussion paper, BCPSEA and the BCTF
were continuing their work to achieve a negotiated collective agreement — the central
objective of both parties.
—1—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Teacher Collective Bargaining in BC — The History
The collective agreement between the BC Public School Employers’ Association,
representing the province’s 60 public school boards, and the BC Teachers’
Federation, representing the province’s public school teachers, expired June 30, 2001.
BCPSEA initiated the Teacher Collective Bargaining Project in January 2000 and
approached the planning of, and ultimately the collective bargaining itself, quite
differently than it had in the first round of provincial bargaining in 1994.
In preparation for bargaining, a team comprised of members of the BCPSEA Board
of Directors and BCPSEA staff met with 59 of the province’s school boards in local
board offices (aka Road Shows #1 and #2) to reflect on past bargaining experiences
and explore the manner in which these experiences were instructive in preparing for
the upcoming round of bargaining. The views and information resulting from these
individual meetings were consolidated and shared in subsequent regional meetings
and resulted in the Collective Bargaining Position Paper, considered by BCPSEA
members in January 2001. This paper became the foundation for the development of
a General Negotiation Framework and bargaining objectives. Both were approved in
February 2001 at the BCPSEA Teacher Collective Bargaining Objectives Conference.
Specific bargaining proposals were subsequently developed based on this
framework and these objectives.
Given the history of bargaining with the BCTF, whether through teacher locals or at
the provincial table, we identified the challenge that BCPSEA as the bargaining
agent and each member school board had to meet if we were to collectively be
successful in meeting our objectives and positively influencing the outcome of this
round of bargaining. The following statements capture the concepts central to the
success of this round of collective bargaining.
Employers join together to achieve or influence collectively what they cannot achieve
or influence individually. As a result, employers must organize themselves and act
in a manner to maximize their ability to “achieve and influence.”
To be successful employers must achieve a balance between maintaining sufficient
focus and strength through a unified stance in order to achieve collective bargaining
and labour relations objectives.
The central questions that the sector had to consider at the commencement of
negotiations remain as we move through the latter stages of this round of provincial
bargaining:


—2—
What constitutes success?
What objectives are we trying to achieve and what outcomes do we seek?
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
These questions have to be answered in terms of both substance — the agreement
provisions and resulting operating parameters negotiated or otherwise achieved —
necessary to accomplish what we are seeking to accomplish in public education, and
relationship — the individual and institutional relationships that emerge as a result
of this bargaining and settlement experience. These relationships are critical to the
effective operation of schools, educational programs and school districts.
How did our history instruct school boards and school district administration?
Phase 1: Pre-1987
Local teachers’ associations did not have the right to organize as trade unions and
bargain collectively under labour relations legislation prior to 1987. School boards
could only negotiate with local teachers’ associations within the limits prescribed by
the School Act. The scope of bargaining was narrow — limited principally to salary
and bonuses. In the event that the local parties were unable to negotiate an
agreement, a regimen of compulsory binding arbitration subject to strict timelines
resulted to conclude an agreement. Local associations of teachers did not have the
right to bargain provisions such as class size and non-enrolling ratios. Provisions
prescribing the way in which schools were organized, the duration of day,
preparation time or posting and filling provisions, were also outside the scope of
bargaining.
Some school districts voluntarily entered into informal agreements with local
associations on workload and matters related to the organization of the workplace.
These agreements became known as Working and Learning Conditions agreements.
The BCTF coordinated locals toward an objective of achieving Working and
Learning Conditions agreements in each district. Considerable friction developed
between school districts that followed this path and those that did not.
During the 1980s the BCTF and local associations actively advocated for the right to
organize and bargain collectively with their employer. In support of this aim, the
BCTF launched a court challenge claiming provincial labour laws that denied
teachers the right to bargain collectively were unconstitutional based on ss. 2, 7, and
15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The BCTF case alleged that the
fact that teachers were excluded from the definition of employees under the Labour
Code was discriminatory and violated section 15(1) of the Charter.
In the face of the demand for expanded bargaining rights and the Charter challenge,
the government of the day (Social Credit —Vander Zalm) crafted legislation that
—3—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
allowed for voluntary membership in the BCTF and gave local teachers’ associations
the choice of forming a professional association or certifying as trade union under
the Industrial Relations Act, the labour relations legislation of the day. In the
legislation principals and vice principals were excluded from the teacher bargaining
unit and were considered management in the traditional union-management
construct. Given the choice of being a member of a union or a member of a
professional association government predicted that teachers would opt for the
professional association structure and the influence of the BCTF would diminish.
That prediction was not to be realized. The BCTF was prepared for this challenge. It
organized and coordinated activities throughout the province, resulting in almost
every teacher becoming members of the BCTF and each local association certifying
as a union. This structure, with full scope bargaining rights, was achieved in an
environment where there was pent up demand for the perceived benefits associated
with collective bargaining and where there had been an effective and successful
organization of local associations by the BCTF. This set the stage for the next phase
of teacher collective bargaining.
Phase 2: 1988–1994 — Full Scope Local School Board – Local Teachers’
Association/Union Collective Bargaining
With the organization of teachers’ union locals in each BC school district, teachers
and school boards entered the next phase — full scope collective bargaining between
local school districts and teachers’ union locals of the BCTF. Local teachers’ unions
entered this phase in 1988 with high expectations. At more than one bargaining
table the teachers said to their employer, “The master/servant relationship has
ended.” Teachers’ unions were well coordinated, well trained and well prepared
through the work and organization of the BCTF.
In general, school boards entered this phase believing that the relationships they had
with their employees and their common interests in the education of children would
allow local unions and local school boards to amicably negotiate and achieve the
first collective agreements. Some school boards engaged consultants and lawyers
from the labour relations field to act as bargaining spokespersons and negotiators.
Most had little or no previous exposure or ongoing relationship with the public
education sector. Other districts relied on administrative staff who generally had
little experience with these issues or had limited experience with collective
bargaining. Others, albeit very few, used human resource practitioners or senior
district staff with experience in collective bargaining and considerable familiarity
with the education and bargaining issues. Over these six years and three rounds of
bargaining in most school districts, the employer found that provisions negotiated
—4—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
covered all manner of subjects. These provisions:



Were not limited to the employer’s ability to pay the resulting costs.
Negotiated provisions in teacher collective agreements exceeded the funding
made available and required that other areas of expenditure be reduced to fund
the collective agreement.
Determined the size of the education enterprise. Class size maxima, staffing
and mainstreaming/integration provisions took the decision making authority
for the delivery of education services and the consequent service levels were no
longer at the sole discretion of school boards. Service levels were now
determined by the specifications of the collective agreements.
Determined the organization of the learning environment. Preparation time,
duration of school year, duration of school day, selection and assignment of
staff provisions were specified by the collective agreements.
During these three rounds of local board-local teachers’ union bargaining, the BCTF
was very effective in coordinating the activities of its local unions. It would
coordinate the negotiation process and as a result, the timing of settlements, so as to
effectively play one employer off against another — referred to as a “whipsaw”
strategy. The gains made by a teacher local at one local table were then moved to
other local tables. It was not uncommon for employer bargaining committees to
hear the union refrain, “Why not here? They have it in school district “X.” Why not
here?”
During these years, there was an average of 16 strikes with working
days/instructional days lost during each round of local bargaining. A local union
could strike with the knowledge that their local was only seeking something that
had already been achieved in another district. When third parties were called on to
resolve strikes, they, too, would look to what already existed or had just been
negotiated by another local and used this as the rationale for the inclusion of the
matter in dispute in the collective agreement at issue.
Were employers at a structural disadvantage not of their making during this period?
Arguably no. School boards were simply out-organized by the BCTF and its
effective organizational, training and coordinating abilities. Local teachers’ unions
had a common interest in working together to achieve improvements in
employment provisions for all teachers. School boards, on the other hand, valued
local autonomy and saw themselves as accountable to community electorate. School
boards, by their nature, had little provincial perspective and sought to resolve local
bargaining matters on their own terms.
During these years, school boards made some attempts to coordinate and organize
their bargaining activities. It can be observed, however, that the desire to act
—5—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
independently and solve problems on their own terms individually, regardless of
the effect on others, prevailed as the operating standard. Boards often succumbed to
the pressure brought by local unions. In the interest of local relationships and
community harmony, these employers’ efforts to coordinate and withstand the
strategic pressures brought by coordinated local unions were limited and, where
tried, quickly fell apart. As a consequence, the cycle of whipsawing continued until
extensive collective agreements emerged in most parts of the province. These
collective agreements had the effect, in the view of some, of limiting the ability of
school boards to manage public education and diminished the role of boards.
What was the public view of these events? Unions that represent public school
teachers usually frame their bargaining objectives not in terms of improvements to
compensation or working conditions, but rather in terms of improvements to the
quality of education. The BCTF successfully portrayed itself as the party most
interested in the quality of education and most able to provide for that quality
through the negotiated provisions of its collective agreements. It can be observed
that most parents knew and trusted their child’s teachers while few knew of the
operation and priorities of the community’s school board. After all, as the argument
went, the BCTF had successfully negotiated class size and that provided the
necessary evidence of the connection between the collective agreement and their
child’s education. The BCTF argued that the collective agreements protected
students from the adverse consequences of funding reductions by the provincial
government and, by extension, of school boards. With resources for a public media
campaign, the BCTF was able to make their case to the public during successive
rounds of bargaining.
It is important to remember that during this period, funding was far less constrained
than is the case presently. In spite of obligations imposed by certain contractual
provisions, school boards had greater discretionary spending ability. School boards
had sufficient funds to absorb the costs resulting from provisions of the collective
agreement and still had flexibility to use other funds to address matters of particular
interest to the school board or community. School boards also had local taxation
authority until 1990. When the government removed local taxation and “equalized”
the distribution of taxation, certain districts faced funding pressures not experienced
previously. With funding constraints and increasing cost pressures of the 1990s, this
discretion gradually disappeared.
School boards’ experiences with local bargaining, in particular the associated costs
and in many cases strikes, prompted calls for a different bargaining structure. The
strikes in the 1993-94 school year in large urban communities focused attention on
the shortcomings of the local bargaining structure and the need for change.
—6—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
On March 6, 1992, the provincial government established the Commission of Inquiry
into the Public Service and Public Sector (the Commission) with mediator/arbitrator
Judi Korbin as Commissioner. The mandate of the Commission was to:

“examine the human resource practices of the public sector; and

propose a new framework of human resource management that
allows government to meet the public’s demand for services within
fiscal limitations.”
Human resources, with specific emphasis on labour relations in the public education
sector, were among the areas of inquiry and recommendation by the Commission.
The Commission made the following observations about teacher collective
bargaining based on employer submissions:
The Commission also received numerous submissions concerning the need to
establish a method of balancing the power of the parties for collective bargaining
purposes. Put another way, there is a perception of a power imbalance. It is
believed by many that there are powerful local teachers’ associations acting in
concert with a more powerful central teachers’ federation, whipsawing
individual school boards into accepting teachers’ bargaining demands because,
on a district-by-district basis, they are not able to resist those demands.
Consequently, it is perceived that school boards are forced to agree to teachers’
settlements beyond the funding ability of a particular district.
Excerpt from Volume 2 - Final Report - Commission of
Inquiry into the Public Service and Public Sector, page F20
The BCTF, speaking for local teachers’ associations, observed:
Centralization is often seen as having negative consequences for the bargaining
and representation process. These consequences include a reduction in the local
flexibility and autonomy of both management and workers and a restriction of
the scope of worker participation. As a result, the workers may become alienated
and frustrated, and hence less productive and more prone to both official and
unofficial strike action.
Given the importance of negotiations with the district’s teachers on matters that
are critical to good school programs and practices, the heart of the trustees’
mandate would be taken away by centralization. It’s not just bargaining.
Proposals for centralization of this critical function really raise the question as to
whether any meaningful role remains for trustees, or even for local boards as
institutions.
—7—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Excerpt from Volume 2 - Final Report - Commission of
Inquiry into the Public Service and Public Sector, page F17
The BCTF, in its first recommendation to the Commission on page F-18,
recommended a continuation of local bargaining.
Collective Bargaining for teachers — a right long withheld from them — must be
upheld and continued on the basis of direct negotiations with their employers, the
school board in each district.
Excerpt from Volume 2 - Final Report - Commission of
Inquiry into the Public Service and Public Sector, page F18
Stakeholders in the employer community, however, recommended a form of
centralized bargaining, although no particular model was proposed.
On July 9, 1993, the Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Public Service and
Public Sector (Korbin Commission) was released, establishing the basis for legislative
initiatives to change the structure of the public sector. Soon after, on July 27, Bill 78,
the Public Sector Employers Act (PSEA) was passed, establishing the Public Sector
Employers’ Council (PSEC) and employers’ associations in six sectors of the public
sector:






health
social services
K-12 public education
colleges and institutes
universities
crown corporations, agencies, and commissions.
As a result, BC’s K-12 sector changed significantly. In May 1994, BCPSEA was
formed. On June 7, Bill 52, the Public Education Labour Relations Act (PELRA) was
passed, which established BCPSEA as the accredited bargaining agent for all school
boards and the BCTF as the certified bargaining agent for all public school teachers
in the province.
Employer bargaining agent
4
—8—
The employers' association
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(a)
is deemed to be the accredited bargaining agent for every school
board in British Columbia, and
(b)
has exclusive authority to bargain collectively for the school boards
and to bind the school boards by collective agreement.
Employee bargaining agent
6 (1)
The British Columbia Teachers' Federation
(a)
is deemed to be the certified bargaining agent for the employees
in the bargaining unit,
Excerpt from Public Education Labour Relations Act,
page 3
Section 3 of the Public Education Labour Relations Act established, in general, the
scope of bargaining:
7 (3)
All cost provisions, within the meaning set out in subsection (4), are
deemed to be Provincial matters.
7 (4)
In subsection (3), “cost provisions” includes all provisions relating to
(a)
salaries and benefits,
(b)
workload, including, without limitation, class size restrictions,
and
(c)
time worked and paid leave
that affect the cost of the collective agreement.
Excerpt from Public Education Labour Relations Act,
page 4
Phase 3: 1994 – 2001 — Full Scope Provincial Teacher Collective
Bargaining and Government Intervention
—9—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
With few exceptions, local school boards and local teachers’ associations negotiated
three full-scope collective agreements between 1987 and 1994. By coincidence most
of the collective agreements were set to expire on June 30, 1994, when the legislative
structures were created to facilitate provincial bargaining.
The Public Education Labour Relations Act required that the parties negotiate which
matters would be dealt with at each local bargaining table and which matters would
be negotiated provincially. In April 1995, the BCTF and BCPSEA completed the
‘split of issues’  all substantive issues, including monetary provisions, were placed
at the provincial table. The local matters were those having limited importance with
respect to working conditions and had no monetary impact.
The employer and the union bargaining agents approached both the process and
content of the negotiations differently. BCPSEA adopted and employed an ‘interestbased’ approach, which was loosely based on the principles articulated in the best
selling book on the subject, Getting to Yes (Fisher and Ury, 1983).
Interest-based or ‘mutual gains’ bargaining is supposed to improve the relationship
between the parties because the resulting framework is based largely on how each
cultivates their mutual relationship. The approach should also yield more judicious
agreements because the parties are encouraged to openly discuss their needs and
fundamental interests, as well as basing their agreement on objective criteria (Fisher,
Ury, and Patton, 1991).
Many school districts felt that since this was the first provincial agreement, the
parties would sit down and explore their respective interests and craft a collective
agreement that was in the interests of teachers, school boards, and most importantly,
public school students.
The BCPSEA bargaining committee invited the BCTF bargaining committee to
participate in joint interest-based bargaining training, but the BCTF declined.
BCPSEA based its approach on the belief that, technically, no collective agreement
existed and the parties were essentially creating a first collective agreement. This
became known as the ‘blank slate’ theory or approach.
There was also the feeling that employers had been the victim of a ‘power
imbalance’ and, as employers testified in the Korbin Commission proceedings, there
was a need to balance the power between employers and the union. This led to the
conclusion that the gains made by teachers in this unbalanced system needed to be
redressed, and this ‘first agreement’ was viewed as the opportunity to do so.
— 10 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
The BCTF had a different view. It believed that the system of local union-local
school board bargaining was the appropriate system. Further, they rejected outright
the concept of a ‘blank slate.’ It was the BCTF’s view that there were 75 collective
agreements, and those collective agreements were the product of much hard work
and sacrifice. The BCTF took the position that the 75 collective agreements were the
base from which to negotiate. The BCTF would later describe the BCPSEA approach
as nothing more than ‘contract stripping’  an attempt to take away the rights of
teachers achieved through collective bargaining.
The parties began negotiations in May 1995. The BCTF, as was the practice at local
bargaining tables, submitted an extensive set of proposals in collective agreement
form. The BCPSEA bargaining committee, however, consistent with their version of
an interest-based approach, had no such proposals. Rather, when issues were
discussed, it distributed so-called ‘interest statements’ in an attempt to engage the
BCTF bargaining team in a discussion.
The Transitional Collective Agreement
Between May 1995 and April 1996, little progress was made and the provincial
government, with an election expected, called the parties to Victoria in an
attempt to facilitate a transitional agreement. On April 28, Bill 21, the Education
and Health Collective Bargaining Assistance Act was passed, establishing a process
to ensure that education and health services would not be disrupted in the event
of a labour dispute during an anticipated provincial election. However, prior to
impasse being reached and with the province entering the election window, this
combination of legislation and government intervention resulted in the
Transitional Collective Agreement (TCA) in May 1996. In addition to a very few
provincial items agreed to or imposed, the TCA simply called a “time out”
during the election window. The TCA provided for a rollover of existing
language in the 1993-94 previous local agreements, a small compensation
increase, and some new provisions that dealt predominantly with standard
collective agreement issues such as the grievance procedure and union
membership. The agreement also established the basis for continued
negotiations. The TCA expired on June 30, 1998, and required the parties to
resume negotiations in March 1997.
School board ratification was on a weighted vote basis — 54% of the total school
board votes cast were in favour of the TCA.
The Provincial Collective Agreement
Bargaining reconvened in earnest in September 1997. The parties exchanged
extensive sets of proposals. BCPSEA, continuing its commitment to the blank slate
approach, brought proposals for changes in almost all areas of the existing collective
— 11 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
agreements. The BCTF, true to its approach of improving what already existed,
brought proposals touching on a comprehensive range of issues. By February 1998,
with no progress evident, BCPSEA accepted the offer of assistance from government
in facilitating the negotiations. In retrospect, BCPSEA representatives did not keep
in close contact with those working on the agreement on behalf of the provincial
government. As it was learned subsequently, government representatives went
beyond facilitation and negotiated directly with BCTF in a series of secret meetings.
As one of the government representatives, Russ Pratt, CEO of the Public Sector
Employers’ Council Secretariat reported in a subsequent agreement implementation
meeting, “I took the microphone and did not give it back until we had a deal.”
BCPSEA was not involved in these negotiations and learned of the contents of the
Agreement in Committee (AiC) after the BCTF and Government had signed.
The principal issues contained in the AiC were:




A 0, 0 and 2% wage increase consistent with government’s monetary mandate
framework.
Non-enrolling ratios which set the number of non-enrolling teachers each
district was required to employ.
K-3 class size maximums, which represented a reduced primary class sizes for
all districts.
Agreement that all other terms and provisions of previous local agreements
arising from the 1988–1994 period were now part of the provincial collective
agreement (ending the employers’ blank slate argument for all time).
Government representatives believed the content of the agreement to be so
beneficial for school boards that the AiC would be greeted with widespread
acceptance in spite of the concerns regarding how the agreement was reached.
Given the bargaining stance of BCPSEA, government argued, both the resulting
process of private government-BCTF negotiations, and the outcome, were inevitable.
School boards were outraged and, when forced to vote on ratification of the AiC,
turned it down by an 86% margin. In July 1998, the government introduced and the
legislature passed Bill 39, the Public Education Collective Agreement Act, which
established the AiC as the collective agreement for the term July 1, 1998 to June 30,
2001.
Summary
— 12 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Between 1987 and 1994 there were both negotiated agreements and legislated
settlements. During the same period some school districts also faced work to rule
and partial or full withdrawal of services, as local teachers’ associations pressed
employers to accede to their bargaining demands. Without exception, complex
collective agreements emerged containing all manners of subjects. Some employers
believed they willingly negotiated the provisions and concluded that collective
bargaining, although difficult, was operating and maturing as it should. Others
were of the view that they had no choice but to accept local associations’ demands
over the three rounds of local school board-local teachers’ association bargaining —
they were forced to accept the demands by circumstances outside their control they
contended.
In the late 1980s - early 1990s there was a general feeling, although not unanimous,
in the K-12 employer community that the local school board - local teachers’
association bargaining model with its scope (what was bargained) and process (how
it was bargained) was not working in the best interests of public education. Not
surprisingly, teachers, as represented by the BCTF, took a contrary view — namely
that the right long withheld from them, the right to bargain collectively, had in their
view resulted in comprehensive collective agreements that were advantageous to
teachers and, in turn, public education.
The first round of provincial bargaining (1995-1998) had a number of features, which
can be summarized as follows:




— 13 —
Negotiations involved two parties — the BCTF and the newly created
association of public school employers, BCPSEA, that had never negotiated
before and had no established working relationship.
Employers entered bargaining seeking to negotiate a “new master agreement,”
initially using an approach they characterized as interest-based bargaining
while seeking to redress what school boards believed were products of a
“power imbalance” of local bargaining.
The BCTF entered bargaining seeking to build from the base established by the
75 local agreements negotiated through the three rounds of bargaining.
The political context evolved considerably as bargaining proceeded. By the
time the Public Education Collective Agreement Act was contemplated, drafted
and passed in 1998, the policy initiatives of government were focused
establishing a public sector settlement precedent — the 0, 0, 2 compensation
mandate — and codifying K-3 class size limits.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Perspectives and Perceptions: The Difference in Belief
Systems of the Negotiating Parties
It is instructive to look beyond the current bargaining objectives and proposals of
BCPSEA and BCTF to the origins of the differences. BCPSEA asserts that its
proposals seek to increase discretion in areas where collective agreements, albeit
negotiated in previous rounds, impose limitations on the operation of the education
enterprise — called concessions by the BCTF and termed change by BCPSEA, given
that the provisions were negotiated predominantly in the early 1990s and have
remained unamended since that time. During the same period public education has
changed considerably. BCTF proposals seek to continue and expand provisions of
the same nature already viewed by employers as excessive. What gives rise to these
polar views?
The Nature of the Current Dispute
Fundamental differences in bargaining positions:
BCPSEA
Ability to pay – Provide a
compensation increase that is fair
within the funds made available by
the provincial government (8.15%)
and consistent with other public sector
settlements.
Movement towards standardization –
Standardize terms and conditions that
affect the employer/union
relationship and issues related to total
compensation.
Increased flexibility to organize the
school system in a time of change
and fiscal constraint – Reduce the
workload specifications found in
collective agreement provisions
concerning class size maximums,
staffing ratios and inclusion of
students with special needs.
— 14 —
BCTF
A significant improvement in
salary – In the face of 5 years of
limited wage increases (0, 1, 0, 0, 2)
the BCTF seeks a significant salary
increase (25%).
No concessions – No agreement
will be reached that results in the
BCTF, any local of the BCTF or any
member of the BCTF losing any
provision, term or benefit that now
exists under the terms of the
previous agreement.
Major improvements to workload
provisions – The workload of
teachers will be improved by
reducing class size, increasing
preparation time, and providing
additional support for students
with special needs, among other
matters.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Arising from differing belief systems:
BCPSEA
The employers say that as governors
of the public education system
accountable to the public, they should
determine the size and the
organization of the enterprise to
provide the best education possible in
a fiscally responsible manner.
Change and renewal in public
education should be initiated and
implemented by the governors in
consultation with the professional
teaching staff. The collective
agreement is an impediment to
change.
— 15 —
BCTF
The BCTF says that it not only
provides for the interests of its
members, but also improves and
protects the quality and quantity of
public education through the
collective agreements it has
negotiated and seeks now to
improve these for teachers and as a
result for students.
The BCTF believes that all matters
relating to the delivery of
educational services should be
bargained and regulated through
the collective agreement. The
collective agreement sets
specifications that control the
structure and organization of
education. Teachers and the BCTF,
as a union of professionals, should
direct change in a manner
consistent with the welfare of
teachers and students. The
collective agreement provides for
measured, planned, and employeecontrolled change.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
The Political and Economic Climate
The current round of provincial bargaining is very different from the first round that
led to the TCA in 1996 and AiC in 1998. In this current round, with the initiation of
the Teacher Collective Bargaining Project in January 2000, BCPSEA made a concerted
effort to raise the level of understanding as to why teacher collective bargaining in
BC is the way it is and sought to have the sector adopt a focused, defensible
bargaining agenda based on a set of objectives. This meant connecting all parts of
the K-12 employer community whether they be school boards, management
partners or government, and focusing on development of a common sectoral
agreement on what needed to be achieved in this round of bargaining.
The current round of bargaining is also occurring in a context significantly different
than ever before. For example:



Local bargaining commenced while the Social Credit Party (Vander Zalm)
formed the provincial government, with a majority of agreements negotiated
and concluded during Social Credit administrations. The last rounds of local
bargaining and the first round of provincial bargaining occurred under NDP
(Harcourt; Clark) administrations with its traditional ties to organized labour.
The bargaining objectives for the second round of provincial bargaining were
set while the NDP (Miller; Dosanjh) was in the final months of its
administration.
While each government said the funds were in limited supply, the record of the
NDP governments from 1991 to 1998 was that funds were available to “grease
the wheels” of public sector collective agreements. Even the 0, 0 and 2 offered
to the BCTF during the 1998 AiC was accompanied by a significant infusion of
new teaching jobs and other areas not directly related to compensation.
Arguably, governments in the 1990s, to a large measure, accepted the BCTF
argument that the BCTF was well placed to improve and protect public
education and that collective bargaining and collective agreements were the
appropriate vehicles.
That context of public sector collective bargaining changed dramatically with the
election of a new provincial government (Liberal — Campbell) in May 2001. The
Liberal win was decisive. The new government was characterized as management
oriented and business-like. The economy, widely believed to be stumbling when the
Liberals took office, worsened as the global economy stalled. If the economic
environment made a collective agreement with the BCTF difficult at the
commencement of bargaining in March 2001, it became more difficult as the state of
the economy began to deteriorate. In response to fiscal challenges, late in the 2001
calendar year government announced substantial cuts to all ministries except health
and education. The funding for the health and education ministries was frozen.
— 16 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Between March and November, the parties also watched as the political context
within which bargaining was occurring began to evolve and change. The Liberal
government’s New Era agenda began to take form. The government also
demonstrated a willingness to enter the public sector collective bargaining arena as
previous provincial governments had, although the process for the resolution of the
disputes was quite different. In two cases where a negotiated settlement appeared
unlikely, the government legislated an end to the disputes — Coast Mountain Bus
Company and the Canadian Auto Workers Local 111; Office and Professional
Employees’ International Union Local 378 ; and the Health Employers’ Association
of BC (HEABC) and the BC Nurses Union (BCNU); Paramedical Professional
Bargaining Association. In the case of HEABC and the BCNU et al, the provincial
government imposed the employers’ last offer while in the Coast Mountain Bus
Company-CAW et al case, the government imposed elements of an Industrial
Inquiry Commissioner’s recommendation. (See Appendix B for Bill 13, the Greater
Vancouver Transit Services Settlement Act passed August 1, 2001 and Bill 15, the
Healthcare Services Collective Agreements Act passed August 9, 2001.)
The Teacher Bargaining Project: Bargaining 2001
At the BCPSEA Annual General Meeting in January 2000, the Teacher Collective
Bargaining Project Plan (TCBPP) was outlined for members in attendance. The
TCBPP was designed to take the BCPSEA membership through a period of
reflection on our past experiences with teacher collective bargaining, towards a set
of bargaining objectives that would guide BCPSEA staff in development of
bargaining proposals. These activities sharpened our focus and led to the
development of the General Negotiation Framework — the four principles for
negotiation that would form the basis for BCPSEA bargaining proposals and the
filter to assess proposals and counter proposals during negotiations:




— 17 —
The costs of employment must be compatible with the government’s funding
priorities and, given school boards’ obligations, a school board’s ability to pay.
The orderly introduction of change and the ability of school boards to adapt to
evolving educational priorities/needs are necessary to maintain a responsive
public education system.
The enhancement of union-management relations, both locally and
provincially, is essential for continued industrial stability and effective
workplaces.
With respect to the terms and conditions of teachers’ employment, the sector is
transitioning from a series of previous local agreements (PLAs) to a provincial
collective agreement (PCA). This necessitates the reduction of the number of
local agreements and the variety of collective agreement provisions now in
effect in PLAs.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
The bargaining issues were systematically explored and examined through a
number of steps.
1.
Spring to Fall 2000: Meeting with individual school boards (aka Road Shows
#1 and #2) to reflect on past experience, discuss roles and responsibilities of
members and government and hear view with respect to bargaining priorities.
2.
Fall 2000: Development of a Teacher Collective Bargaining Discussion Paper
(TCBDP) providing direction for teacher bargaining and a focus of discussion
among members of BCPSEA.
3.
Fall 2000: Regional meetings to refine issues within the TCBDP and move
towards a statement of consensus embodied in a Teacher Collective Bargaining
Position Paper (TCBPP).
4.
January 2001: The TCBPP is circulated to members. This represents the
consensus of view on a number of matters related to teacher bargaining and
points the direction towards bargaining objectives.
5.
February 2001: The Teacher Collective Bargaining Conference is held. Collective
bargaining objectives arising from the consensus of views of members are
placed before the conference for approval.
6.
March 2001: Bargaining objectives approved by members are transformed to
bargaining proposals and approved by the Board of Directors.
7.
March 2001: Collective bargaining with the BCTF commences.
Action at the Table
The bargaining proposals tabled by BCPSEA throughout the spring of 2001 were
more limited than proposals of the previous round of provincial bargaining,
consistent with the BCPSEA strategy and objectives. The bargaining objectives set
by BCPSEA members were more limited and focused on priority issues. The BCTF,
in contrast, followed initially what could be termed a ‘two pronged’ approach —
focus their agenda at the provincial table and attempt to identify local matters of
concern; and then attempt to move those matters to local tables subject to the
agreement of BCPSEA. This plan was not accepted by BCPSEA and the local
initiatives did not materialize. Negotiations began on March 5, 2001.
— 18 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Throughout the months of March, April, May and June, the BCPSEA and BCTF
bargaining teams met on numerous occasions for bargaining meetings of significant
duration. Although little progress was made towards agreement, the bargaining
teams thoroughly canvassed all proposals of each party’s bargaining agenda to fully
understand the intent and impact of each item. In contrast to the first round of
provincial bargaining, the talks could be characterized as more respectful and
professional. Bargaining continued into July and reconvened in the last week of
August.
By November 30, 2001, the parties had completed 60 bargaining sessions. Only
three items had been signed off and only a handful of issues of relatively minor
importance were close to agreement.
In late November, the Minister of Labour appointed a fact finder, Assistant Deputy
Minister of Labour Richard Longpre, to inquire into the dispute and determine the
potential for a timely settlement at the bargaining table. The fact finder met with the
parties and issued a brief report that, as one of the two recommendations, suggested
the parties consider the assistance of a facilitator. (See Appendix C for Richard
Longpre’s November 29, 2001 report.) The parties agreed, and in early December
began meeting with respected mediator/arbitrator, Stephen Kelleher, Q.C. The
initial meetings revealed that the parties remained far apart on the major issues —
compensation and provisions related to the ‘size and organization of the education
enterprise.’ Initially, attempts were made to focus on peripheral issues as a way of
moving the negotiations along and then move to the substantive issues.
Resolving the Impasse: Options
Collective bargaining in the public sector takes place in a highly sensitive political
and psychological environment that impacts the degree of compromise, hostility,
and emotional commitment to the perceived outcome of the bargaining process. In
such an environment, labour and management often reach impasse over issues or
interest questions to be resolved.
The occurrence of an impasse creates a deadlock in negotiations. In reaching that
point either party may determine that no further progress can be made towards an
agreement. At present the BCTF and BCPSEA are at impasse on issues central to
concluding an agreement — compensation and provisions related to the ‘size and
organization of the education enterprise.’
Our history tells us that provincial governments, regardless of party affiliation, are
prepared to let the bargaining process continue without direct government
— 19 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
involvement only until the point that the disruption to education seems inevitable
and the chance of settlement remote.
In developing and assessing any resolution options, the following questions must be
considered:

What are the matters in dispute that give rise to the impasse and what are the
likely resolution alternatives (in terms of process)? Which option has the
greater likelihood of bringing the dispute to conclusion and ensuring continued
industrial stability?

Is the impasse a result solely of a collective bargaining dispute?

Are there issues concerning what is bargained (scope) and how matters are
bargained (structure) that make future impasses of a similar nature likely?

Are there issues or dynamics that make this impasse unique to a given point in
time that necessitate a one-time solution?
Clearly, an agreement reached between the parties is preferable to a settlement
imposed on the parties, but given the political dynamic and the nature of a
particular impasse, a legislative option may soon become the preferred course of
action. Recent public sector disputes give an indication of the provincial
government’s willingness to act legislatively to resolve public sector labour disputes.
The following table provides, for discussion purposes, some of the options open to
government if they choose a legislated option.
Options
Implications and/or Potential
Consequences
Legislate a process to
conclude a collective
agreement; empower a third
party or Commission.
 Resolves the impasse and concludes the
collective bargaining dispute.
 Consistent with the resolution
mechanism under the recent Public
Education Support Staff Collective
Bargaining Assistance Act (see Appendix
B) used to resolve the 44 CUPE-school
board disputes.
 Likely considered the least intrusive into
the collective bargaining process.
 May cause angst for either party
depending on content.
 Unlikely to lay foundation for future
negotiated resolution because of the
differences between the parties.
 Does not address structure or scope of
— 20 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Options
Legislate the employers’ last
offer.

See Appendix B for the Bill 15,
the Healthcare Services
Collective Agreements Act, a
recent example of this option.
Implications and/or Potential
Consequences





Legislate an agreement
comprised of elements of
BCPSEA proposals and BCTF
proposals






Legislate “something else”
addressing bargaining agenda
from a public policy
perspective.



Arguably Bill 39, the Public
Education Collective Agreement
Act that imposed a collective
agreement with other policy
initiatives is an example of
this option. See Appendix B.
— 21 —


bargaining issues if considered
contributing factors to past/current
impasse(s).
Resolves the impasse and concludes the
collective bargaining dispute.
Creates angst and unrest among BCTF
members.
May institutionalize a work to rule
response by BCTF members.
Meets the employers’ objectives.
Creates flexibility for change and
efficiencies.
Does not address structure or scope of
bargaining issues if considered
contributing factors to past/current
impasse(s).
Resolves the impasse and concludes the
collective bargaining dispute.
Limits angst and unrest among BCTF
members.
Ends job action.
Meets some of the employers’ and
union’s objectives.
Creates limited flexibility for change
and efficiencies.
Does not address structure or scope of
bargaining issues if considered
contributing factors to past/current
impasse(s).
Resolves the impasse and concludes the
collective bargaining dispute.
May cause angst for either party
depending on content.
Government fully owns content of
resolution.
Does not address structure or scope of
bargaining issues if considered
contributing factors to past/current
impasse(s).
Leaves current framework in place for
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Options
Legislate end to job action;
extend current terms and
conditions.
Implications and/or Potential
Consequences




Limit what is bargained
(narrow the scope) through
legislation.






Change the structure of
bargaining (how/where
matters are bargained); i.e.,
regional or local.




new bargaining dispute upon expiry of
agreement.
Central issues in dispute remain
unresolved.
Unlikely to lay foundation for future
negotiated resolution because of the
differences between the parties.
Does not meet the employers’ or union’s
objectives.
Maintains what is bargained (scope) and
how those matters are bargained
(structure).
Does not, by itself, conclude dispute.
Removes some areas from bargaining
agenda.
Seen as an affront to existing bargaining
rights resulting in potential labour
disruption and protest.
Potential legal challenges.
Changes the framework for bargaining
making future disputes less likely.
Meets with approval of employer
community.
Does not, by itself, conclude dispute.
Moves the impasse to another
bargaining forum — different
bargaining table and/or different
bargaining parties.
Regardless of the forum the BCTF will
continue to coordinate provincially.
Boards will continue to struggle with
coordination.
The legislative approach can be as limited as providing a process for the conclusion
of an agreement or much broader, the imposition of specific terms and conditions.
Further, should a government believe that a particular dispute results from or was
exacerbated by an unworkable bargaining structure, the government may wish to
make structural changes to the scope of bargaining (what is bargained) or the
structure (how/where matters are bargained and/or concluded) through legislation
distinct from the collective agreement resolution legislation.
— 22 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
For example, the passage of Bill 7, the Public Education Support Staff Collective
Bargaining Assistance Act (see Appendix B) established a process to conclude
collective bargaining disputes in 44 school districts through an Industrial Inquiry
Commission and a process to inquire into and make recommendations concerning
support staff bargaining processes and structures.
Conclusion: The Potential for Perpetual Industrial
Action?
With speculation and discussions concerning a legislated end to this second round
of provincial bargaining, our attention has to turn to possible implementation issues
arising out of the settlement. This includes strategies to manage the “spill over
effect” of the resolution — the actions and reactions of the parties affected by the
resolution and the resolution’s impact on the working relationships and operation of
schools, districts and the sector in general.
Recent press statements from BCTF officials speak to the likelihood of what can be
characterized as perpetual industrial action on the part of the BCTF and its
members. For example:
First vice-president Neil Worboys said members have been quietly discussing how they would
react if the government does what is increasingly expected and imposes a settlement on the
union and the BC Public School Employers’ Association.
Victoria Times Colonist, December 23, 2001
It won’t be “business as usual,” Worboys said in an interview, adding that teachers would
seriously reconsider whether they should provide any voluntary services under such
conditions....
Global TV Noon News January 7, 2002: BCTF is looking at
continuing the ban on extra curricular activities after a
settlement
In a memo circulated to BCTF members in late November 2001, the BCTF executive
sought advice from their members:
“with respect to
— 23 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
a)
short term and long term reactions and/or response strategies to government
intervention in the collective bargaining process and any imposed settlement for
BCTF members.”
The memo went on to identify the following actions the BCTF could take, and
sought input from BCTF members as to their degree of agreement — from whether
they Strongly Agree to No Opinion.
Possible Actions That Teachers Can Take
1.
Nothing.
2.
Continuation of Phase 1.
3.
Day of protest/study session.
4.
Major demonstration/rally at the Legislature.
5.
Full strike action of indefinite length.
6.
Ongoing campaign of non cooperation.
7.
Use available mechanisms to enforce any learning conditions lost as a
result of legislative imposition.
8.
Maintain and publicize a list of districts that continue existing learning
conditions provisions removed by legislation.
9.
Teacher attendance at all public meetings of Premier Campbell and
Education Minister Christy Clark raising questions about lost learning
opportunities for BC students.
10. Produce and publicize a regular report card on the educational
performance of the provincial government.
11. Work closely with support staff unions, the BC Federation of Labour and
other unions for the restoration of full collective bargaining rights for
education workers.
12. Monitor the impact of changed working conditions on teacher
illness/absence.
13. Monitor the impact of changed working conditions on teacher retirement.
14. Place full page response ads in a BC newspapers outlining the negative
impact on education of the imposed contract.
— 24 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
15. Other.
As the BCTF list of Possible Actions Teachers Can Take illustrates, a vigorous BCTF
campaign in opposition to any legislated resolution can be expected. What began as
a collective bargaining dispute will become essentially a political action that will
affect schools, school districts and the sector in general.
Any attempts to continue job action or initiate further job action once a collective
agreement is in force, however, is a violation of the collective agreement and the
Labour Relations Code. In the words of the Code this includes a cessation of work, a
refusal to work or to continue to work by employees in combination or in concert or in
accordance with a common understanding, or a slowdown or other concerted activity on the
part of employees that is designed to or does restrict or limit production or services.
In a sector that has a salaried professional workforce, some slowdowns, concerted
actions or refusals to perform normal activities or duties can be quite subtle, with the
origin difficult to identify. A teacher or teachers may argue that these actions are a
response to the pace of change, increased workload or shifting priorities. These
actions may be characterized by individuals as simply decisions not to do, or do
differently, certain activities or duties in order to reduce work to accommodate other
priorities. The result of teachers not participating in activities such as
extracurricular activities, special school or Ministry of Education projects, or
school/district committee meetings, for example, results in a phenomenon we have
termed “institutionalized work to rule.” As the definition of “strike” encompasses
two main categories of activities:


a concerted cessation or refusal to work
a concerted slowdown or other activity that is designed to, or does, restrict or
limit production or services,
institutionalized work to rule as an operating standard has a profound effect on the
quality of public education and is considered a violation of the Labour Relations Code
and the collective agreement. Each case will require investigation and needs to be
assessed on its merits.
In this current round of bargaining both parties believe that an agreement reached
between the parties is preferable to an imposed settlement. It is not uncommon,
however, in the public sector in BC and K-12 education in particular, to have a
legislated end to bargaining. Should this happen the challenge for the sector will be
to rebuild relationships both locally and provincially, return operating stability to
the sector, and move forward to manage the new agreement. This will be a
considerable challenge.
— 25 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
It is worth noting again that there was a legislated end to the first round of
provincial bargaining in 1998. The BCTF and the provincial government privately
concluded an agreement that was ultimately ratified by BCTF members. Employers,
not part of this negotiation, rejected the agreement and the agreement was imposed
with the passage of Bill 39, the Public Education Collective Agreement Act on July 30,
1998. Despite school boards’ and BCPSEA’s dissatisfaction with the process that led
to the agreement and the agreement itself, they did in good faith implement the
agreement.
— 26 —
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Appendix A: Teacher Collective
Bargaining Project
Teacher Collective Bargaining Project Schematic Overview
Organizational Discipline Concept Discussion Paper
General Negotiation Framework and Bargaining Objectives
Towards a Master Provincial Teacher Collective Agreement
Bargaining Structures and Processes
— 1—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Teacher Collective Bargaining Project Schematic
Overview
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
— 2—
January 2000: Teacher Collective Bargaining (TCB) Project Plan initiated
March 2000: Teacher Collective Bargaining Draft Discussion Paper (DDP)
developed for feedback and editing (internal)
April - June 2000: Team of BCPSEA staff and Board of Directors (aka Road
Show #1 (RS)) preliminary discussions with individual school boards
(September - October Road Show #2)
September 2000: DDP circulated, sectoral feedback collected
November 2000: TCB Draft Position Paper (DPP) developed and
distributed for sectoral feedback; TCB Position Paper (PP) written
November-December 2000: General Negotiation Framework (GNF)
developed and finalized as the basis for bargaining objectives (BO); draft
bargaining objectives (DBO) both broad and specific formulated for Board
of Directors (BoD)
January 2001: BCPSEA Annual General Meeting
January 2001: Board of Directors (BoD) recommends Bargaining Objectives
(BO) to Teacher Collective Bargaining Conference (TCBC)
February 2001: Trustee delegates consider recommended bargaining
objectives (both broad and specific) at the TCBC; bargaining team (BT)
confirmed
December 2000-March 2001: BCPSEA staff team develops potential
bargaining proposals (BP)
March 2001: Board of Directors (BoD) approve bargaining proposals
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Organizational Discipline Discussion Paper
Organizational Discipline is what we term an “organizing concept” designed to focus our
discussions as we plan for collective bargaining. The expression organizational
discipline, also referred to as institutional discipline, is a shorthand expression intended
to capture the following proposition or concept.
Employers join together to achieve or influence collectively what they cannot achieve or
influence individually. As a result employers must organize themselves and act in a
matter to maximize their ability to “achieve or influence”.
The concept is adopted with the recognition that



The management of the workplace is a local reality
Employers manage their workplaces based on a complex web of priorities within
a unique organizational structure.
There are regulatory, provincial and external structures and influences outside
the control of individual employers.
Challenge: Achieve a balance between maintaining sufficient focus and strength through
a unified stance in order to achieve human resource (in the case of collective bargaining,
labour relations) objectives. Arriving at a general agreement on what needs to be done and
a specific agreement on who does what.
Elements

Coherence: the views and approach of employers are “consistent and
intelligible”; there are differences — understand them and be able to explain why
they exist and how they relate to the general agreement on what needs to be done.

No surprises policy: we joined together to achieve and influence, therefore we
work out our differences in private, not in public — because we don’t want to
undermine our ability to achieve and influence.

No self help policy: “If given the chance, I will help myself first….” Employers
need to recognize there are distinct advantages to working together. Remember
if you help yourself first…some day you won’t be first! Union whipsawing
(trading one employer off against another) works best in an employer self help
environment.
The adoption by K-12 employers of the concept of organizational discipline as a sectoral
operating standard does not mean that employers will always say or believe the same
things. It means as a group we strive to understand what we each believe, why we
believe it and how we work together to achieve what we each need to achieve and
collectively need to achieve.
— 27—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
General Negotiation Framework and Bargaining Objectives
Collective Bargaining Objectives
The collective bargaining objectives have been developed based on the work of the
Teacher Collective Bargaining Project initiated in January 2000. These objectives are
written within the following framework or structure.



Collective Bargaining Context: the environment in which we will bargain.
General Negotiation Framework: the foundation for the negotiation of terms and
conditions of employment.
Bargaining Objectives: what we are seeking to achieve in this round of negotiations.
These objectives are divided into Broad Bargaining Objectives and Specific Bargaining
Objectives. The broad objectives set out in general what we are seeking to achieve
while the specific objectives are the objectives we are seeking to achieve on an issue
by issue basis. Specific objectives have varying degrees of importance and priority.
These objectives provide the basis upon which Bargaining Proposals to be exchanged
at the bargaining table are developed.
Broad Objectives
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
Bargaining Proposals
General Negotiation Framework
Collective Bargaining Context
The next round of collective bargaining with the BCTF will take place in a unique
context — a context that will evolve and change as bargaining proceeds. The context
represents the environment in which we will bargain. Elements include:




An uncertain political environment with an election expected during negotiations.
Fiscal challenges effecting school boards in a variety of ways.
Internal (within the sector) and external (public) expectations of the public education
system.
Public sector negotiations and settlements in other parts of the public sector
— 28—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining




The “spillover effect” (on the next round) resulting from the efforts to resolve the
issues concerning the Memorandum of Agreement: K-3 Primary Class Size.
Perspectives and realities of teacher supply and demand.
Consolidation and centralization of the bargaining agents.
Attitudes/philosophy of the bargaining agents and their respective constituents
concerning collective bargaining and labour relations.
General Negotiation Framework
In this round of negotiations, collective agreement provisions are considered and
negotiated recognizing that:




The costs of employment must be compatible with the government’s funding
priorities and, given school boards’ obligations, a school board’s ability to pay.
The orderly introduction of change and the ability of school boards to adapt to
evolving educational priorities/needs is necessary to maintain a responsive public
education system.
The enhancement of union-management relations both locally and provincially is
essential for continued industrial stability and effective workplaces.
With respect to teachers’ terms and conditions of employment, the sector is
transitioning from a series of previous local agreements (PLAs) to a provincial
collective agreement (PCA). This necessitates the reduction of the number of local
agreements and the variety of collective agreement provisions now in effect in PLAs.
Broad Bargaining Objectives
What must these negotiations accomplish? The broad objectives can be articulated as
follows:
A collective agreement negotiated between the BC Teachers’ Federation and the BC
Public School Employers’ Association that permits the delivery of effective and equitable
education services to students while recognizing and providing for the needs of teachers
in an environment characterized by:




Increasing demands and expectations
Decreasing financial resources
An evolving political environment with the resulting public policy thrusts
The actions and reactions of the bargaining agents to the changing context.
Specific Bargaining Objectives
The Specific Bargaining Objectives cover the matters we intend to pursue in this round of
negotiation. These objectives provide the basis upon which Bargaining Proposals are
developed.
— 29—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Towards a Master Provincial Teacher Collective Agreement
The K-12 public education sector is transitioning from a series of previous local
agreements (PLAs) to a provincial collective agreement (PCA). Certain matters
(categories 1 and 2) lend themselves to standard provincial or regional provisions, while
others (categories 3 and 4) require provisions such that local workplace organization and
service delivery issues are recognized.
— 30—
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Appendix B: Legislation
Bill 7, Public Education Support Staff Collective Bargaining Assistance
Act
Bill 13, Greater Vancouver Transit Services Settlement Act
Bill 15, Healthcare Services Collective Agreement Act
Bill 39, Public Education Collective Agreement Act
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
2000 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 36th Parliament
THIRD READING
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
Certified correct as passed Third Reading on the 2nd day of April, 2000
Ian D. Izard, Law Clerk
HONOURABLE PAUL RAMSEY
MINISTER OF FINANCE AND
CORPORATE RELATIONS
BILL 7 -- 2000
PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT STAFF
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ASSISTANCE ACT
Contents
Section
Part 1 -- Continuation of Support Staff Services
1 Definitions
2 Support staff services continued
3 Other rights not affected
4 Appointment and duties of industrial inquiry commission
5 Decision of industrial inquiry commission
6 Decision binding
7 Execution of documents
8 Regulations
Part 2 -- Framework for Support Staff Collective Bargaining
9 Definitions
10 Support staff collective bargaining
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Regulations relating to support staff collective bargaining
Part 3 -- Miscellaneous
12 Application of Labour Relations Code
13 Repeal
Schedule
HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the
Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows:
Part 1 -- Continuation of Support Staff Services
Definitions
1
In this Part:
"employee" means an employee of the employer within a bargaining unit for which
a support staff union is certified;
"employer" means a board of school trustees of a school district designated in the
Schedule;
"industrial inquiry commission" means the industrial inquiry commission referred to
in section 4;
"support staff union" means a trade union that
(a) represents employees of the employer, other than teachers, and
(b) is designated in the Schedule.
2
(1) Despite the Labour Relations Code, immediately on the coming into force of this
Act,
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(a) an employer must not lock out or declare a lockout of any of its employees
and must terminate any lockout,
(b) a support staff union and the employees represented by that union must
not strike or declare a strike and must terminate any strike,
(c) every employee must resume his or her ordinary duties and work schedules
of employment with the employer,
(d) any declaration, authorization or direction to go on strike given before or
after the coming into force of this Act becomes invalid by reason of this Act,
(e) an officer or representative of a support staff union must not in any manner
impede or prevent, or attempt to impede or prevent, any person to whom
paragraphs (a) to (c) apply from complying with those paragraphs, and
(f) an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer must not
(i) refuse to permit any person to whom paragraphs (a) to (c) apply to
continue or resume the ordinary duties of his or her employment, or
(ii) discharge or in any other manner discipline such a person by reason of
the person having been locked out or on strike before the coming into
force of this Act.
(2) A collective agreement between an employer and a support staff union that was
in force on March 1, 2000 is extended and is deemed to be in effect for the period
from the coming into force of this Act until the employer and support staff union
conclude a collective agreement or a renewed or revised collective agreement
takes effect under this Part.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Other rights not affected
3
Nothing in this Part affects the right of an employer to suspend, transfer, lay off,
discharge or discipline an employee in accordance with the collective agreement
that is in force on the day on which this Act comes into force.
Appointment and duties of industrial inquiry commission
4
(1) The Minister of Labour must appoint an industrial inquiry commission under
section 79 of the Labour Relations Code to
(a) assist employers and support staff unions to conclude collective
agreements, and
(b) if necessary, determine collective agreements under section 5 of this Act.
(2) The industrial inquiry commission may utilize such persons as it considers
appropriate to assist it to carry out the duties referred to in subsection (1).
Decision of industrial inquiry commission
5
(1) If after 60 days from the day on which an employer and a support staff union
are designated in the Schedule the employer and support staff union have failed to
conclude a collective agreement, the industrial inquiry commission must within 15
days make a written decision for settlement of a collective agreement between the
employer and support staff union.
(2) The decision of the industrial inquiry commission must include provisions
agreed to by the parties.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(3) The decision of the industrial inquiry commission must provide that the renewed
or revised collective agreement takes effect from a date set out in the decision.
Decision binding
6
(1) The decision of the industrial inquiry commission is binding on the employer
and support staff union and on the employees on whose behalf the support staff
union is entitled to bargain except insofar as the parties agree to vary it.
(2) If it is shown to the satisfaction of the industrial inquiry commission that an error
is apparent on the face of the decision, the industrial inquiry commission may, on
application of a party to the dispute within 7 days after the effective date of that
decision, amend the decision.
Execution of documents
7
(1) If the employer and support staff union fail to prepare and execute documents in
the form of a renewed or revised collective agreement giving effect to the decision
of the industrial inquiry commission within 7 days after the industrial inquiry
commission's decision, the parties, or either of them, must promptly notify the
industrial inquiry commission in writing, and the industrial inquiry commission must
prepare documents in the form of a renewed or revised collective agreement giving
effect to the decision of the industrial inquiry commission and any matters agreed to
by the parties, and submit the documents to the parties for execution.
(2) If the parties or either of them fail to execute the documents prepared by the
industrial inquiry commission within 7 days after the day of submission of the
documents to them, the documents come into effect as though they had been
executed by the parties and constitute renewed or revised collective agreements
under the Labour Relations Code.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Regulations
8
The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations to amend the Schedule
(a) to make corrections in the designations of employers and support staff
unions,
(b) to designate additional employers and support staff unions, or
(c) to delete designations of employers and support staff unions.
Part 2 -- Framework for Support Staff Collective Bargaining
Definitions
9
In this Part:
"commissioner" means the person appointed under section 10 as the
commissioner;
"employers' association" means the employers' association established for school
boards under section 6 of the Public Sector Employers Act;
"support staff collective bargaining" means collective bargaining by the employers'
association, school boards and support staff unions;
"support staff union" means a trade union that represents employees of the
employer, other than teachers.
Support staff collective bargaining
10 (1) The Minister of Labour may appoint a commissioner to do the following:
(a) inquire into the structures, practices and procedures for support staff
collective bargaining;
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(b) make recommendations, after taking into consideration the factors
mentioned in subsection (2), with a view to improving those structures,
practices and procedures;
(c) report the recommendations to the Minister of Labour within the time set by
that minister.
(2) The commissioner may consider the following:
(a) the public interest in stable industrial relations in the public school system
and in a bargaining environment that reduces the potential for disruptions in
education;
(b) the need for effective structures, practices and procedures for support staff
collective bargaining and the views of the employers' association, the school
boards and support staff unions on how to achieve this;
(c) the role, responsibility and effectiveness of the employers' association in
support staff collective bargaining, including any matter concerning the
constitution, bylaws, rules, policies or procedures of the employers'
association;
(d) the role, responsibility and effectiveness of support staff unions in support
staff collective bargaining;
(e) the history and pattern of union representation of support staff employees
of school boards;
(f) any other factor that the commissioner considers relevant or that the
Minister of Labour may direct.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(3) The recommendations under subsection (1) may include, without limitation,
recommendations respecting any or all of the following:
(a) the establishment of associations or other organizations consisting of all or
some of the support staff unions and the functions of those associations or
organizations, including the extent of their bargaining authority;
(b) the establishment of two-tiered bargaining structures and the designation of
bargaining matters for the purposes of those structures;
(c) the establishment and content of articles of association for any association
or other organization of support staff unions;
(d) the conferral of jurisdiction on the Labour Relations Board in relation to any
matter arising from the commissioner's recommendations.
(4) The commissioner must make recommendations to the Minister of Labour
respecting implementation of the recommendations made under subsection (1),
including, but not limited to,
(a) any changes to the constitution, bylaws or rules of the employers'
association necessary to implement the recommendations under subsection
(1), and
(b) any limitations the commissioner considers necessary as to the period
during which any change to the structures, practices and procedures for
support staff collective bargaining should remain in effect or be reviewed.
(5) The commissioner may not recommend the expiry or extinguishment of a
collective agreement before the expiry date set out in the collective agreement.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(6) For the purposes of an inquiry under this section, the commissioner has the
protection, privileges and powers of a commissioner under sections 12, 15 and 16
of the Inquiry Act.
(7) The commissioner may be paid remuneration and expenses set by the Minister
of Labour.
Regulations relating to support staff collective bargaining
11
(1) If the Minister of Labour accepts all of the recommendations made under
section 10, the Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations to give effect
to those recommendations.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), the Lieutenant Governor in Council may make
regulations
(a) respecting the structure, role and responsibilities of the employers'
association in support staff collective bargaining,
(b) establishing, or providing for the establishment of, one or more associations
or other organizations of support staff unions for collective bargaining with the
employers' association,
(c) defining for the purposes of any provision of the Labour Relations Code
whether an association or other organization of support staff unions
established in accordance with a regulation under this section is a trade union,
a council of trade unions, a person or a party,
(d) defining the functions of an association or other organization of support
staff unions established in accordance with a regulation under this section,
including the extent of its bargaining authority despite the authority of a
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
member support staff union under section 27 (1) (a) of the Labour Relations
Code,
(e) establishing, or providing for the establishment of, the articles of
association for any association or other organization of support staff unions,
(f) amending, with the approval of the Minister of Finance and Corporate
Relations, the constitution, bylaws or rules of the employers' association to
facilitate bargaining with one or more associations or other organizations of
support staff unions,
(g) conferring jurisdiction on the Labour Relations Board in relation to any
matter arising from the commissioner's recommendations and specifying the
provisions of the Labour Relations Code that apply in relation to that matter,
and
(h) governing any transitional difficulties encountered in giving effect to the
recommendations made by the commissioner under section 10 of this Act.
(3) If the constitution, bylaws or rules of an employers' association are amended
under subsection (2) (f) of this section, the amended provisions
(a) apply to the employers' association as if they were established and
approved under section 7 of the Public Sector Employers Act, and
(b) subject to section 7 (4) of that Act, may be further amended, or may be
repealed and replaced, by the employers' association.
Part 3 – Miscellaneous
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Application of Labour Relations Code
12
(1) The Labour Relations Code and the regulations made under it apply in respect
of a matter to which this Act or the regulations made under it apply, but if there is a
conflict or an inconsistency between
(a) this Act or the regulations made under this Act, and
(b) the Labour Relations Code or the regulations made under it,
this Act or the regulations made under this Act, as the case may be, applies.
(2) The Labour Relations Board has exclusive jurisdiction to decide
(a) a question arising under this Act, including any question of a conflict or an
inconsistency referred to in subsection (1), and
(b) unless otherwise provided in the regulations, a question arising under a
regulation made under this Act.
Repeal
13 Part 1 and the Schedule are repealed on July 31, 2000 unless a later date is set by
regulation of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, in which case Part 1 and the
Schedule are repealed on that date.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Schedule
School District
Local Union
SD # 5 -- Southeast Kootenay
SD # 8 -- Kootenay Lake
SD # 10 -- Arrow Lakes
SD # 19 -- Revelstoke
SD # 20 -- Kootenay-Columbia
SD # 22 -- Vernon
SD # 23 -- Central Okanagan
SD # 35 -- Langley
SD # 37 -- Delta
SD # 38 -- Richmond
SD # 39 -- Vancouver
SD # 40 -- New Westminster
SD # 41 -- Burnaby
SD # 42 -- Maple Ridge
SD # 44 -- North Vancouver
SD # 46 -- Sunshine Coast
SD # 47 -- Powell River
SD # 48 -- Howe Sound
SD # 50 -- Haida Gwai/Queen Charlotte
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4165
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 748
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2450
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1285
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1260
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1851
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1091
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 716
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 407
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 409
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 379
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 703
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 389
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 801
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 476
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 779
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2020
SD # 51 -- Boundary
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2098
SD # 53 – Okanagan Similkameen
SD # 54 -- Bulkley Valley
SD # 57 -- Prince George
SD # 58 – Nicola-Similkameen
SD # 61 -- Greater Victoria
SD # 62 -- Sooke
SD # 63 -- Saanich
SD # 64 -- Gulf Islands
SD # 67 -- Okanagan Skaha
SD # 68 – Nanaimo-Ladysmith
SD # 69 -- Qualicum
SD # 70 -- Alberni
SD # 71 -- Comox
SD # 73 -- Kamloops/Thompson
SD # 74 -- Gold Trail
SD # 75 -- Mission
SD # 79 -- Cowichan Valley
SD # 82 -- Coast Mountains
SD # 83 -- North Okanagan-Shuswap
SD # 84 -- Vancouver Island West
SD # 85 -- Vancouver Island North
SD # 87 -- Stikine
SD # 91 -- Nechako
SD # 92 -- Nisga'a
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2145
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3742
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 847
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 947
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 382
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 459
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 441
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 788
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 606
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3570
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 727
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 439
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3500
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 173
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 593
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 606
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2052
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 523
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2769
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2045
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3234
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 4177
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 2298
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Copyright © 2000: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
2001 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 37th Parliament
THIRD READING
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
Certified correct as passed Third Reading on the 1st day of August, 2001
Ian D. Izard, Law Clerk
HONOURABLE GRAHAM BRUCE
MINISTER OF SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND LABOUR
BILL 13 -- 2001
GREATER VANCOUVER TRANSIT SERVICES SETTLEMENT ACT
Contents
1 Definitions
Part 1 -- Resumption of Transit Services
2 Resumption of transit services
3 Special mediator
4 Other rights not affected
Part 2 -- Collective Agreement Constituted
5 Definition
6 Constitution of revised or renewed collective agreement
7 Resolution of disputes
8 Expiry of collective agreement
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Part 3 -- Mediation and Settlement
9 Definition
10 Collective agreements extended
11 Special mediator
12 If mediation unsuccessful
13 Costs
Part 4 -- Miscellaneous
14 Application of Labour Relations Code
15 Repeal
HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the
Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows:
Definitions
1 In this Act:
"Canadian Auto Workers Local 111" means the National Automobile, Aerospace,
Transportation and General Workers' Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) Local 111,
commonly known as the Canadian Auto Workers Local 111;
"Canadian Auto Workers Local 2200" means the National Automobile, Aerospace,
Transportation and General Workers' Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) Local 2200,
commonly known as the Canadian Auto Workers Local 2200;
"Coast Mountain" means the Coast Mountain Bus Company Ltd.;
"employee" means an employee of an employer;
"employer" means Coast Mountain or GVTA;
"GVTA" means the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority;
"special mediator" means the special mediator under section 3;
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
"trade union" means the Canadian Auto Workers Local 111, the Canadian Auto
Workers Local 2200 or the Office and Professional Employees' International Union,
Local 378.
Part 1 -- Resumption of Transit Services
Resumption of transit services
2 Immediately after this Act comes into force and despite the Labour Relations
Code,
(a) an employer must not lock out or declare a lockout of any of its employees
and must terminate any lockout,
(b) a trade union and the employees represented by that trade union must not
strike or declare a strike and must terminate any strike,
(c) every employee must resume his or her duties and work schedules of
employment with the employer,
(d) any declaration, authorization or direction to go on strike given before or
after the coming into force of this Act becomes invalid,
(e) an officer or representative of a trade union must not in any manner impede
or prevent, or attempt to impede or prevent, any person to whom paragraphs
(a) to (c) apply from complying with those paragraphs, and
(f) an employer or a person acting on behalf of an employer must not
(i) refuse to permit any person to whom paragraphs (a) to (c) apply to
resume the duties of his or her employment, or
(ii) discharge or in any other manner discipline such a person by reason of
the person having been locked out or on strike before the coming into
force of this Act.
Special mediator
3 (1) The appointment of the special mediator, appointed under section 76 of the
Labour Relations Code on April 12, 2001, is continued
(a) to facilitate and ensure orderly resumption and continuation of operations of
an employer under and in accordance with this Act, and
(b) for purposes of Part 3 of this Act.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(2) The special mediator has the powers and authority of a special mediator under
the Labour Relations Code.
(3) Without limiting subsection (2), the special mediator may make orders directing
an employer, a trade union or any employees to resume and continue operations in
the manner and at the times directed by the special mediator, despite any terms of
a collective agreement, or any working practice or schedule, to the contrary.
(4) Orders under subsection (3) are binding on a trade union, an employer and the
employees affected, and the orders may be enforced as if they were terms of the
collective agreement.
(5) If the special mediator under subsection (1) is unable for any reason to
complete the special mediator's duties under this Act, the minister may appoint
another special mediator under section 76 of the Labour Relations Code to perform
those duties, with all the powers and authority described in subsections (1) and (2)
of this section.
Other rights not affected
4 Nothing in this Act affects the right of an employer to suspend, transfer, lay off,
discharge or discipline an employee in accordance with the collective agreement
last in force before the coming into force of this Act.
Part 2 -- Collective Agreement Constituted
Definition
5 In this Part, "trade unions" means the Canadian Auto Workers, Locals 111 and
2200.
Constitution of revised or renewed collective agreement
6 (1) The following are deemed to constitute a collective agreement between Coast
Mountain and the trade unions:
(a) the collective agreement last in force between Coast Mountain and the
trade unions before the coming into force of this Act as amended by the
provisions described in paragraphs (b) and (c);
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(b) the provisions that have been negotiated and agreed upon by Coast
Mountain and the trade unions during collective bargaining;
(c) the recommendations for settlement made by the special mediator on June
14, 2001, other than the recommendation to refer the issue described under
"Work Contracted Out", subject to the following:
(i) the Operational Review Committee, which is established by the
recommendations, must finalize and complete resolution of the issues
referred to that committee through the special mediator's
recommendations and must do so before December 31, 2001,
(ii) in resolving the issues described in subparagraph (i) and making
recommendations on those issues, the Operational Review Committee
must have regard to the following:
(A) comparable overall terms and conditions of employment in other
transit systems or other comparable industries;
(B) improved efficiency in terms of service delivery to the public,
utilization of the workforce and overall operational productivity;
(C) where efficiencies are realized and accounted for by Coast
Mountain, that any resulting cost savings must be shared with the
employees, and
(iii) any operational cost savings that are
(A) realized by Coast Mountain as a result of implementing the
Operational Review Committee's recommendations on issues
described in subparagraph (i), and
(B) verified by an independent audit,
must be shared with the employees as agreed to by the parties and are
payable to the employees in the form of bonuses and not percentage
wage increases.
(2) For certainty, the provisions respecting contracting out in the collective
agreement referred to in subsection (1) (a) are part of the collective agreement
constituted under this Part.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(3) The collective agreement constituted under subsection (1) may be varied by
agreement between Coast Mountain and the trade unions.
Resolution of disputes
7 (1) If there is a dispute as to
(a) the provisions that have been negotiated and agreed upon by Coast
Mountain and the trade unions during collective bargaining, or
(b) the meaning of any of the recommendations referred to in section 6 (1) (c),
either party may refer the dispute to the special mediator for decision.
(2) Within 30 days after this Act comes into force, the parties must nominate either
the special mediator or another arbitrator agreed to by the parties, for purposes of
resolving any dispute that may arise between the parties regarding the resolution of
an issue before the Operational Review Committee.
(3) If the parties are unable to agree on the nomination under subsection (2) within
the 30 day period described in that subsection, the minister must appoint an
arbitrator for the purposes of that subsection.
(4) An arbitrator nominated or appointed under subsection (2) or (3) has the powers
and authority of a special mediator under section 76 of the Labour Relations Code.
(5) The special mediator or other arbitrator nominated or appointed under
subsection (2) or (3) must
(a) have regard to the same terms of reference described in section 6 (1) (c)
(ii) when resolving any issues under this section, and
(b) finalize and complete resolution of all such issues before December 31,
2001.
(6) A decision of the special mediator or an arbitrator under subsection (1) or (2) is
final and binding on Coast Mountain, the trade unions and the employees affected.
Expiry of collective agreement
8 A collective agreement constituted under this Part expires on March 31, 2004.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Part 3 -- Mediation and Settlement
Definition
9 In this Part, "trade union" means the Office and Professional Employees'
International Union, Local 378.
Collective agreements extended
10 The collective agreements last in force between the trade union and the
employers before the coming into force of this Act are extended and are deemed to
be in effect for the period from the expiry date of the collective agreements to the
date on which revised or renewed collective agreements between the trade union
and the employers come into force.
Special mediator
11 (1) The special mediator must assist the trade union and the employers in
settling terms and conditions of revised or renewed collective agreements.
(2) The special mediator must, within 30 days after this Act comes into force,
endeavour to mediate all matters that remain in dispute and to bring about
agreements between the parties on those matters.
(3) The special mediator must keep the minister informed as to the progress of the
mediation.
If mediation unsuccessful
12 (1) If mediation under section 11 is unsuccessful in bringing about agreements
between the parties, the minister may
(a) direct the special mediator to make recommendations respecting revised or
renewed collective agreements between the parties, or
(b) direct that any remaining disputes be resolved by binding arbitration or
provide for such other mechanism the minister considers necessary and
appropriate to resolve those disputes and settle the terms and conditions of
revised or renewed collective agreements.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) (b), other mechanisms include, without
limitation, the process of final offer arbitration.
(3) Recommendations under subsection (1) (a), or terms and conditions arrived at
under subsection (1) (b), constitute collective agreements between the trade union
and the employers.
(4) A collective agreement constituted under subsection (3) is binding on the trade
union and the employer and on the employees affected, but its terms and
conditions may be varied by agreement between the parties.
Costs
13 Each party to a mediation under section 11 is responsible for
(a) its own fees, expenses and costs, and
(b) an equal portion of the fees and expenses of the special mediator.
Part 4 -- Miscellaneous
Application of Labour Relations Code
14 (1) The Labour Relations Code and the regulations made under it apply in
respect of a matter to which this Act applies, but if there is a conflict or an
inconsistency between
(a) this Act, and
(b) the Labour Relations Code or the regulations made under it,
this Act applies.
(2) The Labour Relations Board has exclusive jurisdiction to decide a question
arising under this Act, including any question of a conflict or an inconsistency
referred to in subsection (1).
Repeal
15 (1) This Act is repealed by regulation of the Lieutenant Governor in Council.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(2) Despite subsection (1), a collective agreement constituted under this Act is a
collective agreement for the purposes of the Labour Relations Code and the
collective agreement remains in force until expiry of the collective agreement.
Copyright © 2001: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
2001 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 37th Parliament
THIRD READING
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
Certified correct as passed Third Reading on the 9th day of August, 2001
Ian D. Izard, Law Clerk
HONOURABLE GRAHAM BRUCE
MINISTER OF SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND LABOUR
BILL 15 -- 2001
HEALTH CARE SERVICES COLLECTIVE
AGREEMENTS ACT
Contents
Section
1 Definitions
2 Constitution of nurses' collective agreement
3 Constitution of paramedical professionals' collective agreement
4 Resolution of disputes regarding agreed provisions
5 Expiry of collective agreements
6 Application of Labour Relations Code
7 Repeal
8 Repeal of Health Care Services Continuation Act
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the
Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows:
Definitions
1 In this Act:
"employee" means a nurse or a paramedical professional who is an employee of an
employer;
"employer" means an employer that is a member of the HEABC;
"HEABC" means the Health Employers Association of British Columbia;
"nurse" means a unionized employee who is included in the nurses' bargaining unit
referred to in section 19.4 of the Health Authorities Act;
"Nurses' Bargaining Association" means the association of trade unions formed in
accordance with section 19.9 of the Health Authorities Act for the nurses'
bargaining unit;
"paramedical professional" means a unionized employee who is included in the
paramedical professional bargaining unit referred to in section 19.4 of the Health
Authorities Act;
"Paramedical Professional Bargaining Association" means the association of trade
unions formed in accordance with section 19.9 of the Health Authorities Act for the
paramedical professional bargaining unit.
Constitution of nurses' collective agreement
2 (1) The following are deemed to constitute a collective agreement between
HEABC and the Nurses' Bargaining Association:
(a) the collective agreement between HEABC and the Nurses' Bargaining
Association that expired on March 31, 2001, as amended by the provisions
referred to in paragraphs (b) and (c);
(b) the provisions that have been negotiated and agreed to by HEABC and the
Nurses' Bargaining Association during collective bargaining;
(c) the provisions of the settlement package tabled by HEABC on July 16,
2001 with the Nurses' Bargaining Association.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(2) The collective agreement constituted under subsection (1) may be varied by
agreement between HEABC and the Nurses' Bargaining Association.
(3) Despite subsection (2), a provision of the collective agreement that creates
obligations for the government must not be varied unless the Minister of Finance
approves the variation.
Constitution of paramedical professionals' collective agreement
3 (1) The following are deemed to constitute a collective agreement between
HEABC and the Paramedical Professional Bargaining Association:
(a) the collective agreement between HEABC and the Paramedical
Professional Bargaining Association that expired on March 31, 2001, as
amended by the provisions referred to in paragraphs (b) and (c);
(b) the provisions that have been negotiated and agreed to by HEABC and the
Paramedical Professional Bargaining Association during collective bargaining;
(c) the provisions of the employer package proposal tabled by HEABC on July
18, 2001 with the Paramedical Professional Bargaining Association.
(2) The collective agreement constituted under subsection (1) may be varied by
agreement between HEABC and the Paramedical Professional Bargaining
Association.
(3) Despite subsection (2), a provision of the collective agreement that creates
obligations for the government must not be varied unless the Minister of Finance
approves the variation.
Resolution of disputes regarding agreed provisions
4 (1) If there is a dispute as to what provisions have been agreed to by the parties
for the purpose of section 2 (1) (b) either party may, within 30 days from the day on
which this Act comes into force, refer the dispute to the industrial inquiry
commission appointed by the Minister of Labour on April 16, 2001 under section 79
of the Labour Relations Code.
(2) If there is a dispute as to what provisions have been agreed to by the parties for
the purpose of section 3 (1) (b) either party may, within 30 days from the day on
which this Act comes into force, refer the dispute to the special mediator appointed
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
by the Minister of Labour on June 19, 2001 under section 76 of the Labour
Relations Code.
(3) The industrial inquiry commission or special mediator, as the case may be, may
meet with the parties and provide clarification with respect to the provisions that are
in dispute and the collective agreement is deemed to be amended to include those
clarifications.
Expiry of collective agreements
5 A collective agreement constituted under this Act expires on March 31, 2004.
Application of Labour Relations Code
6 (1) The Labour Relations Code and the regulations made under it apply in
respect of a matter to which this Act applies, but if there is a conflict or an
inconsistency between
(a) this Act, and
(b) the Labour Relations Code or the regulations made under it,
this Act applies.
(2) The Labour Relations Board has exclusive jurisdiction to decide a question
arising under this Act, including any question of a conflict or an inconsistency
referred to in subsection (1).
Repeal
7 (1) This Act may be repealed by regulation of the Lieutenant Governor in Council.
(2) Despite subsection (1), a collective agreement constituted under this Act is a
collective agreement for the purposes of the Labour Relations Code, and the
collective agreement remains in force until expiry of the collective agreement.
Repeal of Health Care Services Continuation Act
8 The Health Care Services Continuation Act, S.B.C. 2001, c. 23, is repealed.
Copyright © 2001: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
1998 Legislative Session: 3rd Session, 36th Parliament
THIRD READING
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
Certified correct as passed Third Reading on the 30th day of July, 1998
Ian D. Izard, Law Clerk
HONOURABLE PAUL RAMSEY
MINISTER OF EDUCATION
BILL 39 -- 1998
PUBLIC EDUCATION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT ACT
Contents
Section
1 Definitions
2 Constitution of collective agreement
3 Commencement
HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of the
Province of British Columbia, enacts as follows:
Definitions
1 In this Act:
"Agreement in Committee" means
(a) the Agreement in Committee signed on behalf of the government and the BCTF on
April 17, 1998,
(b) the Memorandum of Agreement K-3 Primary Class Size signed on behalf of the
government and the BCTF and appended to the Agreement in Committee,
(c) the article entitled "Salary Determination for Employees in Adult Education" signed
on behalf of the government, the employers' association and the BCTF on May 7, 1998,
and
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
(d) Article A.1 entitled "Term, Continuation and Renegotiation" signed on behalf of the
government, the employers' association and the BCTF on May 4, 1998;
"BCTF" means the British Columbia Teachers' Federation;
"employers' association" means the British Columbia Public School Employers'
Association;
"parties" means the BCTF and the employers' association.
Constitution of collective agreement
2 (1) Effective July 1, 1998, the Agreement in Committee is deemed to constitute a
collective agreement between the parties.
(2) The Agreement in Committee may be varied by agreement between the parties.
(3) Despite subsection (2), a provision of the Agreement in Committee that creates
obligations for the government must not be varied unless the minister approves the
variation.
(4) The Labour Relations Code and the regulations under it apply in respect of the
matters to which this section applies, but if there is a conflict or inconsistency between
this section and the Labour Relations Code or any other enactment, this section applies.
Commencement
3 This Act is deemed to have come into force on July 1, 1998 and is retroactive to the
extent necessary to give it effect on and after that date.
Copyright © 1998: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Appendix C: Fact Finder’s (Longpre)
Report, November 29, 2001
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
For Immediate Release
2001-017
Nov. 22, 2001
Ministry of Skills Development and Labour
FACT-FINDER APPOINTED IN TEACHERS’ DISPUTE
VICTORIA – A fact-finder has been asked to report on the status of negotiations in the
teachers’ dispute, Graham Bruce, minister of skills development and labour, announced
today.
Richard Longpre, assistant deputy minister in the Labour Ministry, will confer
informally over the next week with both the teachers’ union and the employers’
representatives to determine where the parties stand on key items and the prospects of
the two sides reaching a timely resolution. Longpre has been asked to report back by
Nov. 29.
“As the dispute enters its eighth month and the province’s 45,000 teachers have
been in strike mode for nearly three weeks, I’m led to believe the parties are about $5
billion apart.” Bruce said. “Thus, it is important to assess the chances of the parties’
achieving a negotiated settlement.
“After the fact-finder has reported, we will have a better sense of what options
are realistic to bring this to a conclusion.”
Longpre has more than 20 years’ experience in labour relations. He was a vicechair of the Labour Relations Board for more than 10 years.
- 30 Contact:
Irwin Henderson
Communications Branch
250 356-1487
News releases from the Ministry of Skills Development and Labour are at
www.labour.gov.bc.ca/news/newsroom.htm online.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
BRITISH COLUMBIA
November 29, 2001
BY FAX
To:
David Chudnovsky,
British Columbia Teachers’ Federation
Ken Denike
British Columbia Public Schools Employers’
Association
Attached please find the report of the informal fact-finder, Richard Longpre,
appointed November 22, 2001. I am providing it to you in advance of its public
release, scheduled for tomorrow morning at 11 a.m.
Please accept my thanks for your cooperation with Mr. Longpre’s work during the
past week.
Yours truly.
Graham P. Bruce
Minister
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
FACT FINDING REPORT
November 29, 2001
To:
Minister Graham Bruce
Minister of Skill Development and Labour
From: Richard Longpre
Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour
I was appointed as a Fact Finder to determine the status of the current collective
bargaining between the BC Teachers’ Federation (BCTF) and the BC Public
Schools Employers’ Association (BCPSEA). I met informally with the parties to
determine their respective positions on key items in dispute and the prospects of
a timely resolution.
This is my report.
Statistics
Number of School Boards:
Number of Teachers:
Number of Non-Enrolled Teachers
Current Agreement expired:
Start of Bargaining:
Initial Bargaining Demands:
Days of Bargaining:
60
46,000
6,600
June 30, 2001
March 5,2001
BCTF - 32 issues
BCPSEA - 14 issues
59 days up to November 22, 2001
To date, three issues have been resolved in collective bargaining. There are
several issues on which the parties have found varying degrees of common
ground. The following key issues remain in dispute.





Total compensation, including wages and benefits;
Teachers not assigned to a classroom: “non-enrolIing teachers”;
Class size
Special education for students so designated; and
Workplace Organization
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Background
Prior to 1988, teacher representatives bargained compensation with each School
District. The majority of those negotiations were settled by arbitration in
accordance with the legislation. In 1987, the Government permitted the BCTF to
organize teachers in each School District and granted trade union status under
the then Industrial Relations Act. All 75 School Districts were certified. The
resulting 75 collective agreements contained many different terms around the
Province.
In 1994, the Public Education Labour Relations Act gave BCPSEA accredited
bargaining agent for all 75 School Districts while the BCTF was made the
certified bargaining agent for all teachers in the Province. In 1995, the parties,
while unable to complete bargaining and agreed to a transitional agreement that
settled compensation and left all other matters to be discussed in the months
ahead. In 1997, bargaining for a new agreement commenced, however, a
stalemate was reached in the Spring of 1998. With the assistance of
government, a collective agreement was reached and subsequently legislated
into effect. Each School District was now governed by the new “Provincial
collective agreement” which incorporated terms from its “previous local
agreement”.
BCPSEA and BCTF acknowledged that to achieve a Provincial collective
agreement on behalf of what are now 60 School Districts, there must be some
change to their respective approaches to bargaining.
REVIEW OF KEY ISSUES IN DISPUTE
Total Compensation - Including Wages and Benefits
Existing agreement: The salary of a teacher is determined by three factors; the
actual starting wage; the length of service of the teacher, and the teacher’s
university education.
BCPSEA’s objective is to settle the total compensation increase over three (3)
years at 7.5%. The BCPSEA costs each percentage increase at $22 million.
BCTF recently proposed a 22% increase over three years. The BCTF argues
that a percentage increase is closer to $18 million.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
Non-Enrolling Teachers
Existing Agreement: Non-enrolled teachers are not assigned to a classroom.
Non-enrolled teachers include librarians, special education teachers, counsellors
and ESL teachers. Some School District agreements have different ratios for the
number of non-enrolled teachers per student.
BCPSEA wants the obligation to employ non-enrolled teachers removed from the
Provincial collective agreement. Such positions would be employed at the
discretion of the School Districts and in accordance with funding allotments in
each School District.
BCTF wants to increase the number of positions classified as non-enrolled
teachers and to improve the ratio of non-enrolled teacher/student.
Class Size
Existing Agreement: In every School District, the number of students in
Kindergarten (K) to Grade 12 classrooms is restricted.
BCPSEA wants more flexibility in determining how the class size restriction is
met.
BCTF wants to lower the maximum class size, however, it has discussed how
the calculation for class size should be made.
Special Education: Students with Special Needs
Existing Agreement: In certain districts, where a special needs student is
assigned to a classroom, the maximum number of students permitted in that
classroom decreases. Certain previous local agreements continue to restrict the
number of special needs students in a classroom.
BCPSEA wants to eliminate both of these restrictions. Its argument focuses on
the mandate of the principal to decide the changes necessary to meet the needs
of students and the School District’s obligation to meet its budget.
BCTF opposes the BCPSEA proposal. It argues that the teachers in the school
better know the needs of children in the classroom.
Workplace Organization
Their positions have had a significant impact on collective bargaining. BCPSEA
focuses on several principles, which include: the right of the School Board to
operate the school and determine the education it provides; operation of the
school within the allocated budgets; and increase standardization of the
collective agreements in designated regions.
Reflecting on the State of Teacher Collective Bargaining
BCTF and its locals in each School District, focus on several principles, which
include: the welfare of their members; the growth of the education system; and
the standard of education provided to students.
Conclusion
The parties have bargained for 59 days. While there has been discussion on
virtually all proposals, and some progress has been made, they are not close to
resolving key items.
The rift in Workplace Organization discussions, the gap in compensation, the
costing of certain proposals, and the dispute over the costing of several
proposals, mitigates the chance of a negotiated settlement in the near future.
In my meetings with the parties, they both agreed to consider the following:
1)
2)
Setting aside a specific time in the next two weeks and, with the possible
assistance of a mediator, focus on key outstanding issues; and
Requesting a third party to assist them in establishing a common method of
calculating all monetary proposals.
I will contact the parties on or before December 18 and discuss the outcome of
these efforts.
Richard Longpre