Bumper-sticker wisdom is a kind of minimalist sagacity that does the rounds of social networks. Once in a while, a thought shows up that provokes further consideration.
A recent Facebook posting from a friend explained that a “gimme” in golf can best be described as “an agreement between two golfers, neither of whom can putt very well.”
A “gimme” keeps the game moving and is a generous display of humanity, gratefully accepted (as I can attest) by those for whom the game is not going too well.
Which brings us, by the thinnest of connections, to the recent B.C. Teachers’ Federation vs. government championship event.
Golf is a game of trust between civilized players, while labour negotiations are anything but. “Gimmes” found no place in the event we just watched. Where there might have been evidence of agreement, co-operation or, most important, trust between adults in the best interests of keeping the game moving, there was none of the above.
It was equally clear that the players were stumbling through the bargaining process consistently hitting the ball into out of bounds (think Clause E80), asking for a “gimme” and then wondering why everyone else was getting so annoyed.
Not difficult to understand why the pro, Vince Ready, who had played many a labour-relations game at the negotiator’s equivalent of the PGA, packed up his clubs and walked off the course in frustration until somebody who knew the rules showed up.
That somebody was Hassan Yussuff, the newly elected president of the Canadian Labour Congress who, by some accounts, was there at the invitation of the premier but, for obvious reasons, was also welcomed by the players on the union side.
Yussuff carries a big stick as CLC president and got straight to the heart of the game by speaking candidly to both sides about trust, and why, in the absence of trust, there was not much point in continuing with the game the way they were playing it.
Worse still, if fractured relationships and mistrust were keynote features of this negotiation, the erosive effect of suspicion and mistrust extended far beyond the grounds on which this game was being played.
At no time before the game even began had any of the other players convened in the clubhouse to agree on club rules about how the game was to be played: so many OBs forgiven, so many gimmes awarded per player, no displays of petulance, no fudging the truth about where the ball landed.
So it was apparent that the B.C. Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils was notably cautious about aligning its organization and stepping into the fray on behalf of parents.
It is no surprise that a social-network campaign is afoot aimed at encouraging disillusioned local parent councils to withdraw from the BCCPAC.
The same could be said of the B.C. School Trustees’ Association, representative of boards of education throughout the province, which were elected by their local communities to speak up on behalf of the best interests of public education and kids.
No surprise that some trustees have begun to privately question the role and value of boards of education in running the public system.
Also absent from any roundtable meeting that might have formed a coalition to see that the game was fair and being played by the rules were both the B.C. School Superintendents’ Association and the B.C. Principals’ and Vice Principals’ Association.
Like those golfers who need to meet before the game began, a coalition of these major players in B.C.’s public-education system might have become a strong and effective voice that guaranteed the game did not drag on almost to the close of day.
Why these organizations exhibited such timidity about getting together to discuss how to intervene in such a significant issue — the extended closure of public schools — is a mystery.
So enough of the golf metaphor, other than to say the scores are in and nobody won and, with the onset of fall, it is a lot colder out on the course than it was.
Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools.
