The B.C. Teachers’ Federation has a new president. Glen Hansman has been elected to replace Jim Iker, who stepped down after serving three terms. Hansman, an elementary-school teacher from Vancouver, says his top priority will be getting more money for education.
If this were a normal bargaining cycle, Hansman would have time on his side. The current contract doesn’t expire until 2019. But the situation is not normal.
Many teachers were critical of the way last year’s negotiations were handled. The leadership called for a strike just as the summer break was beginning. That removed the pressure on government to improve its offer.
Hansman’s first job, then, is to come up with a more realistic negotiating schedule. But there is an elephant in the room that could wreck the best-laid plans.
In November, the Supreme Court of Canada is to hear arguments in the dispute over class size. The government insists this is a management issue, and therefore non-negotiable. The union views the matter as a workload concern, and hence fair game.
The union won the first round, with a favourable decision by the B.C. Supreme Court. But that ruling was overturned by the B.C. Court of Appeal. Now the country’s highest court has decided to step in.
The union took that to imply its case has merit. And so, indeed, it may.
However, the Supreme Court has been working its way through a series of labour disputes, using each occasion to clarify its thinking. This might simply be another step in the process.
Nevertheless, whichever way the court rules, the decision will have a huge impact on the next collective agreement. If the teachers’ federation wins, the government will have to hire more staff and perhaps pay reparations backdated to 2002. The bill could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. In that event, fairly or not, government negotiators would be in no mood to sweeten the deal with higher salaries.
If the union loses, Hansman will face a double challenge. His membership will be disappointed and furious. And the government, while likely in a more generous frame of mind, will not give back at the table what the teachers lost in court.
Adding to the complexity, there is a second unknown — which party will form the next government.
The union might find an NDP administration easier to deal with, though that, too, is uncertain. In 1993, Mike Harcourt’s NDP government ordered striking teachers in Surrey and Vancouver back to work.
In short, Hansman has his work cut out for him. He must find a way to moderate his membership’s expectations so a deal can be reached in 2019. Arguably, his predecessor, Iker, failed to do that, by asking for a salary lift well outside the pattern other public sector unions had settled for.
But whoever wins the 2016 provincial election must also step up. The perception is that Premier Christy Clark has no time for the teachers’ union, and takes every opportunity to show it. If she is re-elected next year, that has to stop.
There is a glimmer of hope here. The education ministry is working on a new curriculum that teachers generally support. The union appears impressed with progress to date.
If both sides can use this project to build common ground, perhaps some of the rancour left over from last summer’s job action will dissipate.
For there is a broader context to consider. The public is thoroughly fed up with a collective-bargaining system that has produced 48 local strikes, several wider walkouts, three legislated contracts and just two negotiated settlements in 30 years.
If either side is contemplating another round of warfare, they had better think again.
