111 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

Waitlists in BC are slowly coming down. There is a lot of pressure on the healthcare system due to population demographics.

Well, thank the Lord that the school-aged-aged population is shrinking in most parts of BC, or who knows what kind of a mess public schools might be if it was increasing like the strain on healthcare.

[jonny]

This makes no sense.

You have no more or less say in how public schools are run than private schools in most cases. Electing school board officials and MLAs gives you a say in how schools are organized. How is that having "no say".

If you want direct input into your local school then join the PAC. If you want even more control get involved in a charter school.

This makes no sense.

If you don't like the way your private school is run, you just go to a different private school. Take your money elsewhere so to speak.

$7k for private school isn't bad. I know parents who spend $10k a year on hockey for their kid.

I stand by my earlier comment that teachers are adequately compensated. There is clearly an over supply of individuals striving to become teachers, yet we should be giving them a 15% raise? If they were in high demand I could see compensation being an issue, but as it stands suckers are literally lining up for these underpaid and overworked teaching gigs.

I asked my boss for a 15% raise yesterday and he laughed at me...shoot!

[AllseeingEye]

Robb while yours is an interesting observation, and understandable if you have no experience in the private school system, in fact I would argue the opposite is true: at the school in question there are kids from over 40 different cultural/ethnic/linguistic and national backgrounds which I would stack up against any public school in Victoria in terms of exposing one's child to "varied backgrounds".

In terms of ability that is certainly covered off too as there is an Honours track for those that accept that challenge or the Regular curriculum track for those families who feel the child will do better without the added workload/ expectations/pressures of the Honours program. There are very definitely differing ability levels within the system.

I think the main sticking point for many people which I alluded to earlier in the thread is the term "private" which seems to evoke images of 'privileged' and therefore 'monied': I would like to be there when someone makes that argument to the many single parents who send their kids to the same school as our daughter, including the single mom who works as a dental assistant; or the single dad who drives a taxi. They certainly aren't "rolling in dough" nor do they occupy mansions in Uplands or Broadmead - although of course that element is represented in the school as well - no question. Rest assured nonetheless that just because it has the private label that doesn't mean there aren't children from widely different cultural and yes economic backgrounds, all of which are very well exposed to our kid and vice versa.

[mc9]

but as it stands suckers are literally lining up for these underpaid and overworked teaching gigs.

I asked my boss for a 15% raise yesterday and he laughed at me...shoot!

There are suckers lining up to work in cubicals and in offices all day too.

[mc9]

b) I don't think the quality of education is much better in private schools. My perception of it is they have betters kids to work, but I could be wrong.

They also have MUCH smaller class sizes which makes a huge difference in the teachers ability to help each individual student.

[VicHockeyFan]

This makes no sense.

You have no more or less say in how public schools are run than private schools in most cases. Electing school board officials and MLAs gives you a say in how schools are organized. How is that having "no say".

If you want direct input into your local school then join the PAC. If you want even more control get involved in a charter school.

The PAC doesn't set any kind of EDUCATION policy, it really only deals with extra-curricular stuff.

And electing officials is a bit of a hard route to go to get change, up to three or four years as your kids winds through the system. With private school, you can make choices in advance of the school year, not after your kid gets in and is assigned a teacher(s).

[Robb]

In terms of ability that is certainly covered off too as there is an Honours track for those that accept that challenge or the Regular curriculum track for those families who feel the child will do better without the added workload/ expectations/pressures of the Honours program. There are very definitely differing ability levels within the system.

It's interesting to me how I said differing-ability meaning children with different mental and physical abilities and you thought I meant average vs. honours student.

[Bernard]

One way many parents get the private school experience within the public system is by putting their kids in French Immersion. Kids with learning problems are defacto not allowed into French Immersion. Kids that are behavioral problems are typically pushed out of the French Immersion problem.

Most French immersion students come from families with university degrees and decent paying jobs. You can see how much more French Immersion there is on the east side of SD#61 than the west side

[LJ]

The best part of having your kids in a private school is that it is not controlled by the BCTF.

Every day is a teaching day, every day there is extra curricular activities taking place, there are no strikes, no refusing to do this that or the other thing etc. etc.

It was worth every penny for us.

[Mike K.]

Uck. Isn't it bad enough that the government makes us use a healthcare system that is terrible? Now we should be forced to send our kids to schools that we have no say in how they are run? No thanks.

The government is complicate in running the public healthcare system into the ground and private healthcare corporations are salivating at the border for the opportunity to start making inroads in Canada.

I don't need to get into it, but we've all heard stories of how private healthcare has bankrupted a fair number of well-to-do types who happened to lose coverage during treatment. To think you must sell your home and possibly declare bankruptcy to access full medical care is a fear Canadian's simply do not know and we're lucky for it. Neither do we know the burden of insuring a family of four (my acquaintance in Seattle pays $3,000/month for herself, her husband and their two healthy sons -- nobody in that family has health issues). $3,000, which turns out to be her monthly salary as a teacher, coincidentally. Luckily her husband earns enough to make up for her wages. No wonder most American's have no medical coverage to speak of, meanwhile Canadian's are pushing for an American system (and American's wishing for a Canadian system).

What is happening to healthcare (the degradation of services and the increasing waiting times together with reduced treatment windows) is equal to what is happening to education. 30 years ago both systems worked. Now public healthcare is "forced" on us and public education is "substandard" How did we slide so far?

Although I support pro-business governments, I find their agendas for the erosion of the values and the social safety net that made Canada Canada (you know, the Canada we were raised in) shameful and disheartening. I know that my children will likely have to attend a private school and their healthcare will be provided by a private corporation that will demand thousands in premiums with no guarantee my child's care will be covered if the insurer feels their money is better allocated to someone else.

Yay.

[jonny]

That's a very noble rant there Mike, but the fact is that government here had literally been throwing billions at our health care problems with only marginal improvements.

Canada has one of the most socialist healthcare systems while the US had one of the most individualistic. Saying the only alternative to our system is the US system is naive and narrow minded. The only other country with a healthcare model like ours is Cuba. The consistently highest ranked countries have a mix of public and private delivery. Canada will need to move away from the 100% public model we currently have in order to realize any material improvements in health system performance.

This doesn't mean leaving people uninsured btw, which for some is the only argument they have against reduced public delivery. Canadians seem to only care to compare us against the US, when there are many other comparables.

[tedward]

From a local teacher: http://staffroomconf...ing-letter.html

It comes down to this:

[BC Liberals]don’t want an improved public education system.

Clearly many of the posters here agree with this position. How about we stop pretending this is anything other than ideological warfare against unions, public education and public healthcare?

[Mike K.]

That's a very noble rant there Mike, but the fact is that government here had literally been throwing billions at our health care problems with only marginal improvements.

The problem is waste, jonny, not the socialized healthcare system. European countries excel at delivery of public healthcare, but don't tell me for one second that you believe Canada will follow in the footsteps of Europe with all of the lobbying already taking place by American-backed healthcare organizations.

I studied Canadian healthcare for nearly six years. The system is slowly becoming Americanized because the government keeps feeding us the carrot that universal healthcare is too expensive, too burdensome. Meanwhile America's for-profit privatized healthcare system has nearly double the per-capita cost of the Canadian system (but, alas, paid for out of pocket by Americans) and the real problem in Canada is waste, much of it created by the very government that then tells taxpayers it is challenged to support universal healthcare.

[BC Liberals]don’t want an improved public education system.

No, they don't. Education is for sale as far as the Liberals are concerned.

[PulpVictor]

There may be a few die-hard pro-unionists who will join you. Those of us that work can't afford you:

Given the current fiscal climate -- the BC government’s significant deficit ($1.4 billion over the next two years) -- and comparisons with the income of average BC families, now is hardly the time for BC teachers to be asking for more. Rather than give to the demands of the BC Teachers Federation, Premier Christy Clark should ensure the next collective agreement ties teacher pay to performance.

Consider that as a result of the recent recession, the income of average BC families has grown by only 0.8 per cent, on average, over the past four years. That’s lower than the rate of inflation. In other words, consumer prices have increased faster than the income of average BC families. Indeed, many families are actually worse off today in real terms.

But not BC teachers. They signed a generous collective agreement in 2006 that gave them average wage increases of 2.5 per cent over five years (add in benefits and total compensation increase by 16 per cent over the life of the agreement). In addition, each teacher received a $4,000 signing bonus. After inking that deal, then-BCTF President Jinny Sims boasted of achieving “significant gains.”

While average BC families struggled during the recession, BC teachers prospered. And after all this, the BCTF wants even more as it renegotiates its contract.

Here’s what the BCTF is currently asking for:

•26 weeks (half year) paid leave to care for someone (being a family member is not a requirement);
•a year's pay as a “bonus” for retiring veteran teachers;
•two weeks paid leave upon the death of any friend;
•five paid days per year for professional activities;
•two sick days a month that can be saved up; and
•a substantial pay increase (not yet specified) that would make BC teacher “the best paid teachers in the country.”
According to the teachers’ “employer” -- the B.C. Public School Employers Association -- it would cost BC taxpayers more than $2 billion to meet their demands. And that doesn’t include their full salary demands.

[dirtydeeds]

Here’s what the BCTF is currently asking for:

•26 weeks (half year) paid leave to care for someone (being a family member is not a requirement);
•a year's pay as a “bonus” for retiring veteran teachers;
•two weeks paid leave upon the death of any friend;
•five paid days per year for professional activities;
•two sick days a month that can be saved up; and
•a substantial pay increase (not yet specified) that would make BC teacher “the best paid teachers in the country.”
According to the teachers’ “employer” -- the B.C. Public School Employers Association -- it would cost BC taxpayers more than $2 billion to meet their demands. And that doesn’t include their full salary demands.

What they are asking for and what they are expecting or feel they are entitled to are totally different. I would bet that any teacher would tell you they are not expecting these things but that they are part of a negotiating process to make gains in their collective agreements. Same with their 15% wage increase? They are starting negotiations at 5% a year, the government is starting at 0%. I think asking the question "what will the teachers agree to" is a more important question than what are they asking. It seems detractors on both sides are fixed on the government and teachers starting points maybe a mediator will be the answer or maybe binding arbitration, but I doubt either side would agree to that?

[PulpVictor]

The rest of us cannot afford your 'fair deal'. I'd love to get your deal. Please view this short video, and try to understand WHY WE CANNOT AFFORD YOU!

http://youtu.be/MwqQxA3-_fg

[mc9]

I appreciated this comment for the above posted youtube video

"You confuse two issues. Yes, you probably deserve better pay, and we all deserve better pensions and benefits. Corporations don't give a rat's ass for their workers. But why take away the better pay and benefits from one group instead of raising the benefits and pay of the others? We need to lift all boats, not sink the few that are still floating."

[Fairbanks]

If you want smaller class sizes then that means more teachers. You cant have your cake and eat it too. So which is it, more teachers or more money...decide. in the last 50 years only one contract has been settled without dispute. One settled contract in 5 decades. Clearly the BCTF is not capable of negotiating in good faith.

[bluefox]

There may be a few die-hard pro-unionists who will join you. Those of us that work can't afford you.

I find the part in bold particularly insulting and inflammatory, and I'm not even a teacher. In fact, I do work in the private sector. I don't know why you think talking like that helps get teachers back to work with a fair, equitable deal.

You definitely don't speak for me.

[martini]

I find the part in bold particularly insulting and inflammatory, and I'm not even a teacher. In fact, I do work in the private sector. I don't know why you think talking like that helps get teachers back to work with a fair, equitable deal.

You definitely don't speak for me.

I second that.