CPC(M-L) HOME ontario@cpcml.ca

July 16, 2012 - No. 41

McGuinty's "Roadmap" for Education 

 

McGuinty's "Roadmap" for Education
Local School Boards Left in the Dark - Christine Nugent
Agreement Signed Between Catholic Teachers' Union and Government of Ontario - Laura Chesnik
The Michigan Example -- Is This What McGuinty Has in Mind for Ontario? - Enver Villamizar
Discussion Paper on Post-Secondary Education
Student Indebtedness in Ontario

For Your Information
Cuts to School Boards Announced to Date - Sylvia Etts


McGuinty's "Roadmap" for Education

Local School Boards Left in the Dark

The announcement of the settlement between the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (OECTA) and the Ontario government, without the Ontario Catholic School Trustees Association present, has left the local Catholic School Boards, teacher and education organizations, parents and students in an unknown and untenable situation.

Negotiations between local school boards and teachers' and education workers' unions are to take place this September in accordance with the Ontario Labour Relations Act. (Note: Some have begun already, but most will commence in earnest in September as traditionally not much goes on locally when school is out and Board and union members are "on vacation.") The parameters set by the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between OECTA and the government reached July 5 are final and must be implemented without consideration of local conditions. The boards must submit contracts to the province for approval. Much of the local authority over education is being usurped by the province.

This has put the local Catholic School Boards in a precarious situation. For example, as reported in their local press, the director of education for the Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board, said that the MOU had parts that are "doable" and "certain others that without the details were not quite sure how to implement them." Barbara Holland, chairwoman of the Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board noted that school boards are teachers' employers and said, "We were a little dismayed." "We had not been given any indication OECTA could sign with the province," she said.

According to the details released, the MOU states that all teachers represented by OECTA will lose three days' pay ("Dalton Days") amounting to a 1.5 per cent cut in wages in 2013-14. This will be applied against the government's fiscal targets for the education sector, the MOU states.

OECTA's salary grid is frozen for two years -- anyone at maximum on the grid gets a zero per cent wage increase in year one and a 1.5 per cent cut in year two.

Movement up the grid for experience and across the grid for qualifications will continue both years but will only take effect on the 97th day of the school year instead of the first day. That means eligible teachers get only half a year's worth of increased pay instead of a full year for experience and/or additional qualifications.

Further, no increases in health benefits can be negotiated in local bargaining under the terms of the MOU. Whatever a Catholic teacher had in 2011-12 is frozen for the next two years, the only exception being if your collective agreement entitled you to coverage at "current" rates in, say, the dental plan, your coverage can increase to reflect whatever the Ontario Dental Association rates are for that year. This means that for bargaining units (often the smaller, non-teaching units) with very inferior benefit plans which they hoped to be able to improve this round, even that is subject to a provincial prohibition.

Local bargaining will not be able to address any provision in a collective agreement that has been amended by the MOU. Further, local bargaining must end by December 31, 2012, after which anything not mutually agreed to by the Board and the union by that time will remain status quo. Without the right to use sanctions, strikes or even to apply for conciliation, all provided for under the Ontario Labour Relations Act, Catholic teachers and anyone else who might come under the same terms as the OECTA MOU, would have very little power to back up their demands.

The conditions of the MOU clearly address the overall demand of the ruling elites that the wages, working conditions and benefits of workers in Ontario must be driven down so that more of the wealth of the province is made available to make the rich richer.

Meanwhile the press and certain parties predict a "stable" start to the fall semester, thereby expressing the cynical belief that the MOU makes any opposition impossible. This is because local negotiations are set within parameters that are tight and final in terms of what can be negotiated under the OECTA MOU. At the same time, other questions such as whether there will be funding needed or additional grants to cover the terms of this agreement are not answered. Will local boards, many of which have already decided their budgets, need to make new arrangements, start cutting more teachers and education workers, close schools, cancel more programs, sell off school yards to fix the roofs or what? Everyone is left to fend for themselves to understand whatever they can.

The reality for local school communities such as the Toronto District School Board and many other boards, is that for years they have been working to resist the effects of the pressure put on them for balanced budgets. In the '90s, the Harris government implemented an untenable funding formula that the McGuinty government has refused to resolve. This formula, for example, has allowed the Peel Board $1,000 less per child than the Toronto Board, although it is facing similar conditions and demographics. None of this is resolved and no means of resolving it are provided.

Another arrangement by the Harris government which has not changed is that boards must balance their budgets, despite the inadequacies of the funding formula. If not, they lose their decision-making power to a government-appointed supervisor who will step in and do as they see fit to meet the government's agenda.  Now, in addition, the McGuinty government agenda is to eliminate the deficit by 2017-2018. In this situation all local decision-making in the delivery of quality education is given no role. The recent agreement adds to this loss of local authority. It demands that the local boards submit collective agreements to the province for approval.

Statements from the Premier's office that "The 2012 Budget takes strong action to eliminate Ontario's deficit by 2017-18 while protecting health care and education, all of which is essential to creating jobs and growing the economy" are designed to deceive school communities. Many local board members are speaking out against this fraud.

A serious look at the facts reveals that the education system is not protected. The budget recently passed by all Ontario political parties in the Legislature contains restrictions on increases to education that has already resulted in local boards implementing austerity measures. The local boards have had to respond to funding cuts and have not been able to shield themselves from these financial losses. This was the case even before the parameters forced on the Catholic teachers and education workers were established. The boards, despite opposition from parents, teachers and education organizations have had to make decisions that are damaging to the health of local boards and their education community. These boards are now faced with local negotiations in the fall with no assurance of how the new MOU will be implemented. Millions of dollars are being taken out of the system at a cost to quality education in Ontario.

By the looks of it, McGuinty's "moving forward together" sermon, without increasing funding to social programs, is a fraud designed to take all decision-making power out of the hands of teachers and support staff.

Return to top


Agreement Signed Between Catholic Teachers' Union and Government of Ontario

On July 5, the Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (OECTA) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Ontario government. It was ratified by OECTA's Provincial Executive that same morning. The MOU must be incorporated into all local collective agreements. OECTA's provincial website states: "The parameters of the MOU cannot be changed and will not be subject to local ratification."

On July 10, the MOU was endorsed by OECTA's Council of Presidents by a vote of 42 in favour, 24 opposed.[1]

The two-year agreement, the first and only one yet to be signed between the province and education workers in Ontario, includes among other things: a two-year wage freeze, three unpaid days during the 2013-2014 school year, the elimination of 50 per cent of previously-negotiated sick days, elimination of the ability to bank unused sick days and an end to retirement gratuities. And to pour salt into the wounds of education workers: no strikes, lockouts or requests for conciliation during the period of local bargaining September 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012.

In a letter to members, OECTA President Kevin O'Dwyer stated: "If there is no agreement [by December 31, 2012], status quo prevails, which means the terms of the 2008-2012 agreement are extended for the next two years, except for the terms of the MOU. Between September 1 and December 31, 2012 (during bargaining), there will be no job action or strikes by teachers, and no lockouts by school boards. This is one of the parameters agreed to in the MOU. Boards cannot apply for conciliation, which means boards cannot unilaterally change the terms of the current collective agreements."

The ability of teachers and support staff to withhold their labour and stall the beginning of the school year would create immense pressure to resolve the dispute while offering teachers and students what remains of the school year to cover necessary content. However, the MOU comes into effect as of September 1, 2012 and opens the period of collective bargaining that already has a set end date. After December 31, 2012, a new collective agreement is in place; whether it is the MOU with new collective agreement terms/language in sections not touched by the MOU or it is the MOU with a status quo agreement. Either way, by January 1, 2013 there is an agreement in place and as such there would be no ability to withhold education workers' labour.

The MOU also takes district school boards out of the picture. Not only are the negotiated terms being dictated to them as well, but if they wanted to lock out employees in a political statement to put pressure on the government to increase provincial funding for education, especially considering the province's newly imposed "budgeting practices," under the MOU they can't (see Ontario Political Forum, July 9, 2012 - No. 40).

In a bulletin to members issued after a July 12 meeting with provincial negotiators, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF/FEESO) President Ken Coran stated: "Giving up these rights [conciliation, sanction/strike, ratification and unencumbered local bargaining] is unacceptable to OSSTF/FEESO and our members. We will be proceeding with the provisions outlined in the Labour Relations Act and will move forward with local bargaining."

On June 11, it was reported that l'Association des enseignantes et enseignants Franco-ontariens and the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF/FEESO) met with the province to get more information on the MOU.

The Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (ETFO) walked out of the Provincial Discussion Table (PDT) at the beginning of the negotiations in opposition to the threats of legislation and the conditions of the parameters put forth. They remain away from the PDT.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees-Ontario (CUPE-O) which represents 55,000 school board support workers in every elementary and high school as well as Catholic and French language schools in Ontario is opposed to the deal and also remains away from the PDT.

Note

1. The Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association's Council of Presidents consists of: OECTA's unit presidents or their designates; the elected members of the Association; the elected Association representatives on the board of governors of the Ontario Teachers' Federation; the president of the St. Michael's College School Teachers' Association; one occasional teacher bargaining unit representative for each of the following regions: northeast, northwest, southwest and central; chairpersons of the standing committees, networks, work groups, project teams, task forces and the Institute for Catholic Education representative (non-voting); the general secretary (non-voting) and the deputy general secretary (non-voting).

Return to top


The Michigan Example -- Is This What McGuinty
Has in Mind for Ontario?


Michigan-wide protests against cuts to education, May 23, 2011.

In March of 2011, using the pretext of deficit financing in education, the state of Michigan legislature passed the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act, commonly known as Public Act 4 or PA4. The Act expanded the power of the Governor of Michigan to place local school districts and cities in "financial distress" in state receivership and impose "emergency financial managers" on them. The Act also expanded the powers of emergency managers once they are imposed.

Under the Act, an emergency manager can now dismiss elected local governance of school districts or cities; take control of budgets and issuance of bonds; approve or eliminate existing contracts and negotiate, or not, all future contracts; hire, fire and lay off city workers; sell public assets like school buildings, libraries and water rights; guarantee debt payments and more.

The Act amended the state's labour legislation to provide that collective bargaining is suspended for five years from the date a school district is placed in receivership by the State or until the receivership is terminated.

The City of Detroit has been at the centre of schemes to put in place new state-wide arrangements in public education using the new powers of emergency managers contained in the Act.

In May 2011, Roy S. Roberts was appointed Emergency Manager for the Detroit Public Schools by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder and given broad powers to "rectify the District's fiscal emergency." Roberts is a former General Motors executive and director of a private equity firm.

Shortly after being appointed, Roberts announced that starting in September 2012, 15 Detroit public schools (nine elementary and six secondary) in the Detroit Public Schools District will be placed under the control of a newly-created statewide school district called the Education Achievement Authority (EAA).

 The schools placed under the new state-wide authority are those which have been designated by the federal government as "failing schools" due to their "failure" to properly implement federally mandated "redesign plans." However, the EAA has stated that its intention is to place all public "failing schools" statewide under its control.

The EAA is currently soliciting proposals from charter school operators and other contractors to run some of its schools and buildings. Despite being part of the public system, funding for its functioning for the upcoming year comes from unnamed foundations and donors.

Those teachers and staff which were employed by the schools placed in the new district were fired, and are now being forced to re-apply for their jobs in a situation with no union and where individualized contracts are signed between a teacher and the district, rather than a collective agreement.

The EAA was created through an interlocal agreement between Eastern Michigan University and the Emergency Manager-controlled Detroit Public Schools district. Michigan's Urban Cooperation Act provides for such contracts between government entities in an area to "share their budgets to reach a common goal they may be unable to reach separately."

Rather than locally elected officials, the EAA is governed by an appointed 11-member Board. It is made up of: two members appointed by Detroit Public Schools, two members appointed by Eastern Michigan University and seven members appointed by the governor. Members serve at the pleasure of the respective appointing authority.

Meanwhile on June 30, those teachers and staff which remain part of the Detroit Public Schools and continue to be represented by the Detroit Federation of Teachers had a contract imposed on them by Emergency Manager Roberts. Amongst other things, the new contract imposed a 10 per cent wage cut, as well as the suspension of payouts of banked sick leave for teachers who retire. The imposed collective agreement affects some 4,100 teachers currently employed by the Detroit Public Schools.

Detroit is just one example. Similar arrangements are being made across the state. Emergency managers in Muskegon Heights and Highland Park, Michigan have announced that schools in those districts will all be turned over to for-profit charter operators when schools open in the fall.

These measures have been met with stiff resistance from the people of Michigan, especially the high school youth in Detroit. During the last school year, students organized ongoing walkouts against the takeover of their schools and attacks on public education. They were supported by union teachers who are working out how to mobilize their members under the new circumstances where local elected governance is being eliminated as is the right of unions to negotiate collectively.

Return to top


Discussion Paper on Post-Secondary Education

The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities has released a discussion paper on innovation for colleges and universities which it argues will make the Ontario post-secondary sector stronger. The paper is titled "Strengthening Ontario's Centres of Creativity, Innovation and Knowledge." It is important to examine and discuss the paper as it presents the government's aim for post-secondary education. People in Ontario depend on post-secondary education for a number of reasons. As part of society they need a system which serves its advancement, along with their own. Is this the aim of the government's discussion paper?

An Anti-Social Agenda

The discussion paper begins its proposals from the viewpoint of economic crisis. It declares that "lower rates of spending growth" are the order of the day, not investments in the kind of education required by the society and the generations of youth and others who need the knowledge and skills it requires.

"In light of the current fiscal climate, and as we continue to recover from the recession, it is necessary to lead the province's publicly funded higher education system towards lower rates of spending growth. Costs in the post-secondary sector have grown at a rate above inflation during a time when growth and grants from government have become constrained. At the same time, a balanced tuition policy is essential for both students and the government in order to ensure financial sustainability as well as adequate recognition of the public and private benefits of education."

Is this an acceptable approach for the development of a post-secondary education system in a modern society? There is no discussion of the causes of the economic crisis, just a demand for the education system to give in to its consequences. The government itself seeks to relinquish its public responsibility to fund the system so that it prospers. It even openly refers to the "private benefits of education" without any explanation of whom or what is represented by these benefits.

Ontario Political Forum has pointed out the following in the context of public services: "People support reforms which eliminate what is blocking society from moving forward and strengthen the positive things society has given rise to. However, to make radical changes which subordinate the public interest to the private interests of the monopolies is an entirely different thing."[1] This is also true of the proposals in the discussion paper on post-secondary education. It serves to justify cuts to post-secondary education in the name of debt-servicing and other pay-the-rich schemes.

The paper goes on to say:

"Managing growth in compensation costs will be [a] key to sector sustainability. The government expects all broader public sector (BPS) partners to bargain responsibly and to consider aspects of collective agreements that enhance productivity and facilitate transformation. The government is also working towards a number of initiatives intended to improve the sustainability, affordability, and efficiency of pension plans in the BPS. Consultations have already begun on a proposed framework for jointly sponsored public sector pension plans. The government will also consider a variety of tools to enhance the sustainability of single-employer pension plans, and expects that these plans will move to a 50-50 cost sharing formula for ongoing contributions within five years."

It is clear that those involved in the delivery of post-secondary education will be the ones to bear the brunt of cost cutting measures. It is an anti-human approach and runs contrary to the reality of education that requires a pro-social agenda. This has already been the government's approach to negotiations with elementary and secondary school teachers and education workers. College faculty are also in the midst of negotiations with a deadline set for August 31 after its last contract in 2010 was imposed by the College Employer Council representing the government. The proposals for changes to pension plans must also be discussed in terms of what it means for those reaching retirement. The discussion paper is a clarion call for all those involved in the delivery of post-secondary education to evaluate its aim and measures and whether these serve their interests.

A Focus on Innovation

Much of the paper refers to what it calls the need for innovation in post-secondary education to drive productivity. The report emphasizes the need for growth in what it calls entrepreneurial education through experiential learning which it describes as students working in shared spaces with direct links with the private sector. It also refers to the possibility of funding these spaces, based on a performance basis, through more online learning.

Its ideas to drive innovation include: expanded credential options including labour-market focused three-year degrees that could include specific experiential learning opportunities, more effective credit transfer between institutions, year-round learning, continued focus on teaching and learning outcomes, increased use of technology, including more on-line learning (and even the potential for a degree- and diploma-granting Online Institute).

All of this is to make the sector more productive or, in other words, cut costs. Students, faculty, support staff and others at the colleges and universities should discuss what these proposals mean for them based on their direct experiences.

The paper concludes with a discussion on how innovation and productivity can inform forthcoming tuition policy that is fair for both students and institutions. It states:

"We see a higher education sector that has more fluidity between learning, training, and the workforce...We see a system that is driven by learning outcomes and the quality of education. We see a sector that fosters and supports our young entrepreneurs. And, most importantly, we imagine a PSE system that is highly innovative and productive -- a nimble sector that is ready to adapt to the accelerating change of pace in technology and in our economy."

Education for Whom and for What Purposes? Who Decides?

The discussion paper comes at a time of debate about the development of education across the country, captured in the Quebec students' organization against increased tuition fees and all attempts of retrogression of the system, based on the needs of society. What stance does the discussion paper take in this debate and does it capture public sentiment? What do people want to see in a discussion paper on post-secondary education? These questions must be considered if the government actually carries through on its deliberations on the paper. The government will hold a series of discussions on specific topics, including tuition policy, funding formulas, and productivity and innovation in the sector. Ontario Political Forum encourages everyone to consider the proposals in the paper and to develop their own discussions in order to intervene on a political basis of their own making.

Continued discussion on the paper and the overall agenda that governments are proposing for the economy and all of its sectors must take place in a calm and sober manner. Such an approach must start from an analysis of the real world today as it presents itself. The economic system that dominates in most countries around the world is in crisis and governments that are embroiled in this crisis are facing their own crisis of legitimacy as they follow the demands of monopolies for open markets and skilled labour trained at no cost to themselves. Governments that are supposed to serve the public will are instead serving narrow private interests which characterized old societies of the aristocracy. A paper that presents education in this way cannot be accepted if society is to advance.

Finally, it is important to keep in mind what demands governments are placing on universities and colleges. Governments must serve their function to fulfill the public will and thus provide discussion on education and other sectors of the economy and society. The report mentions the need for assessment of its mandate as follows: "If the post-secondary sector is being charged with improving productivity through innovation, it is important to understand where our institutions stand now and how well they are progressing towards achieving the vision and goals that have been set for the sector." However, once again, discussion on this mandate must start from whether it is an acceptable outlook in the first place to advance post-secondary education on a pro-social basis which is the fundamental character of all modern education.

Note

1. Ontario Political Forum, May 10, 2012 -- No. 35.

Return to top


Student Indebtedness in Ontario

Ontario students pay the highest tuition fees in the country. Those fees have increased as much as 71 per cent since 2006. Ontario university students are forced to pay nearly 50 per cent of their institutions' operating budgets and 35 per cent at the colleges', while per student funding on the part of the government is the lowest in the country. In real dollars, Ontario spends less on post- secondary education per student than two decades ago and the average per-student funding from the provincial government is only 78 per cent of the Canadian average. In the last election, Dalton McGuinty promised that his government would cut tuition fees by 30 per cent. The 30 per cent Off Ontario Tuition is a grant. This grant was introduced supposedly to help make post secondary education more affordable for full-time undergraduate university and college students. For two terms beginning in fall 2012, the grant, for those deemed eligible, would pay $1,680 a year for students in a degree program at a college or university and $770 a year for students in a certificate or diploma program at a college.

Part of the costs to cover the grants for those who qualify is being recovered by the elimination of three other student aid programs. The programs which have been eliminated are programs many of these students would have qualified for which would have resulted in a net gain. With the loss of these programs those students who do qualify for the new grant will not see any net benefit. Besides this, the government has given itself the go-ahead to continue to increase tuition fees by up to five per cent per year regardless of the grant program.

User-Pay Culture

As in all fields of life -- from health care to education to private highways -- the government is determined to maintain a user-pay culture in Ontario. Its grants program excludes two thirds of the students in Ontario, including part-time students, a growing demographic which needs to work due to exorbitant costs of post-secondary education. Full-time law, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, optometry and education students are also exempt from the grant. Graduate students are also not included in the grant program. Nowadays most graduate students live below the poverty line. They continue to provide research for mostly private interests at a pittance. They are demanding that the funding they receive should be commensurate with the work they do and provide an adequate living. This is a reasonable demand.

Graduate students who return to university after being away for more than four years also do not qualify. They face high unemployment rates and many are underemployed. They find themselves unable to pay the banks and other lending institutions the $40,000-70,000 loans they incurred to pay for their studies and the accrued interest which kicks in six months after leaving school. The grant program also leaves out those students whose parents make more than $160,000 a year, whether or not the parents help them pay for their school fees. Astonishingly, the 44 per cent of students currently receiving financial aid through the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) are considered independent of their parents and will not be eligible for the tuition grant, even though they have demonstrated financial need in order to qualify for OSAP in the first place.

Due to deregulation under the Mike Harris government, since 1996 universities charge international students tuition well in excess of the combined tuition and ancillary fees and government operating revenue received from domestic students. In fact, international students face tuition fees that are currently 3.5 times greater than those of domestic students. This is why the McGuinty government last year said it would increase international student enrollment by 50 per cent over the next five years.

During the last election, the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario (CFS-O) called for an immediate 13 per cent cut to tuition fees for all. Education must be recognized as a right the CFS points out, not a commodity. There are many countries in the world with free post-secondary education including Argentina, Brazil, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Malta, Mauritius, Morocco, Norway, Scotland, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, Kenya, Peru and Cuba, to name just a few.

Return to top


For Your Information

Cuts to School Boards Announced to Date

The following is a sample of the announced budget decisions by several of Ontario's local school boards as reported in the press. They reflect cuts in line with the guidelines sent by the Ministry of Education to School Board Directors in a March 29 memorandum, which states: "The 2012-13 school year will mark the transition from a time of large annual increases in education funding to a more constrained fiscal environment." This is the situation in which teachers and local boards will be negotiating the terms of the teachers' next contract.

These cuts dispel the fraud that this government is "protecting education."

Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic District School Board

Both Kingston and Belleville face:

- possible school consolidation;

- cuts of five to eight teacher positions in September;

- cuts to 15 education assistants in the special education department; and it is estimated that the Board's special education envelope will still be overspent by $530,000 next year;

- cuts to teacher development spending; and

- elimination of several central office positions, including two teacher consultants.

Avon Maitland District School Board

This board represents public elementary and secondary schools in Huron and Perth counties.

- The board's finance committee spent three meetings reviewing the draft budget with staff, before sending it to the board for a closed door discussion. It was approved in an open board meeting with no questions from trustees.

-As a result, schools will operate with 48 fewer staff, including teachers, educational assistants, trainers and others next year.

- Effective this month, seven public schools will close.

Bluewater District School Board

- There are threats of school closures.

- The two remaining teachers in Bluewater District School Board's gifted education program have been "sent back to the classroom" leaving the status of the advanced learning program "under review." The board will receive $24.7 million from the provincial government for special education this year. It has allocated $4.1 million from "other areas of the budget" to increase the special education spending, but there's still a shortfall.

Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board

- Fourteen teaching positions have been eliminated

- Two educational assistant positions in the special education program have been cut, along with a special education resource teacher, an assistive technology position with specialization in the use of adaptive technology for persons with disabilities, two speech/language pathologist positions, three librarian technician positions, two consultant positions and one custodial position.

- The Ministry of Education has provided funding for 25 early childhood educator positions in the early learning kindergarten classrooms for the next school year. The full-day kindergarten program is being phased in from 2010 to 2015.

- The additional early childhood educator positions are based on the enrolment of 650 students with 26 per classroom. There are currently nine early learning classrooms and that will increase to 16 in September.

Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board

- The board was forced to use reserve funds to deal with their deficit of $492,272, which resulted from implementing full-day kindergarten in six classrooms that are not currently funded.

- Seventy per cent of the kindergarten students will be in a full-day learning environment which exceeds the provincial average of 50 per cent

- Three elementary teaching positions and 4.7 secondary school positions have been eliminated through attrition and employee leaves of absence.

Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board

Ten per cent, or 213 board employees, have received layoff notices, including:

- 110 teachers -- 71 elementary and 39 high school teachers. This may change by the fall depending on any decline in enrolment, retirements and decisions made at the Provincial Discussion Table.

- 28 custodians, 24 information technologists and about 30 education assistants.

- Seven social worker positions, which affects the neediest students who come to school hungry, suicidal or with major home problems. These positions are not funded by the Ministry of Education.

Toronto District School Board

In early April, the board announced the following cuts:

- 200 high school teachers

- 39 elementary vice-principals

- 430 education assistants. The Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 4400 negotiated a deal that offers re-training for some of the regular program educational assistants who choose to go back to school

- 134 school secretaries

- closing of up to 100 neighbourhood schools next year

- closing of 32 school cafeterias

- $9.9 million in cuts to maintenance budget

- $4.5 million in cuts to teacher development budget

- closing of schools/buildings on Fridays in the summer and during winter break

- fewer social work/psychological/speech pathology services

- special education (administration/services)

- school budgets -- $600,000 (roughly $2 per student in elementary; $3.25 for secondary)

Meanwhile, fees will also be raised and assets sold off:

- fees for permits after-hours use of schools will be raised by almost 41 per cent;

- 100 parcels of development land to be severed from the TDSB's 600 schools to generate $100 million to cover building maintenance costs not funded by the Ministry of Education.

Trustees say that they don't want to resist because they fear that the Liberal minority government will place a supervisor in charge

Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and
Clarington Catholic District School Board (PVNC)

- There will be a $2.4 million shortfall this year.

- There will be ten fewer library staff in the next year.

Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board

Eight schools are being closed. Protests of their closings raised the issue of Who Decides?

- Three new schools are being built

- In May, the board voted to close Delta, Sir John A. Macdonald and Parkview secondary schools and replace them with one new high school in the lower city

- Parkside and Highland schools in Dundas to close and a new school to be built on the Highland site.

- Mountain, Barton and Hill Park schools to close and be replaced by one new high school southeast of the Lincoln Alexander Parkway.

Return to top


PREVIOUS ISSUES | HOME

Read Ontario Political Forum
Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  ontario@cpcml.ca