March 21, 2019
Alcoa Must Pay
for Its Reserved Preferential Rate Energy Block!
All Out for ABI
Workers' Energy March!
PDF
Ontario
Bill
48,
Safe
and
Supportive
Classrooms Act, 2019
• Ontario Teachers Oppose Moves to Change
Governance Structure of Ontario College of Teachers
Alcoa Must Pay for Its Reserved
Preferential Rate Energy Block!
On March 26 and 27, ABI
locked-out workers and their allies are organizing an Energy March. It
is a two-stage event: a march in the city of Trois-Rivières on
March 26 and a march in Quebec City on March 27, ending at 11:00 am
with a ceremony in front of the National Assembly.[1] The
ABI workers' many supporters are invited to join the marchers and
welcome them upon their arrival at the National Assembly.
The march's aim is to have the energy contract between
the Government of Quebec, Hydro-Québec and Alcoa reopened.
According to the government, the contract frees Alcoa from having to
pay for its reserved, preferential rate energy block in the case of a
lockout, which is described as a "force majeure" beyond its control.
The
contract is not a mutually beneficial business agreement, as the
company's unilateral dictate is imposed on the workers and society,
with the assistance of the government.
The outgoing and incoming Presidents of the
14,000 unionized workers at
Hydro-Québec delivered a message of continuing support for the
locked out ABI workers to Quebec Director of USW, Alain Croteau, March
13, 2019.
|
The Quebec government is extremely complacent and
deceitful in this matter. It falsely claims that nothing can be done
unless the contract is reopened, which of course it is not willing to
do. At the same time, it refuses to enforce the contract's terms, which
clearly state that a "force majeure" must be an "unforeseeable,
irresistible event
beyond the control of a Party that delays, interrupts or impedes the
performance, in whole or in part, by that Party of its obligations
under the Contract." Alcoa itself is responsible for the lockout, as
the company planned and decreed it and the course of events has shown
that it did so to smash the union and lower the working and living
conditions
at ABI and in the community. It did so while rejecting the bargaining
efforts of the workers, who even agreed to concessions to arrive at a
negotiated settlement that would not eliminate their gains over the
years and would respect the union. The lockout cannot be considered a
"force majeure" even within the contract's terms.
In refusing to take up its responsibility, the Legault
government is assisting in prolonging the lockout and giving the
message to all supranational private interests that making "Quebec open
for business" means that in Quebec the oligopolies are free to act with
impunity against workers, communities and society, which is
unacceptable. The government must do its duty and force ABI to respect
its contract by paying for the block of energy reserved for it at
preferential rates. It must apply pressure on Alcoa to lift the lockout
and negotiate with the workers and their union so that a collective
agreement, which they consider acceptable, can be reached.
Note
1. The United Steelworkers
describe the two-stage march as follows:
Tuesday, March 26: Trois-Rivières leg,
ending in the Ste-Marthe-du-Cap sector
Meet at 8:30 am at Stade Stereo Plus Parking Lot, 1550
Gilles-Villeneuve Avenue, Trois-Rivières. March to the office of
Labour Minister Jean Boulet
(1500 Royale Street in Trois-Rivières)
The march takes place between 10:00 am and noon.
Departure from
Labour Minister Jean Boulet's office is followed by a BBQ in the
parking
lot of the Sanctuary, courtesy of the FTQ-Construction. Shuttle buses
will bring participants back to Stade Stereo Plus at the end of the
activity.
Wednesday, March 27: Laurier Place leg, on
Boulevard Laurier in Quebec City to the National Assembly
March departs from Place Laurier at 9:00 am. Rally
begins at the National Assembly at 11:00 am.
Everyone is invited to accompany the marchers, or join
them at 11:00 am in front of the National Assembly (a shuttle
bus will be made available for those wishing to return to Laurier Place
at the end of the event)
If you are interested or want further information,
please contact Daniel Mallette at 450-567-0170.
Ontario Bill 48, Safe and Supportive
Classrooms Act, 2019
On October 24, 2018, Ontario Minister of Education Lisa
Thompson tabled Bill 48, the Safe
And Supportive Classrooms Act, 2018.
Schedule 3 of the Act makes changes to the Ontario College of
Teachers Act, 1996 that would weaken the democratic governance
structure of the Ontario College of Teachers (OCT) and weaken the
voice of teachers within it.
The OCT was created under
the Progressive Conservative
(PC) government of Mike Harris, but was contemplated under the
preceding Bob Rae NDP government. Its function is to license, govern
and regulate the Ontario teaching profession in the public interest,
according to the College. Teachers and principals employed by publicly
funded
schools in Ontario are required to be members in good standing of the
College.
The March 2019 issue of Professionally Speaking, the
quarterly magazine of the OCT, reports that in March
2018 the OCT contracted
Governance Solutions Inc. (GSI), a private consulting company, to
conduct a review of its governance structure. Its report,
tabled in November 2018, contained 37 recommendations to change the
governance
structure of the OCT to make it more "nimble and effective." The
Ontario College of Teachers executive noted, "The completion of the
report is timely as the College's commitment to effective governance
practices and structures aligns with the government's direction, as
outlined in Bill 48, the Safe and Supportive Classrooms Act,
2019."
Some of the changes proposed by the GSI review include:
1. Reducing the size of the OCT Governing Council from
37 members, comprising 24 teachers and 14 persons appointed by the
provincial government, to 14 members -- 7 teachers and 7 government
appointees.
2. Replacing the current elections process, through
which teachers nominate and elect their representatives to the
Governing Council, with one where the OTC chooses council members from
a
qualified pool. According to GSI, this would make the process less
"political."
3. Selecting Council members from a separate pool for
the College's Statutory, Regulatory, Standards of Practice and
Education Committees.
4. Changing the tenure of Council members from two
three-year terms to up to four renewable two-year terms.
5. Altering the composition of Council committees to
ensure an equal number of teachers and public members for the
Investigation, Discipline and Fitness to Practice Committees, a
majority of public members (appointed by the government) for the Audit
and Finance, Governance and Nominating and Human Resources Committees,
and a
majority of members from the profession on the Standards of Practice
and Education Committee.
6. Changing the term that Chairs can serve on committee
to a one-year renewable term from a three-year Council term.
7. Reducing the role of Chair of the OCT Governing
Council to part-time from full-time and eliminating the role of
Vice-Chair completely.
8. Making the Executive Committee a Committee of the
Whole with a changed mandate and change the manner in which meetings
would be conducted.
Additionally, among other things, GSI recommended that
the name of the OCT be changed to "The Ontario Teachers Regulatory
Authority" because the public was "confused" about what the OCT
actually did.
Ontario Teachers' Federation and Affiliates Respond
The Ontario Teachers’ Federation (OTF) is a statutory
body established under the Teaching
Profession Act as the professional organization for teachers in
Ontario to "promote and advance the cause of education, to promote and
advance the interests of teachers, and to secure conditions that will
make possible the best professional service." At the end of February
2019, in a written submission to the OCT, the Ontario Teachers'
Federation (OTF) and its Affiliates, which together represent more than
236,635 teachers, raised their concerns about these proposed changes.[1]
At the start of its
submission, the OTF noted that
the survey conducted by Governance Solutions Inc. was based on a very
small sample of respondents (only 255 of 8,000 teachers responded while
only 89 of 15,775 members of the public responded). Furthermore, GSI
did not include Francophone teachers and groups in their
review.
The OTF and its Affiliates also pointed out that GSI
conducted its review within a corporate framework and that some of the
recommendations may suit a private corporation where there may be
competing interests, but this orientation is hardly the one to apply to
a professional governance body where there are no competing interests,
the
OCT being organized to regulate the teaching profession for the public
good.
They also assert that since its founding, the election
to the OCT Governing Council has been democratic and that the principle
of self-regulation is a well-established practice. "The essence of
professional self-regulation is that the members of a given profession
are best suited to understand, advise, guide and judge their
profession." The authors
point to various other professional organizations such as the Ontario
Dental Association and the Law Society of Ontario where the vast
majority of those sitting in governance are from the profession.
On the notion that the elections to the Council,
whereby currently teachers select and then elect from among their peers
those who will represent them on the Council, are too "political," the
OTF rebuffs this charge pointing out that elections are by their very
nature "political" and that the teacher federations may endorse various
candidates to
serve on the OCT Council, but the membership is left to decide for
themselves who should represent them. The OTF submission points out
that since the beginning of the OCT, the elections to Council have been
"a robust, transparent process" and that elections to the OCT Council
should continue to be decided by teachers.
The OTF and its Affiliates say they "fundamentally
reject any proposal to eliminate the current majority of teacher
members on the Council." They also point out that even at 37 members,
the Council numbers are hardly excessive. They note that currently the
ratio of the total teachers to the number of Council members works out
to 6,396:1 as compared to 4,685:1 for accountants, 3,238:1 for
engineers, 956:1 for doctors and so on, and make the case that the
reduction of the number of Council Members to a proposed 14 would
further increase the ratio of teachers to representation, making it
less effective.
Also called into question was the recommendation to
change the name of the Ontario College of Teachers to "The Ontario
Teachers Regulatory Authority." There is no basis to argue that the
term "College" is "confusing," the OFT submission points out, adding
that the College's primary role according to its mandate is to regulate
the
profession -- to licence teachers, ensure professional standards are
met and to discipline members who fail to meet the standards of the
profession. Furthermore, they point out, professions such as doctors,
nurses, dentists and others also use the term "College" to refer to
their governance organizations without causing any confusion.
The OTF and its Affiliates also object to GSI's
suggestion that the "Governance and Nominating Committee" of the
College, the majority of whose members will be from outside the
teaching profession, should select teacher members of the Council so
they are no longer elected by their peers, to "avoid either the reality
or the perception that a
small group of members of the profession, potentially highly
politicized, controls the selection process, which is the current
situation that must change if self-regulation is to be preserved at the
college." The OTF response reiterates that teacher representatives on
the Council are elected from across Ontario by local teachers in a
robust, transparent
process and that this should continue. It points out that other
self-governing professional bodies in Ontario also elect their
profession council members and that the concern raised by GSI has no
merit in fact.
The OTF also objected to the
recommendation of GSI
that: "The College will directly measure harm reduction among Ontario's
students and/or adopt an explicit logic chain model to link strategic
priority activities to this desired outcome, and report publicly on
these outcomes."
The OTF response points out that the mandate of the OCT
does not "actually refer to the protection of students. That said, risk
reduction is a product of a well-governed profession. To the extent
that the College carries out its regulatory role (licencing, standards
and discipline) in a robust and transparent and judicious manner, it is
effectively
protecting students and acting in the public interest."
The OTF submission also opposes the proposal to empower
the Executive Committee to act as a Committee of the Whole. It notes:
"Given our earlier objections to the composition and size of Council,
we do not believe that the Executive Committee could effectively
operate as a Committee of a Whole. And, while we understand why some
matters such as human resource issues may be better dealt with in
private by the Executive Committee or in camera by Council, we would
strongly suggest that attempts to address even more Council matters in
private would not seem to be in the public interest."
The OTF and its Affiliates also rejected the claim by
GSI that the open debate and discussion expected at Council meetings
attended by parties "with special advocacy interests" have created a
"culture of fear" at Council meetings, noting, "We would expect Council
members whether elected or appointed, to fulfill their important role
by openly
engaging in discussion of professional regulatory matters, while
recognizing that members of that same profession should take an active
interest in same."
It can be seen in these responses from the OTF and its
Affiliates that teachers are justified in raising objections and
concerns about this review and the agenda behind it. This move by the
Ford government to impose changes to the governance structure of the
OCT can only be seen as a pernicious attempt to further restrict
teachers
from
having a say and control over their profession, and by extension the
education they deliver to Ontario students. Teachers along with other
education workers are a powerful political force in Ontario and Canada.
They organized their numbers to overthrow the Rae NDP government in
1995, the Mike Harris PCs in 2003 and the McGuinty/Wynne
Liberals in 2018 as part of their political efforts to affirm their
rights. The
same fate awaits the Ford PC government.
Note
1. The Affiliates of the Ontario
Teachers' Federation are the Elementary Teachers' Association of
Ontario (ETFO), Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF),
Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (OECTA) and Association
des enseignantes y des enseignants
franco-ontariens (AEFO).
(To access articles individually
click on the black headline.)
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: office@cpcml.ca
|