Remarks by Ted
Montgomery, Chair, OPSEU bargaining team for college faculty, at a news
conference held March 10, 2006
My name is Ted
Montgomery. I’m the chair of the bargaining team for college faculty.
The strike continues this morning.
We are here today for two
reasons. The first is that we’ve decided to file formal charges of a
failure to bargain in good faith against the colleges’ negotiating
committee. Specifically, on March 6, in the final hour of negotiations,
having tabled nothing in five days of bargaining, the management
bargaining team tabled a position at that crucial stage that was an
offer that they knew could not lead and would not lead to settlement.
Its purpose was not to settle, not to move ahead, but rather to force
and provoke the strike that we’re now on.
Part 2, section 5 of the
Colleges Collective Bargaining Act requires that the parties negotiate
in good faith and make every reasonable effort to make an agreement. At
the end of the day, the colleges went in the opposite direction. They
put on the table, on March 6, that evening, a demand which had been
withdrawn from their previous offer after that offer had been rejected
by over 96 per cent of the faculty in November of 2005.
The demand that they
re-introduced was to remove the limit on the number of classes that a
teacher can have in a week. That limit is currently six different
classes in a week – up to 18 hours, three hours for each of those
classes – and the proposal from management was to remove that cap to
have an unlimited number of classes.
They knew from before
that that was an offer that could not result in a settlement. It would
drive the parties further apart.
They were pursuing a very
different agenda. That was to provoke the strike which we now have.
The second reason we’re
here is that the union is also writing a letter to Dalton McGuinty today
calling on him to take action – not simply to wish that the strike was
over, but to take action to stop it. We’re not seeking legislation back
to work. We think that’s the wrong way to go. We believe that the action
should be that Mr. McGuinty should encourage his agents, and in fact
require his agents at the bargaining table to table a serious and
responsible offer.
What we’ve seen from
management so far is simply a reiteration of the same offer that they’ve
had on the table, with minor changes, since August of 2005. That offer
was rejected in November. That offer produced a strike vote of over 80
per cent in February of this year, February 7.
With one month to the
strike, the only thing the employer did was make the offer even worse.
They know that that offer cannot be a settlement, and they have never
tabled an alternative offer. They simply keep describing it as a good
offer. Whether they like it or not, it’s clear that it cannot form the
basis of a settlement.
Mr. McGuinty must know
that, and must act upon it.
The demands that the
union has put forward, and that faculty have put forward, are for
quality education. Faculty don’t easily go on strike, and management has
been suggesting the strike is about money, they keep raising money. That
is not the issue in this strike. The issue is quality.
The problem is the
priorities of the colleges. The way they have allocated their funding,
they have not have not allocated it towards quality.
We told them at the
bargaining table we do not want a reduction of workload. We have not
sought that. Our workload is currently 18 teaching hours a week and up
to 44 hours of work including all the preparation, evaluation, feedback,
and assistance to students outside of class. We have not tabled at any
point in bargaining any reduction of those numbers, nor in the numbers
of weeks of teaching.
What we want is fewer
students for each teacher. It’s a matter of quality. A teacher with 240
students cannot give each of those students the same level of quality as
that same teacher with 150 students. That requires the hiring of some
more teachers, and equally – perhaps more importantly – the conversion
of part-time teachers into full-time.
We want the students to
reap the benefits that Bob Rae said, in his report, they deserved.
We want the students to
share in the aims and objectives that Mr. McGuinty set-out on May 13
when he provided $6.2 billion over the next four years for the colleges
(originally five years, now there are just four of those left).
Six point two billion
dollars for the colleges to put into quality funding! But what we were
told at the bargaining table by the chair of their bargaining team was
that that money would be spent for facilities, for student services, for
fuel costs, but that any hiring of new faculty would only be for
additional students in additional programs. [It] would not be spent on
today’s faculty, today’s students. We think that is totally
unacceptable. That violates the principle that Rae set forward. That
violates the funding principles that the Minister and the Primer
expressed on May 13.
The strike continues. We
want it to end. We want it to end with a settlement, and that settlement
now depends upon the involvement of the provincial government to get
involved with their side of the table [and] to tell the colleges to put
a serious offer on the table – one that can lead to negotiation, not one
that they must know can only lead to a strike. That’s all they have done
so far. It’s now time for Mr. McGuinty to act.
The strike is continuing
and the reports from every college in Ontario are that the faculty
remain determined to see that our efforts will not be wasted. This was a
fight we took up to protect and better quality education in the colleges
in this providence. We will not abandon that fight.
We are concerned about
our students and we want the government to act in a way that will bring
about a fair resolution. We’ve been disappointed and dismayed by the bad
faith bargaining exhibited by this management bargaining team. With me
today are Peter McKeracher, who has been on several bargaining teams
with me in the past – four in a row. We have settled three of those
rounds. With me also is Damian Wiechula who has also been on bargaining
teams where we settled, successfully, without a strike. Also with us
today is Bobbi Wagner who is a teacher at Sheridan College.
The reason Bobbi is here,
is because Bobbi teaches our students and is an artist herself and after
we are finished in this room I want to take you out into the hallway
where one of Bobbi’s works of art is portrayed. It’s a picture that
expresses in an abstract way what it’s like at the colleges today. It is
the sardine can model.
The president at the
college where I teach – Rick Miner – thought that was laughable. Well,
if Rick Miner came into the classes he’d see that the teachers and the
students don’t find it laughable at all. We are concerned about
overcrowding. We’re concerned about too many students and not enough
teachers to service their needs.
The quality has declined.
Rae found it, Rae pointed it out, Rae provided the remedy. And now
McGuinty has provided funding to put that remedy into place.
The road block, the
stonewalling, is college management, who have tried to vilify and
denigrate the faculty by suggesting that we are striking for some other
reason than the reason we have told them in public, in private, at the
bargaining table, away from the bargaining table, on the picket lines,
everywhere we have been able to express that message. And that message
is consistent – we are there to improve the quality of education for
students in Ontario in the college system. That is our message today
that will be our message tomorrow. It will be our message when we return
to the bargaining table and we hope that that is soon. Thank you.
Question and Answer session
with reporters
Question: How long
can this go on before the students’ year is in danger? Are you willing
to extend the school year into the summer?
Ted Montgomery:
The school year can go on for some time yet. There are different
schedules at different colleges. Some have four weeks left, some have as
many as eight weeks left. In the two previous strikes in the college
system, both in the 1980s, work was added to the schedule – the teachers
made up the lost time. With a two-week strike or thereabouts there is
still time to make up all the classes and all the work that was lost.
Teachers will be more than willing to undertake that work.
Question: How do
you think management came up with such a low number of saying they have
23 people in a class on average?
Ted Montgomery:
Management bases that number on counting every faculty member that is in
the bargaining unit. It’s every counsellor, librarian, every person on
sabbatical leave, long-term disability, short term-leave, pregnancy
leave, secondment to other places. Unlike high schools, where the
student/teacher ratio is the actual teachers in the classroom and the
actually students in the classroom, the number that the colleges use is
quite false and they know it to be false.
Question (unclear
on tape) regarding a college statement that the union had not proposed
reductions in class size until March 6:
Ted Montgomery: I
wrote about that just today. That is a lie. In without prejudice
discussions on February 15 and 16, the union tabled a proposal to limit
class size, to lower the average call size. Normally without prejudice
positions are not discussed in public. Because the colleges have put out
that falsehood, we have no choice but to give you the truth. We proposed
that on February 16 and that was in response to a management statement
on January 24 of this year that they would not change the factors which
are in our workload formula. They asked us to come up with a creative
solution that dealt with the workload issues other than changing the
factors. We did so for them on February 15 and 16. They now are saying
they didn’t know about that until March 6. That is a flat untruth.
Question: I’ve
been talking to college students who say they a) they’re worried about
losing their year, and b) they’re worried about – one for example I was
speaking with yesterday said – she can’t make any money because she is
in the chef’s program at George Brown. She says she just wants school to
be over so she can get out there to make money. She is a student with no
money, she is suffering through not having a very good income, and yet
you say you are worried about the students. She doesn’t see that.
Ted Montgomery:
It’s understandable that the students who are in the colleges today or
actually out of the colleges today, because of the strike that has been
forced upon both of us by management, would be frustrated. We are
equally frustrated. Both the students and the faculty are pawns in some
game that college management is playing to try and wheedle more money
out of the government. They are claiming they don’t have the money to
meet the faculty’s demands. They have never tabled a proposal that puts
any money into the system, any, whatsoever. In fact they have tabled
proposals to save money on the workload and quality issues.
We are concerned about
those students, and we think that we need to get back to the bargaining
table and we need to get a serous offer on the table that we can
actually begin some serous bargaining. Those students, I say to them,
their year will be made up, there will be lost time, that has been the
history. We want them back in the class and I encourage them to continue
with their work, to stay with it. I receive thousands of emails from
students. I obviously can’t read them all, but I read a great many of
them. The students are frustrated and concerned. Some are misled by the
management position that faculty are out for salary but a great many,
and more and more all the time, share our view of overcrowding in the
classroom. They too want more faculty to be hired.
One of the students
associations at one of the collages have been very clear that they
support the position of the union for the hiring of more faculty.
Question: What do
you say is the average class size number by your standards (or what you
say), and what do you want it to become? In other words, how many
teachers do they have to hire, and what kind of dollar figure is with
that?
Ted Montgomery:
The college management claimed at the bargaining table claimed that the
average class size is 29 and that’s what they costed it on. More
recently I read in the press from Mr. Miner from Seneca college, the
President there, that the average class size is 28. We don’t know where
they get the figures from. Our figures show that it is 29.1 at the last
counting. We’ve tabled a proposal that average class size should be
reduced to 25. So from 28, from their last figures, to 25. The reduction
is hard to cost in many ways because of the ability of the colleges to
convert part-time and partial load faculty into full-time faculty. Their
costing (they give us different figures), they say $150 million, and
they say that is over four years. We don’t accept that costing. Our
costing is considerably lower, well under that, and flexible because
management has the ability to reduce it or increase it depending on how
they implement the changes.
I can tell you this: They
cost the hiring of a new faculty member at $74,000. We’ve looked
through the statements that we receive. We can’t find any faculty who
are hired at that rate. The average faculty salary is $76,000. That is
existing faculty, many of whom are at the very top of the scale.
Question (unclear
on tape) about timing of bad-faith charges:
Ted Montgomery: This is partly why we didn’t file on Sunday
evening. We wanted to give the government and management an opportunity
to come back to the table. They haven’t done so. Accordingly, rather
than wait, we are putting pressure on them, putting the matter before
the College Relations Commission to assess their behaviour, and more
importantly at this time, inviting Dalton McGuinty to act upon what he
said was his concern. Mr. McGuinty has said he wants to be known as the
education premier; this is his opportunity to act and make a reputation,
or enhance his reputation in that regard.
Question (unclear
on tape) putting pressure on the employer:
Ted Montgomery:
Absolutely, this is not an effort to stay away from the table. Quite the
opposite: its an effort to get the bargaining on track, to get
management back on track, away from their foolish positions that provoke
a strike, and into a position that actually attempts to make a
settlement that complies to the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act.
Question: Now that
the charges have been filed how long will this process take?
Ted Montgomery:
The College Relations Commission takes the charges and they will convene
a hearing to hear evidence regarding those charges.
Question (unclear
on tape) asking what remedy the union is seeking:
Ted Montgomery:
The remedy is fashioned by the College Relations Commission. I wouldn’t
want to speculate to what they would determine.
Question: What are
you hoping for then?
Ted Montgomery: We
are hoping that the College Relations Commission finds that the colleges
have been in fact in violation of the Colleges Collective Bargaining
Act, and directs them to comply by tabling an offer that is an attempt
to achieve a settlement and to reach a settlement. That is their
obligation out of the Colleges Collective Bargaining Act.
Question: That’s
kind of wishy-washy.
Ted Montgomery:
Yes, that is why it’s up to the Colleges Relations Commission to make
that determination.
Question: Is there
any time frame that restricts that?
Ted Montgomery:
Not to my knowledge. The Commission will determine the timeframe.
Question: Will
this be filed today or next week?
Ted Montgomery: It
will be filed today. It’s being drafted now.
Question: Dalton
McGuinty and Mr. Bentley have been loath to get involve in any kind of
labour dispute, they say that’s up to you – bargaining committees have
to deal with it, the government doesn’t get involved. They say they are
watching this from afar, and they want you guys to deal with it. What
makes you think this kind of an action is going to get any kind of
response from the government in the sense of getting involved in the
nitty-gritty of your negotiations?
Ted Montgomery:
Education Minister [Gerard] Kennedy has gotten involved in negotiations
at the elementary and secondary level, and quite successfully so. We
think it’s best if the government can avoid involvement but in this case
it has become necessary. And we ask the Minister and the Premier to do
what is necessary to resolve this issue.
Question: Do you
want them to take the colleges out of the back yard and bang them around
a bit? What is it that you want them to do?
Ted Montgomery:
Well that is your description of what it is, to take the colleges out in
the back yard and bang them around a bit, those are not my words. But I
think that Premier and the minister ought to have a word with their
representatives and probably words with representatives with the union
too, because I think that the kind of miscommunication that has come
from the colleges bargaining team has led them to some misunderstandings
of what is available by way of settlement and what is possible by way of
settlement. The misunderstandings I’m talking about are with respect to
the question I answered earlier, where the colleges have spread a
falsehood about what the union proposed and when it was proposed.
Question (unclear
on tape) about whether the colleges have enough money for a settlement:
Ted Montgomery:
Yes, there is enough money for a settlement.
Question (unclear
on tape) about how many new faculty the union wants to see hired:
Ted Montgomery:
Our position is for ten per cent more faculty until targets are met that
I spoke of earlier with regard to average class size.
Question How long
would your contract be? Ten per cent over how many years?
Ted Montgomery:
The union has tabled an offer, now we have revised it from two years to
three years on Sunday. Management expressed an interest in a longer
contract, and we agreed a three-year contact was possible. Currently
seven of the 24 colleges are at or under 25 per class average. That is
another issue with the costing: some colleges are over the 25 and other
are under it. So for some colleges there would be no cost. For others,
which are larger, there would be.
Let me add another
comment on the class size. College courses are not like university
course where you can have Psychology 100 with 300 students and lecture
to them with a series of teaching assistants then to assist the students
with understanding of the seminars afterwards. College teaching is
hands-on, practical, applied teaching, and it’s important for the
college students to have a direct relationship with the teacher of their
courses and their programs. It’s not like university. There are very few
courses that are like that where the large lecture mode is like that,
and the colleges know that. We are not looking at a lot of classes with
two or three hundred, we are looking at classes of 40, 50, 38, that’s
where there are to0 many, where there should be in those classes fewer
students.
Question: Are
faculty willing to stay out forever? Until your demands have been met?
Ted Montgomery:
The faculty will stay out as long as it takes to achieve a good
settlement. That’s not necessarily by meeting the demands that are on
the table now. We have tabled those demands as an effort to get some
bargaining going, get some response to them, but we haven’t said to the
colleges, “That’s our final position, it’s that or nothing.” That’s
something we certainly haven’t done that and that’s not our intention.
Question: Why not
wait until the school year is over? (Further question unclear on tape)
Ted Montgomery:
It’s not my suggestion that students finish the school year in the
summer but rather finish this term. The term may be extended by a week,
squeezing the exam week into a shorter period, using Saturdays, Sundays
even. I know that isn’t comfortable for students and neither is it for
faculty but I’m not suggesting, I don’t understand the colleges to be
suggesting, that their plans are to extend into the summer. There would
be a short extension certainly and that has an impact that we would
rather not see, but that’s what we have been forced into.
As for waiting until
there are no students well, many of the schools run year round. There
are summer programs that are now big, certainly at Seneca they are well
attended and their enrollment is high, so there is no such time. If we
were to do that anyway the colleges would simply keep us out until the
students returned in September and then we would be in exactly the same
situation except in September the students would be out for four to six
weeks or more, because there would be more time to make up the year.
Question: Don’t
you think it’s fair to say that in September and October there would be
a heck of a lot more time to make up [lost class time]?
Ted Montgomery:
That would be fair to say. [Having a strike now] does maximize the
impact and in doing so creates, in our view, a shorter strike, shorter
stoppage, shorter time out of classes for students. It puts pressure on
both parties to settle more quickly. And it puts pressure on the
government as well to get their side of the table to put a settlement
offer on the table.
Question: You
don’t apologize for this being spring and March instead of back in
September- October?
Ted Montgomery:
No. There are number of factors that come into play there, one of which
is that support staff were negotiating in the summer and they were
planning, if necessary, to strike in September or October – I believe it
was around mid-September. And we thought to plan out a faculty strike
shortly following a support staff strike would be even more harmful for
the students. We thought it was better not to plan a strike for October
with the possibility of a support staff strike at that same semester. We
thought this was better route to go in this instance.
Question: Wouldn’t
it be better for students to have the two strikes at the same time?
Ted Montgomery: In
some ways it might be better for the two at the same time, yes, but that
wasn’t an option. And that does present some problems, in that if one
strike is settled and the other isn’t, then that creates difficulties
for the students in any event. And maybe more difficult for the
government to deal with trying to bargain with two different bargaining
units at the same time. So there are some advantages and some serious
disadvantages as well to that proposition.
Question: Why
would the [employer issue a statement] this morning at the 11th minute,
before your announcement on this, suggest that this whole issue of class
size was only tabled on March 6? What you said was in fact we did this a
month earlier. Why do you think they said that this morning? That’s a
euchre move.
Ted Montgomery:
You’d have to ask them that question.
Question: Do you
have any thoughts on, perhaps, that? Clever timing on their behalf?
Ted Montgomery: I
wouldn’t describe it as clever. I would describe it as unfortunate and
disappointing, given that it is an untrue statement. It should have
never been said, given that it’s known to be an untrue statement by
those who said it. I’m assuming that representatives of the Colleges
Compensation and Appointments Council [the employer], that they ought
not to be saying things they know are not to be true. Had they said the
union didn’t table its position that would be one thing, to say we
hadn’t proposed it is another matter entirely. They know we had proposed
it. They had dealt with it. They had plenty of time to address it and it
was not a surprise to them.
