The Elementry Teachers Federation of Ontario say:-
“In September, the Ontario Liberal government, supported by the Progressive Conservative Party, passed Bill 115. This legislation is an unprecedented attack on free collective bargaining rights. Collective bargaining gives employees a voice in determining their wages and working conditions, and has, historically, set the stage for the benefits we all now enjoy, such as health care and CPP.
Bill 115 undermines the guarantees made to all Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And even though it affects the education sector today, it sets a dangerous precedent for all Ontarians in the future. In fact, the government is already threatening other public sector workers.”
They also say:-
"The Charter also guarantees the right not to be deprived of
fundamental rights. It protects employees from being forced to work
under terms and conditions which are coerced, dictated, or imposed by
the state. Certainly Bill 115 violates these rights on many counts."
"We want all Ontarians to
understand that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms exists to
protect the rights of individuals, even when governments seek to
override them. That is the strength and backbone of democracy in
Canada" said ETFO president...
There is no clause in the Charter that
“protects employees from being forced to work under terms and
conditions which are coerced, dictated, or imposed by the state”
it simply says that “Every individual is equal before and under the
law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of
the law without discrimination and, in particular, without
discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour,
religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability”.
The freedom of conscience and
religion; freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression,
including freedom of the press and other media of communication:
freedom of peaceful assembly; and (importantly) freedom of
association.
It does not say anything about work
terms and conditions except to say that individuals are free to move
elsewhere to seek employment (freedom of mobility) to say that it
does is both misleading and adds nothing to the 'debate'.
Perhaps we should all invoke the
charter because we are being discriminated against because we do not
get 75% of our income when off sick, or excessive number of weeks
holidays after being employed at the same organization for a few
years or perhaps because our income does not even come close to that
of most teachers. Yes, it can be a thankless task and yes it can be
stressful but so can many other jobs, and if the 'employer' (that’s
us) cannot afford the compensation package demanded then the
'employee' has a choice, live with the status quot (quite generous
given the circumstances) or they can always invoke those 'democratic'
mobility rights and find a job elsewhere.
We have enough problems with
undemocratic actions by government without pretending that this issue
is one of them, better that we concentrate on more fundamental issues
such as keeping parliament open, access to information, and elections
untainted by fraud........and not loading more debt upon future
taxpayers.
1 comment:
This will likely be an issue where the Supreme Court may "read-in" the rights of teachers and their unions. The Supreme Court will need to determine the rights of teachers to association and the meaningful aspects of it. The unions will likely make their case that not only did the legislature impose "conditions of employment" on the teachers, the legislature approved the suspension of any challenges in any lower courts by the unions. The teachers may have a case on this point.
Post a Comment