The Saskatchewan Teachers Federation and NDP are calling on the Sask Party government to agree to binding arbitration on a contentious point in contract negotiations.Despite last week's announcement of $180 million more in annual school budgets, including an additional $45 million on classroom size and complexity, the STF wants guarantees on classroom size and complexity put into a contract. The government has consistently said that won't happen.STF president Samantha Becotte has proposed the issue go to binding arbitration, but the province has declined this as well.“This is a process that can move negotiations forward,” Becotte told reporters at the legislature Thursday.“Both sides would have the opportunity to present their arguments and put forward proposals that would hopefully get to a solution.”In binding arbitration, both sides make submissions on a dispute to a neutral party that decides on the issue.“At the end of it, the arbitrator, through a fair judicial process would award a decision on what would then go into the agreement,” explained Becotte.Prior to 2017 amendments to the Education Act, 1995, only one party had to request binding arbitration. Today, both parties must agree.In comments to reporters after question period Thursday, Education Minister Jeremy Cockrill said the government did not want to bind school boards by a provincial agreement.“I think school boards understand their school communities best,” said Cockrill. “I think school divisions want to find ways to support students and teachers, but they need to have the autonomy to do that in their local school communities.”The Western Standard asked Cockrill if school boards and the government wanted to avoid hassles that would be caused by grievances filed by the union in any incident where requirement for classroom size and complexity were not fulfilled."I know that our school boards in the province have spoken directly with former school board members from BC. And I know BC gets referenced often by by the STF leadership," Cockrill said."There's been some reports from BC that it does create significant challenges around families being able to access different schools, a significant number of grievances being filed by the union out there."Becotte said it was "frustrating" to hear Cockrill share "misinformation" by claiming the STF was calling for the BC model, though she agreed "there are challenges with those articles" in that province."In the conversations that have happened between school trustees around the agreements within BCTF, we have never once said that that is our gold standard. We have said that we need to find something that works for Saskatchewan. There are other examples that could be brought here as well," Becotte said."But what we are seeking is not unreasonable. It is not impossible. And there is no reason, aside from not wanting to invest in our schools in the long term, to not put it into an agreement with teachers."Becotte acknowledged the place of school boards to make decisions, but said teachers are the ones left to deal with overcrowded classrooms.“Teachers are the ones working day in and day out to try and support the students. They’re the ones who understand the needs of the students in their classrooms and they should be consulted in that process,” said Becotte.“If school divisions make the decision to increase superintendents, that’s not going to be in the best interest of kids. Not when we know that classes are increasing in size.”Cockrill said the two sides had been at the table too little to turn to binding arbitration yet.“There’s an offer on the table from government addressing several other asks from STF leadership, but we haven’t had an adequate opportunity to discuss those,” said Cockrill.Becotte said without binding arbitration, job action would continue to the detriment of students. She said if teachers didn't help out with the province's annual high school basketball tournament, it was the government's fault.“We know that Hoopla is coming up next weekend, we know that there are many trips that are coming up after that. We don’t want kids to lose out on these opportunities,” she said.In a statement Thursday, the STF gave the province until March 17 to agree to binding arbitration.“If the government agrees, negotiations will continue for all other items,” said the statement. “A tentative agreement could be brought forward to STF members for a vote while awaiting the arbitrator’s decision on class size and complexity.”In the legislature, NDP education critic Matt Love called on the government to take the STF's suggestion.“Why won’t that minister get out of the way and send this issue to arbitration so there can finally be a resolution?” asked Love.
The Saskatchewan Teachers Federation and NDP are calling on the Sask Party government to agree to binding arbitration on a contentious point in contract negotiations.Despite last week's announcement of $180 million more in annual school budgets, including an additional $45 million on classroom size and complexity, the STF wants guarantees on classroom size and complexity put into a contract. The government has consistently said that won't happen.STF president Samantha Becotte has proposed the issue go to binding arbitration, but the province has declined this as well.“This is a process that can move negotiations forward,” Becotte told reporters at the legislature Thursday.“Both sides would have the opportunity to present their arguments and put forward proposals that would hopefully get to a solution.”In binding arbitration, both sides make submissions on a dispute to a neutral party that decides on the issue.“At the end of it, the arbitrator, through a fair judicial process would award a decision on what would then go into the agreement,” explained Becotte.Prior to 2017 amendments to the Education Act, 1995, only one party had to request binding arbitration. Today, both parties must agree.In comments to reporters after question period Thursday, Education Minister Jeremy Cockrill said the government did not want to bind school boards by a provincial agreement.“I think school boards understand their school communities best,” said Cockrill. “I think school divisions want to find ways to support students and teachers, but they need to have the autonomy to do that in their local school communities.”The Western Standard asked Cockrill if school boards and the government wanted to avoid hassles that would be caused by grievances filed by the union in any incident where requirement for classroom size and complexity were not fulfilled."I know that our school boards in the province have spoken directly with former school board members from BC. And I know BC gets referenced often by by the STF leadership," Cockrill said."There's been some reports from BC that it does create significant challenges around families being able to access different schools, a significant number of grievances being filed by the union out there."Becotte said it was "frustrating" to hear Cockrill share "misinformation" by claiming the STF was calling for the BC model, though she agreed "there are challenges with those articles" in that province."In the conversations that have happened between school trustees around the agreements within BCTF, we have never once said that that is our gold standard. We have said that we need to find something that works for Saskatchewan. There are other examples that could be brought here as well," Becotte said."But what we are seeking is not unreasonable. It is not impossible. And there is no reason, aside from not wanting to invest in our schools in the long term, to not put it into an agreement with teachers."Becotte acknowledged the place of school boards to make decisions, but said teachers are the ones left to deal with overcrowded classrooms.“Teachers are the ones working day in and day out to try and support the students. They’re the ones who understand the needs of the students in their classrooms and they should be consulted in that process,” said Becotte.“If school divisions make the decision to increase superintendents, that’s not going to be in the best interest of kids. Not when we know that classes are increasing in size.”Cockrill said the two sides had been at the table too little to turn to binding arbitration yet.“There’s an offer on the table from government addressing several other asks from STF leadership, but we haven’t had an adequate opportunity to discuss those,” said Cockrill.Becotte said without binding arbitration, job action would continue to the detriment of students. She said if teachers didn't help out with the province's annual high school basketball tournament, it was the government's fault.“We know that Hoopla is coming up next weekend, we know that there are many trips that are coming up after that. We don’t want kids to lose out on these opportunities,” she said.In a statement Thursday, the STF gave the province until March 17 to agree to binding arbitration.“If the government agrees, negotiations will continue for all other items,” said the statement. “A tentative agreement could be brought forward to STF members for a vote while awaiting the arbitrator’s decision on class size and complexity.”In the legislature, NDP education critic Matt Love called on the government to take the STF's suggestion.“Why won’t that minister get out of the way and send this issue to arbitration so there can finally be a resolution?” asked Love.
