PATTI BACCHUS, Vision Vancouver school board chairperson:
We have been calling for binding arbitration since July and of course I fully support that position now more than ever. It looks like the most reasonable way out of this very lengthy dispute.
Q: Are you worried about the implications of binding arbitration, positive or negative?
Ideally, a negotiated agreement is the preference and I would have liked to have seen that happening, perhaps with a mediator, but clearly that’s not happening and certainly not happening fast enough for Vancouver students, so I think having a neutral third party who could hear from both sides and come up with an agreement is probably the most practical way forward at this point.
Q: What's your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
I think as the pressure builds. I get the sense the government does not want to do this. Obviously, it does take some of the financial control that they have had away. But the teachers didn’t want to do this either a while back. But when you reach an impasse and you have thousands of students out of school, you have to start making compromises. It’s time we prioritize getting the system back on track and I don’t see another way forward that’s probably going to work as quickly as binding arbitration.
KEN DENIKE, Vancouver school trustee running for re-election under Vancouver First:
My take on it is the government has turned it down, so it’s a non-entity now.
Do you have a position one way or the other on it?
I think the condition that the union wanted to put in place, they really couldn’t lose on it. If it went to binding arbitration with these conditions, they could only do better. With regard to class size and composition, if you take that off the table and basically don’t have an arrangement so you can deal with the current contract – and that’s what the effect would be – I don’t know how you could do that. Practicality is just not there.
Q: If there was binding arbitration, would you be worried about the implications, positive or negative?
I think so. We did have arbitration at one point way back when and it was very unfortunate for both sides. We got conditions that took about two contracts to get straightened out because you had an industrial labour mediator doing an arbitration and not recognizing the education components, which is a real problem.
Q: What’s your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
No. I don’t think it will happen. I can see getting into essential service. It’s not a solution in the sense that it’s not going to finish the bargaining, but what it does is get the kids back in class and that’s what we need and we need it fast.
MIKE LOMBARDI, Vision Vancouver school trustee:
I’m a big supporter of binding arbitration. As you know, the Vancouver School Board passed a motion calling for binding arbitration on July 7. We think it’s a fair, neutral and reasonable way to get a settlement and gets kids back in school.
Q: Are you worried about the implications of binding arbitration, positive or negative?
I don’t have any (concerns). I think there can be nothing but positive (implications) getting kids back in school. If you look at the history of arbitration in British Columbia, teachers had binding arbitration before 1987 to settle disputes. It worked well. There were always reasonable, fair settlements. Manitoba uses it. We’ve had one anomaly in the whole history of binding arbitration in B.C. and that was the BCMA one, but everywhere else it’s worked really well. I don’t think you can look at one isolated example. As long as it gets kids back in school – that’s really important. Students, parents, teachers, trustees are calling for school to start again. Secondly, it puts in place a fair, neutral process to resolve the issues that allows things to go through on the court case. It’s a winner all around and from what I’m hearing from people is they want a fair, reasonable way to get the contract settled, but they want kids back in school and this does it.
Q: What’s your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen:
It’s a matter of how much heat can be put on the government. From what I’m hearing out there from parents, students and community members, I think there’s going to be an incredible amount of heat on the government to do this.
KEN CLEMENT, Vision Vancouver school trustee:
It provides a venue for children first. It ensures that we have the kids going back to school for one thing. And it’s like a cooling off period, as well as to find out what the real issues are and for the parties to listen to each other, perhaps, and get some type of agreement because it’s just been going on too long. So I’m definitely in favour of binding arbitration.
Q: Are you worried about the implications of binding arbitration, positive or negative?
I know it’s part of the (BCTF) deal that the court cases wouldn’t be part of it, but you never know in these kinds of situations. I’m concerned (it would be part of it). I hope that it can be separated so it wouldn’t be part of it.
Q: What’s your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
I want to be hopeful. It’s a good compromise. It’s something that the BCTF wants to happen, as well as teachers, students and parents, so I’m hopeful.
FRASER BALLANTYNE, NPA school trustee:
They’ve got to get the kids back in school. Binding arbitration is the only thing that’s out there right now. We have to do something to get these two [parties] back at the table. It’s pretty tragic that the kids are still out [of school].
Q: If there was binding arbitration, would you be worried about the implications, positive or negative?
In the past, binding arbitration has worked. I’ve been in the business for 40 years and in the 70s and 80s, sometimes the employer won and sometimes the union won. So you take your chances. We’ve got to do something to break the impasse. I know the stakes are high on both sides, so I don’t know how you’re going to get by that. It’s really a very deep and disturbing problem.
Q: What's your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
I personally don’t think it’s going to happen because the government has said there’s too much out there, they’re too far apart. They said they got burnt by the doctors dispute with Allan McEachern back in ’02, so that’s haunting them, which is a concern. So the past record is a scary one from, I guess, the government’s point of view.
ROB WYNEN, Vision Vancouver school trustee:
I definitely support it. We (VSB) put forward (a motion) quite a ways ago and the rationale was we saw that talks were getting stalled. Ideally, both parties would sit down together and they would work something out, but we’re in total crisis mode. Right now. That time is gone. We need something in place this week, so we felt binding arbitration is the way to go.
Q: If there was binding arbitration, would you be worried about the implications, positive or negative?
Not really. Both parties have a chance to pick a neutral arbitrator, so I’m assuming they would do a good job picking someone. A third party coming in, especially with the way this relationship between the province and the teachers is right now, I think a neutral third party coming in and looking at the big picture and making a decision will probably get the best decision. The government keeps going back to the doctors’ arbitration, but the history around binding arbitration is not just based on that. It’s been done quite a bit in the past, especially in situations like this where it doesn’t look like mediation is going to bring these two sides together.
Q: Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
The ball is in the government’s court. I was happy to see (teachers) put this forward. I know they were originally not super keen on binding arbitration. I think they saw the scenario. Obviously, Vince Ready has backed off, saying it doesn’t look like mediation is going to be fruitful, so to me it’s like what are you going to do? Or the province can legislate and they said they didn’t want to do that either. I’d rather see binding arbitration than a legislated agreement because, again, that leaves uncertainty in the system. We’re in crisis mode. My son is supposed to be in high school right now and he’s sitting at home. We need something and we need it quick.
SOPHIA WOO, Vancouver school trustee who’s running for re-election under Vancouver First:
[Comment via email] As you are aware Jim Iker's media call for binding arbitration with pre-conditions was rejected by Government so is not on the table. Polling teachers on accepting binding arbitration with pre-conditions (as) if employers' agree is a public gesture. I think it indicates the sides are not getting anywhere. An option that will get kids back in school is essential services. Invoking essential services will not resolve the bargaining impasse and is horribly bureacratic and populated by industrial arbitrators. It might just work until the government appeal is heard in October and we get a hint if anything is going to be resolved in court. In the interim, kids are in school.
CHERIE PAYNE, Vision Vancouver school trustee:
The VSB called for this back in July, so we're glad to see that two months later the parties are beginning to discuss it (but we're) disappointed to see the government dismiss the idea out of hand (Monday) and hoping that they'll reconsider their position as they see the results of the BCTF vote Wednesday. Parents want to see their kids in school. Older kids want to start getting their grades once they start doing their studies so they can advance to the next grade or on to post-secondary. And, parents with younger children really are facing pressure in terms of childcare. There just really isn't space or enough activities around the city or province to accomodate children from being displaced from classrooms. So, both from an educational point of view and from a childcare point of view, it's vitally important to get those students back into the classroom and binding arbitration right now is the only proposal on the table that is offering a solution to the strike.
ALLAN WONG, Vision Vancouver school trustee:
[Comment via email] Seeing as a freely negotiated settlement is thwarted, followed by failed mediation, I believe binding arbitration by a neutral third party is an acceptable and encouraged direction in order get our students back into the classrooms before they lose any more learning time.
Q: Are you worried about the implications of binding arbitration, positive or negative?
Yes. I worry about the implications and the long term effects. It is important for an arbitrator to look at the long-term implications over the life of the collective agreement that addresses the ideals and priorities of British Columbians. I believe the public is crying for a well-supported and funded public education system that supports our diverse student population. Moreover, it is important to ensure that we build and foster an environment where the morale of our educators and support staff is positive and happy. An arbitrator must really be able understand the importance of education funding historically and the percentage of the provincial budget pie over the past decade. Although binding arbitration is risky, sadly this dispute will drag on unless drastic measures such as binding arbitration are used as a method to resolve the impasse.
Q: What's your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
Not unless British Columbians fight for it. The stubbornness and length of time passed has truly been disappointing. I believe, from what I have heard, the public is looking at binding arbitration as a reasonable compromise for both sides. I believe this pressure will build. I have not heard of any alternatives offered by the province. If binding arbitration is to occur, it is up to constituents to lobby and pressure their MLAs and school board trustees to force the government to accept binding arbitration.
JING WANG, 16, Vancouver School Board student trustee who is in Grade 12 at Prince of Wales Secondary:
The thing with binding arbitration is that the BCTF has asked for it and the government has rejected it. As a student, I don’t take either side at the moment. But a part of me thinks that binding arbitration is probably one of the quickest ways to get students back into school. From my perspective, it that’s the fastest option, I think it needs to be done.
Q: If there was binding arbitration, would you be worried about the implications, positive or negative?
For sure. I understand the government doesn’t want a third party to come in and think for them. That’s fair. But this has gone on for so long and they both want such different things. As a student, all I can say is we don’t want negative impacts on our education now. And, as a senior student, I don’t want to see negative impacts on future generations and future students. I guess if binding arbitration occurs it doesn’t really solve things for the longterm, which can be kind of dangerous. That means younger students, elementary school students, may be going through the same labour dispute when they’re in high school. That’s no good. That just shows the B.C. education system is still unstable. There’s really no options right now. Students are especially left with no options. Students want to be back in school and we want to start learning as soon as possible. If binding arbitration is one of the only ways to do that, then so be it. But if both parties are willing to negotiate themselves, that’s the best option.
Q: What's your prediction? Do think binding arbitration will actually happen?
Both parties are being so stubborn at the moment and they’ve been so stubborn for the past few months. I think neither parties want to move away from their stance. I feel there’s a lot of pressure on the government to accept binding arbitration from the school board, students, parents and the BCTF. So, I think there might be a rather high chance.
noconnor@vancourier.com
