BCTF claims victory at Supreme Court of Canada

[Urbane]

We'll see what the fine print says within 48 hours but the ramifications will be significant. It's a victory for the BCTF but not necessarily a victory for public education. I don't see the government raising taxes and adding an enormous amount of money to the education budget so I expect that there will be some serious adjustments within the system.

British Columbia's teachers have won a long-standing battle with the provincial government over the rights to bargain class sizes in a ruling today from the Supreme Court of Canada.

Rich Overgaard of the B.C. Teachers' Federation says the court delivered a verbal decision in favour of the teachers after a hearing today at the Supreme Court in Ottawa.

He says the judges voted 7-2 in favour of the teachers.

The court confirms it allowed the appeal in a news release and says it will release a written judgment within 48 hours.

Full article: http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... htm#180584

[Veovis]

I have a hunch it might read they should have the right going forward but the BCTF are already retroactively applying a forward permission ans a past right and will react improperly accordingly.

Will have to see what it really says overall though.

[KGT]

So happy!!! Just wish it could have happened before I retired.

[Urbane]

I have a hunch it might read they should have the right going forward but the BCTF are already retroactively applying a forward permission ans a past right and will react improperly accordingly.

Will have to see what it really says overall though.

Yes, according to the BCTF president the ruling is not retroactive but only going forward. He does say that the government will need to spend $200-300 million more per year but we'll see what the government does. No one expected a final decision from the Court until after the provincial election, but now that the decision has come down so soon it presents a challenge for the government.

[maryjane48]

yea a challenge of being wrong , it is also a strong voice from our charter of rights that kids have a right to proper teacher student levels and that education should never be treated as a crown corporation , and it goes for the ndp to , the scoc has spoken and its over . win for kids , loss for rightwing christy libs

[occasional thoughts]

I'm so pleased on the broader point of thwarting governments that swat down obvious legal rights, and esp. a government's like that of Gordon Campbell that rely on and probably specify predetermined legal opinions from hack and/or partisan lawyers for sale.

[erinmore3775]

The speed at which this decision was reached clearly indicated that the Justices in their initial prehearing reading of the positions presented both by the BC Provincial Government and the BCTF, they found little in Canadian Constitutional law to support the position of the the Provincial Government. Oral arguments failed to failed to disaude them from their initial positions.

The Provincial Government's position in a nutshell was that they could not afford class size and composition negotiations and to reduce costs unilaterally stripped them from the contract and all future contract negotiations. Two lower BC Court judges agreed with BCTF that this "contract stripping was unconstitutional" while the BC Court of Appeals sided with the Governments effectively saying that the necessities of producing a balanced budget over road the constitutional rights of the teachers. The Supreme Court of Canada, composed largely of judges appointed in the last 10 years, disagreed with that position.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-teachers-union-wins-landmark-appeal-at-supreme-court/article32793770/

"The surprise ruling, which followed a hearing in Ottawa on Thursday, sets the stage for negotiations to restore teaching positions and restrict class sizes, which would require millions of dollars in additional government funding. A notice posted to the court’s website said the court allowed an appeal from the union in a 7-2 judgment.


In 2014, the B.C. Supreme Court found the new legislation was virtually identical to the former laws and awarded the BCTF $2-million in damages. That ruling also included the provocative finding that during a recent round of contract negotiations, the government had attempted to provoke a teachers strike.

"Thursday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision upholds that 2014 decision.

Throughout the legal process, the provincial government has warned that restoring the contract terms deleted in 2002 could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

"In its provincial budget last year, the province identified the case as a “major risk” to its balanced budget plans.

"Bench decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada – issued the same day of a hearing – are relatively rare."

The written decision will provide the decision rationale, required remedies, and a timeline through which the Provincial Government must make BCFT and the teachers it represents whole. This is not a precedent setting decision. It basically reaffirms contract labour law and its interpretation through the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Constitution Reform 1980) and its predecessor the Canadian Bill of Rights (Federal Statute 1960).It will be very interesting to see how the current Provincial Government reacts to this decision as they prepare fora Spring Budget and a Spring Election.

[maryjane48]

here are some highlights

judges voted 7-2 in favour of the teachers

The union says the province will now have to provide resources for class size and composition that date back to levels from when the legal dispute began.


The union says the province will now have to provide resources for class size and composition that date back to levels from when the legal dispute began.

The Supreme Court of Canada is the definitive decision on the issue.



i think the biggest issue now is explaining to the taxpayers she lied to after the appeal overturned the right first decision , why she wasted money on something she knew was not legal , it was wasted money never to come back , infact i would be asking her to step down

[maryjane48]

it looks like it is retro active , hope them libs have fun explaining why tax money is going to be spent in large amounts because this falls directly on the governing party .

[Retrosnap]

I could be wrong, but I thought that when the teacher strike was settled last year, they gave up the claim for retroactive compensation, but were able to continue the case through to the SCOC.

In any case, this looks like the BCTF has retained the "right" to bargain for class size/composition, which was taken away from them. It doesn't mean that they are going to get what they want in future negotiations. They definitely won't get anything close the the backroom deal the Glen Clark NDP imposed on the public school districts back in 1998.

[maryjane48]

In any case, this looks like the BCTF has retained the "right" to bargain for class size/composition, which was taken away from them. It doesn't mean that they are going to get what they want in future negotiations. They definitely won't get anything close the the backroom deal the Glen Clark NDP imposed on the public school districts back in 1998.

um what you think union contracts mean ? it does mean they have the right to class size and composition , if the govt refuses a arbitrator will come in and give the bctf everything they want , the process isnt a game , its kids of bc and canada's future, i never understood why some people are against our future kids getting what is promised them from birth .

[Urbane]

I could be wrong, but I thought that when the teacher strike was settled last year, they gave up the claim for retroactive compensation, but were able to continue the case through to the SCOC.

In any case, this looks like the BCTF has retained the "right" to bargain for class size/composition, which was taken away from them. It doesn't mean that they are going to get what they want in future negotiations. They definitely won't get anything close the the backroom deal the Glen Clark NDP imposed on the public school districts back in 1998.

Yes, the BCTF gave up the claim for retroactive compensation and took the "bonus" for doing so. The BCTF president has made it clear that the ruling is not retroactive. We'll see what the Court says within a couple of days but I doubt very much that they will dictate precise levels for class size and composition. Those will be matters for collective bargaining moving forward.

[KGT]

Yes, according to the BCTF president the ruling is not retroactive but only going forward. He does say that the government will need to spend $200-300 million more per year but we'll see what the government does. No one expected a final decision from the Court until after the provincial election, but now that the decision has come down so soon it presents a challenge for the government.

Do you have a link where Glen says it's not retroactive, Urbane? I can 't find anything.

[maryjane48]

lol at fear mongers trying to again bend the truth . this isn't about pay retroactive , it is about class size and composition levels at time they were removed . those are the templates that will be used as the scoc said when the ruling is released it will include the process going forward . what that means is the court is going to say the sizes will be with in this parameter and composition the same thing .


now what does anyone suppose will be the political ramifications from this keeping in mind everyone now knows the clark govt wasted tax money on a sure loss and having to explain to all the folks who bought into her balanced budget fantasy and second pitted those same parents against teachers who will be saying i told you so

[maryjane48]

That ruling also included the provocative finding that during a recent round of contract negotiations, the government had attempted to provoke a teachers strike.

i also wonder how this, taken from erins post , which says all you need to know for now , will play out . can bctf now sue the clark govt for breach of contract? interesting days ahead for sure :)