Someone once said that if you want loyalty, buy a dog.
That's especially true in the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately, stab-your-one-time-friends in-the-back, rough and tumble world of politics, where the concept of loyalty is almost non-existent.
The Ontario Liberal government knows this all too well.
After all, the Liberals are now embroiled in a bitter battle against their recent best friends -- the Ontario public teachers' unions.
And, make no mistake, this is not a battle any provincial government would welcome. Ever since they were granted the right to take in mandatory dues in 1964, and then granted the right to go on strike in 1975, public sector unions have become a powerful force in Ontario politics.
Governments take them on at their peril.
This is why ever since Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty came to power, one of his chief policy goals has apparently been to buy the teacher unions' loyalty by giving them essentially everything they asked for.
It was a strategy that worked for a while. As long as the Liberals kept the money flowing, they could count on the loyalty of the teachers' unions.
But then something happened. The Ontario government ran out of money. Suddenly, McGuinty could not offer his teacher union friends any more goodies.
Maybe he hoped his past generosity would keep the teachers' unions friendly, or at least reasonable in their demands, but if that was the case, he was dead wrong.
The teachers' union bosses still wanted more, and the minute the Liberals couldn't deliver, the unions turned against their one-time ally.
Who will win the battle between these former bosom buddies? Hard to say.
But one thing is clear -- when it comes to making friends, governments would be better off buying a dog than trying to buy a public sector union's loyalty.
At least that would be less costly to taxpayers.
Laurel Broten: Why I Imposed Contracts on Ontario Teachers
Danielle S. McLaughlin: Teachers: The Classroom Is Not Your Pulpit
Samuel Mosonyi: The Ontario Teacher's Union Is Holding Students Hostage
Malkin Dare is from the "Society for Quality Education". This organization appears to have some interest in public education, but also sports a disproportionate number of office bearers who have business as their area of expertise, rather than teaching or education.
Could it be that this group, with ties to the CD Howe Institute, has as agenda that is not really about quality public education at all, but rather exploiting any and all failings they can find in public education per se. In short. a lobby group whose aim is to undermine confidence in public education, and then leave the way free for privatization. Read the article again with this in the back of your mind, and see if it does not provide a focus.
www.aei.org/article/education/private-enterprise/the-irrational-fear-of-for-profit-education/
As far as the rest of the article goes, well duh, everyone works according to self-interest. Politicians and teachers. To expect teachers not to pursue the best possible wage and benefits so that they and their families can have a good standard of living is naive. Teachers have sacrificed in the past when times were tough with frozen wages or increases that haven't kept pace with the cost of living. Heck, they even agreed to a wage freeze on the current contract... and yet they are still painted as greedy and self-serving. For what then? At one time teacher's wages were on par with MPs and nurses.
One would think the author, whose organization paints itself as being interested in "promoting better learning for students" would want the best possible people entering the field instead of other fields that offer better salaries or have contracts imposed on them. Her position makes no sense.
"She was OQE’s founding president, a director of the Society for Advancing Educational Research in Education, a member of the Advisory Committee on Judicial Appointments for the Province of Ontario (West and South), and the author of How to Get the Right Education for Your Child and Stairway to Reading. Mrs. Dare is a member of the editorial board of the Journal of School Choice. Mrs. Dare fervently wishes that Canadian public schools would shape up so that she could spend more time on reading, travel, movies, volunteer work, tennis, and bridge."
This organization includes among its "Board of Directors", a member of the CD Howe institute. The organization is an advocate of schools of choice, in other words, charter schools.
The author is simply one more advocate of education privitization, and an anti-union conservative leaning activist. Following a short period working as elementary school teacher, Ms Dare worked for the foreign service. So, based on limited experience as an educator, Ms Dare wants to present herself as an expert advocating for improved public education. Don't believe it for a second. This is another blogger with an anti public schools agenda, trying to hide herself on scholarly commentary.
Madam, you are welcome to comment, but be honest about who you are. Huff Post, why do we, your readers, have to do the research? Why will you not make clear what blogger bisases are brought to the website in the name of "dialgoue"?
......and look where that got us.....
Thanks GTA........
If you don't get it I'm making fun of you.
Teachers never asked for more in the contract. They wanted to preserve what they've negotiated over decades with all kinds of governments. Why is that wrong? Are either of you stepping up and saying to your employer pay me less? I doubt it.