Negotiate, Don't Dictate: the Assault on Teachers' Collective Bargaining

THE ASSAULT ON TEACHERS’ COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS IN NOVA SCOTIA BY BRIAN FORBES 20 OS|OS SPRING/SUMMER 2017 THE BEGINNING (TA1) end a strike by 400 home care workers. been a staple of teachers’ contracts for The legislation required that the union decades). Government also wanted to egotiations between the Province of negotiate with the employer to determine lengthen the school day and the school Nova Scotia and the Nova Scotia which services were essential, with workers year, remove principals (and above) from Teachers Union, in the fall of 2015, deemed essential prohibited from going on the union, reduce teacher control over N 2 did not begin well. strike. A month later that principle was certifcation and professional development, The preceding summer, Finance Minister extended to 40,000 health and community and eliminate retiree health care benefts, Randy Delorey sent a letter to union services workers with passage of the as well as an assortment of other contract leaders. While referring to the “stark fscal Essential Health and Community Services stripping proposals. There was no indication reality” facing the province, Minister Delorey Act, which ended a brief strike by 2,400 of government interest in addressing a explained the government was committed nurses in the Capital Health District.3 And myriad of classroom and working conditions to a balanced budget, without raising taxes, in October 2014 McNeil used the Health issues that teachers had submitted. which he claimed taxpayers were “not Authorities Act to force a reduction of That same afternoon, in blatant interested in contributing.” bargaining units, merging district health disregard of a confdentiality agreement The following week, the minister authorities across the province from 10 to between the parties earlier in the day, summoned all public sector unions in the government posted its salary proposal to province to a meeting, at which he delivered teachers on its website. Everything pointed a stern message: Nova Scotia’s fnances IT WAS A SHOCK TO NSTU to a tough and nasty round of negotiations. were not in good shape. According to REPRESENTATIVES WHEN THEY Then it got worse. labour leaders who attended the meeting, they were told that there would be no new MET WITH THEIR GOVERNMENT º º º money available for public sector workers. COUNTERPARTS ON SEPTEMBER 29, When later pressed, Delorey denied he While the two teams were engaged in trying had indicated no new money, just that 2015 TO EXCHANGE PROPOSALS. to establish dates for further meetings, the there would be no new taxes. He also GOVERNMENT PROPOSED A Union’s chief negotiator, lawyer Ron Pink, disputed assertions that he had warned was “approached by senior representative the government was prepared to introduce 2% SALARY INCREASE OVER A of the province ... and asked if [he] would legislation imposing its own demands have a ‘discussion’ with the government FIVE YEAR CONTRACT, AND PHASING if new agreements did not incorporate about the possibility of settling the issues them. Perhaps that is what prompted OUT OF THE LONG TERM SERVICE in dispute without lengthy and diffcult Joan Jessome, president of the province’s negotiations.”6 According to Mr. Pink, that largest union, the Nova Scotia Government AWARD (A SIGNIFICANT MONETARY led to “negotiations” between himself and and General Employees Union [NSGEU], BENEFIT PAYABLE AT RETIREMENT, the individual who had approached him, to say that the Minister had used very during which he consulted with “senior creative language, forcing the unions to THAT HAD BEEN A STAPLE OF leadership of the union” and relayed read between the lines.1 Regardless, with TEACHERS’ CONTRACTS FOR their responses back to the unnamed the letter and follow-up meeting on August government representative. To this day 18th, the essence of Delorey’s message DECADES). the identity of this government “Mystery was clear; the government had attempted Man” has not been revealed by either side. to set the tone and predetermine the Nor is it known who at the Union offce outcome of all upcoming negotiations. authorized these secret discussions, nor The union leaders had gone into the with which Union offcials Mr. Pink was meeting wary; they came out angry and two.4 So unions had every reason to believe consulting. What is clear is that neither the apprehensive. that the Premier would not hesitate to Union’s offcial negotiating team, nor the The foreboding was justifed. Since his resort to legislation to get the agreements government’s, had any inkling that the talks election in 2013, and in spite of pre-election he wanted, if they were not compliant with were taking place. It is also acknowledged promises to respect unions and collective his demands at the table. by Mr. Pink himself that the “Mystery Man” bargaining rights, Liberal Premier Stephen Nevertheless it was a shock to NSTU warned that, if the Union did not accede to McNeil had proven himself unsympathetic representatives when they met with their government demands, they were prepared to both. In particular, he had shown no government counterparts on September 29, to legislate all of the most distasteful qualms about using the power of the 2015 to exchange proposals. Government items in their original proposals, and quite Legislature, where he had a comfortable proposed a 2% salary increase over a fve possibly more. It was this overt threat that majority, to enact conditions he could not year contract,5 and phasing out of the long apparently spooked whoever was speaking get at the bargaining table. In February term service award (a signifcant monetary for the Union through the agency of 2014 he introduced a bill designed to beneft payable at retirement, that had Mr. Pink. OS|OS SPRING/SUMMER 2017 21 On November 12th the Union’s 2. Service award accrual to end as 2015 negotiating committee was summoned to of July 31, 2015 and paid out at Halifax to be apprised of the agreement that retirement; and September 29: Meeting between NSTU and had been reached through this very irregular 3. Withdrawal of all other government government resentatives. process; in effect a fait accompli arrived at and union proposals.7 without their knowledge or participation. November 12: NSTU attends meeting in In due course, reportedly after some very In A Brief Word distributed to members Halifax to be presented with TA1 (arrived at heated discussion, the agreement was on November 18th, NSTU President Shelley through a very irregular negotiating process). approved by the committee. Only after they Morse was explicit about why they were being asked to ratify the agreement. “In November 18: NSTU president, through the face of impending draconian legislation a memo distributed to membership, asks …GOVERNMENT WAS WALKING it was decided to recommend acceptance membership to ratify TA1. AWAY WITH ITS OWN FISCAL of this offer.” In essence, the Premier had made the Union an offer it couldn’t refuse, November 26: Former NSTU presidents OBJECTIVES SECURED, DUE TO A forcing the Union to give him what he issue statement critical of the bargaining process and ask that scheduled ratifcation TWO-YEAR WAGE FREEZE FOLLOWED wanted most – wage restraint and surrender of service awards, which would establish vote be cancelled, allowing parties to return BY ANOTHER TWO YEARS OF the pattern for all upcoming contracts with to the table; failing that, former presidents other public sector unions. The ratifcation advocated rejection of TA1. MINIMAL INCREASES, WHILE A vote would occur on December 1, and it December 1: Membership votes to reject TA1, was widely expected that the deal would be MAJOR MONETARY BENEFIT — 60% to 40%. accepted. THE SERVICE AWARD — WAS TO That judgment proved to be wildly December 7: NSTU invites government to BE ERASED FROM THE CONTRACT. premature. Teachers had not yet had their resume negotiations. say. IT WAS HARD TO SEE ANYTHING December 14: Bill 148 (Public Services BUT AN ABJECT SURRENDER OF º º º Sustainability Act) receives frst reading in the Legislative Assembly. TEACHERS’ INTERESTS. The sudden unanticipated announcement of a tentative agreement (subsequently December 18: Bill 148 receives third reading known as TA1) was greeted by teachers and royal assent but was not (and still hasn’t at frst with mystifcation, possibly mingled been) proclaimed. with a ficker of relief and hope. Against had done so was it submitted for approval all expectation, could the two sides have to the government team, who were also reached a reasonable accommodation taken by complete surprise. Finally the tentative agreement was presented to the NSTU Provincial Executive (PE) for approval, and recommendation of acceptance to the membership, which it received. Finally, the existence of a tentative agreement was announced to astonished NSTU members, media and public, all of whom up to that time were totally unaware that anything was in the works, and were quite realistically resigned to a long and contentious round of bargaining between two parties who were at serious loggerheads with one another. The terms of the agreement were fairly simple: 1. Wage restraint — salaries to increase over a 4 year term by 0%, 0%, 1%, 1.5%, and 0.5% on the fnal day of the agreement; 22 OS|OS SPRING/SUMMER 2017 2016 so quickly? But as the substance of the agreement became known, and the January 17: Government renews negotiations process by which it had been arrived at with NSTU. emerged, the reactions quickly turned to shock, disbelief, and outrage. June: Liette Doucet elected president of NSTU. First, the agreement did nothing to address the many grievances around June 2: Government requests Minister of working conditions and classroom issues Labour appoint a conciliation offcer. that teachers had identifed, and expected to see addressed through the collective September 2: New tentative agreement (TA2) bargaining process.

Load more