Our Collective Agreement says this:
C.23.1.d.ii A teacher-on-call will not be removed from the list of teachers-on-call unless the teacher-on-call was regularly unavailable for work, or there is just cause. Just cause will recognize the often fragmentary and short term nature of teacher-on-call service.The new callout, mailed out March 1st, 2012 from the board, says this:
FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT
[5] The parties shall negotiate a process for movement from one list to the other and for the removal of TOC status pursuant to Art. C23.1.d.ii.[6] The parties shall negotiate an expedited resolution process for any disputes arising out of the
interpretation, application or implementation of this Agreement.
ADDENDUM
- Requests for teachers listed on "B List" will occur after the "A List" has been exhausted.
- Part-time temporary or continuing contract teachers will self-select either "A List" or "B List" with the same eligibility conditions as for all TOCs. The provisions regarding the removal from the "A List" or the "B List" will not apply to these teachers for the period they hold such contracts.
- HR will review refusals/unavailability/no answers in terms of maintaining eligibility for the "A List" on a quarterly basis.
- Removal from the "A List" may occur when there has been 15 refusals/unavailability or no answers at any point during the school year. Multiple refusals for the same day will count as one refusal.
- The notice period for movement from "A List" will be one month.
- The HR Department will notify TOCs and the BTA in writing once the 15 refusals/unavailability or no answers threshold is met and the notice period is in effect. The affected TOC(S) will be responsible to bring forward any information for consideration regarding any extenuating circumstances which may have affected their availability.
- A TOC on the "A List" may place him/herself on extended unavailable status in the TOC dispatch system limited to the following circumstances.
b) For maternity reasons as provided for in the Employment Standards Act
c) One week vacation per school year
d) Medical reasons subject to receipt of reasonable documentation
e) Bereavement
8. Template letters for movement from "A List" to "B List" and for removal from TOC list will be
drafted and reviewed by the parties.
drafted and reviewed by the parties.
9. Annually, (before the end of the school year and prior to the June Liaison meeting) those on "B
List" will be given an opportunity during a specific timeframe in which to indicate if they want to
be moved to "A List" for the following school year. Requests are to be made by e-mail to the
Human Resources Department.
10. At the June Liaison meeting the parties will review the list of any TOCs requesting to move from
the "B List to the "A List".
11. The status quo will continue for the annual review of the TOC list. A TOC must have worked 10
days in the school year. If the minimum requirement has not been met, a letter of inquiry will be
sent to the TOCs and the BTA which may result in removal from employment in the school
district.
12. Retirees currently on the wait list will be added to the list for mail out and placed on the list
effective April 1, 2012.
13. TOCs will be given a 3 week deadline to respond to mail out. The parties agree to a joint
communication regarding the terms of the framework agreement and this addendum.
14. This agreement shall be reviewed May 2013 in accordance with the November 4, 2011
framework agreement.
15. The Expedited Dispute Resolution Process referred to in paragraph 6 of the framework agreement
is as follows for issues arising from the framework agreement and this addendum.
a) Meeting with Human Resources (within 3 days)
b) Meeting (appeal) to Superintendent or designate (within 3 days)
c) Colin Taylor (within 5 days)
d) Decision (within 5 days)
List" will be given an opportunity during a specific timeframe in which to indicate if they want to
be moved to "A List" for the following school year. Requests are to be made by e-mail to the
Human Resources Department.
10. At the June Liaison meeting the parties will review the list of any TOCs requesting to move from
the "B List to the "A List".
11. The status quo will continue for the annual review of the TOC list. A TOC must have worked 10
days in the school year. If the minimum requirement has not been met, a letter of inquiry will be
sent to the TOCs and the BTA which may result in removal from employment in the school
district.
12. Retirees currently on the wait list will be added to the list for mail out and placed on the list
effective April 1, 2012.
13. TOCs will be given a 3 week deadline to respond to mail out. The parties agree to a joint
communication regarding the terms of the framework agreement and this addendum.
14. This agreement shall be reviewed May 2013 in accordance with the November 4, 2011
framework agreement.
15. The Expedited Dispute Resolution Process referred to in paragraph 6 of the framework agreement
is as follows for issues arising from the framework agreement and this addendum.
a) Meeting with Human Resources (within 3 days)
b) Meeting (appeal) to Superintendent or designate (within 3 days)
c) Colin Taylor (within 5 days)
d) Decision (within 5 days)
So basically what they've done is switch one discriminatory list for another. The old one may have been against human rights, but isn't the new one against employment law - forcing employees to be at the employer's disposal for over 80 hours/week under penalty and without pay!
ReplyDeleteAt a union meeting, I asked if all interested retiring teachers will be placed on the TOC list in September. The answer was YES! I asked if it had ever crossed their minds that this will create shortage of work for TOCs already on the list. The answer was that this won't create shortage since when teachers retire, TOCs are hired in their places! I was angered and stunned by this simplistic look at such a complicated issue, especially knowing that these are smart people we have elected to the office. If this is really their belief, I wish they had shared this with us before rushing to grievance and arbitration in the midst of job action.
ReplyDeleteWhat I would have said to them is that their theory was not realistic since:
1-There is no seniority into hire in Burnaby.
2-The list is not capped in Burnaby.
3-There are too many flaws and loop holes in our CA which allows the board to hire teachers without posting a couple of times a year. This means that they are able to hire from outside the TOC list.
4-There is nothing to stop the board from putting any person they wish on the list for any length of time (1/2 hour!) before they hire them.
5- Remember "best suited" comes before most qualified.
And the list goes on......
Forget September for the time being. Let's concentrate on April 1st when the new agreement will come to effect, traditionally the slow time of the year for TOCs; that is why we had a 2-tier TOC list for this period. This year the 2nd-tier TOCs will work after Spring Break. In a 2009 survey there was a certain number of TOCs on the second tier, and the board has hired additional retired teachers as TOCs since then. Furthermore, there are additional retirees on the waiting list who will go on the TOC list April 1st. So starting April 1 more TOCs will be on the list and this is only from the retirees. We are told that the board is interviewing brand new TOCs, too. I am not sure if those will start April or September. Finding an answer to that can be our next project!
Unless there is an outbreak of a nasty bug, God forbid, or a sudden jump in great deals for travelling to exotic places for some TOCs, the rest of the year does not look so good for those TOCs who earn their bread and butter TOCing in this nifty local!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSubj.: Starting a discussion of the A/B List
ReplyDeleteAnyone, please correct me on any of this if I'm wrong or have misunderstood
but I'm wondering if we can go back to the root of this whole event and
prove to someone who has some authority that the current situation is the
result of bad conduct by both the Burnaby Board and the BTA. In their
attempts to settle a grievance based on hiring practices , they negotiated
TOC working conditions. The two are related, but very different things and
should not have been lumped into one.
My opinion of this comes from the documents we received in the mail (along
with the pink sheet) that outline why we have this new framework. In the
"In the Matter of an Arbitration" document that is dated Feb. 7, 2012, the
first and second points show why this whole thing came about:
1) On January 7, 2009, the Union filed Grievance #41-002-2009 alleging a
violation of the collective agreement arising from the Employer's hiring
practices in respect to Teachers on Call .
2) The grievance came on for hearing on November 4, 2011 at which time the
parties, in settlement of the grievance, entered into a "Framework
Agreement".
It would be okay if the framework agreement (which was also included in the
mail package) dealt solely with the hiring practices of TOCs which is what
the grievance was about, but it seems as though only point 4 of the 11
points deals with this issue. Most of the other points deal with the
implementation of the A/B list which is about TOC working conditions. So
how did this big jump happen?
When we asked why we were not consulted in the process, the union told us
that they did not have to consult TOCs in this type of issue. It makes
sense to me that the membership doesn't need to be consulted for grievances,
but the problem here is that they took one grievance and used it to settle
additional items that go beyond #41-002-2009, items that otherwise may have
required consultation with us.
I'm wondering if we can get access or greater insight to the grievance to
see if it really was about one thing while the framework is about another.
If so, I wonder who we could present this to? Someone at the BCTF? the
Labour Relations Board?
I would appreciate any input on this. Thanks.
The above makes a great deal of sense. It does seem that there has been bad conduct on the part of the BTA and the BBE. This for me is a huge part of the frustration that I feel with this whole process. The feeling that we have not only not been protected by our own union, but that they have been complicit with the BBE in restructuring our working conditions in a very detrimental way, all this with no consultation.
ReplyDeleteThe writer wonders if we should make a presentation to the BCTF or the LRB. Did this whole process not take place under the watchful eye of the BCTF? Would the LRB be a better choice? I don't know. But I think that the ideas and questions are excellent and well worth considering. I do take heart that there seems to be so much opposition to this.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe Burnaby School Board has literally screwed all TOC's over. I'm pretty pissed off. I'm a part time continuing contract teacher this year that also rely on TOC'ing. However, what I noticed since April 1st, I stopped receiving calls in my field area which is math/sci/business & got calls for kindergarten, P.E., home ec, & other non-related stuff in my area. In addition the number of calls has drastically decreased, much worse than 4 years ago .... We have been royally screwed and we have to pay union fees to get screwed over like this. Just unbelievable !!!
DeleteWhat I meant was not the school board, but the BTA that has screwed us over. We need to cancel the new callout system ASAP !!!
ReplyDeleteAgreed! The only thing that will make the board and the union look like they stand for the human rights and equal rights that they espouse, will be to carry out a fair Seniority Callout (based on Qualification first, of course). Right now, it's a Mixed Bag Callout where teachers can call out anyone they like - qualified or not - and the criteria for being A-listed or B-listed is in omnishambles! And what about all the teachers laid off for next year - even if they have 5 or 10 years of service they will have no protections and may be called out behind new hires (retirees included), from an unlimited TOC List, open to be re-flooded, of course.
DeleteSeniority Callout Solves Everything.
Please click on and see the new page, Seniority Solves All.
The new agreement between the BTA and the school board will result in shortage of work for TOCs.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete(reposted as edited)
ReplyDeleteWhat can we do to remove the new callout system? Or do we have to wait for another year before the BTA screws us over again. Very depressed. This is much worse than the time we had with B. B. in charge.
Being the chair of the TOC committee, what have you heard so far or what's the reaction of the TOC's so far of the new callout system? What are the chances this new system will be scrapped and returned to the way it was by May 2013 or maybe seniority system? Thanks.
21 May 2012 14:28
Since its inception April 1st, I have heard only very negative and angry comments from TOCs and TOCTs (teachers on contract) alike on the new callout. I have been told by the BTA and BCTF that we cannot appeal because "we agreed" to the agreement in arbitration!
DeleteThe agreement "shall be reviewed May 2013" (Addendum to Framework Agreement Dated Nov. 4, 2011 para 5,6)and I can only refer to the BTA Table Officers for an answer on that. You should have gotten an e-mail from the BTA, as I did, that asks for input into survey questions. This survey is supposed to decide direction on this review, I assume. If you didn't get it, please make sure the BTA has your e-mail contact and ask for it.
I did not run for the position of Chair for this school year, but of course the other thing you can do to make your voice heard is join the TOC Committee and/or put your name in for TOC Staff Rep to have a vote at monthly Rep Assemblies God knows we need more) :).
My concern is that the structure cannot take into account the calls that a TOC turns down due to a verbal agreement between a contract teacher and a TOC before being requested on the ADS system. This is something that I have been doing as a TOC because I know the staff and students in some classes well, and it helps with the continuity for students in the classroom. I have had to turn down jobs due to previous knowledge of a contract teacher requesting me, but I am still working in School District 41 so therefore it is not a 'missed day.' I don't want to have to accept the first call I get when I know of another call coming later because I would be letting down the teacher and classes who want to request me, but I can't risk being moved to 'list B' and not being called in as often.
ReplyDeleteHi, Anonymous, and welcome! My understanding from an e-mail I received from senior staff in HR at the board (May 31) is that you don't have to worry about the scenario you paint above. In her words, "This would be not recognized as a RUN [Refusals/Unavailability/No Answer] if you subsequently accept another dispatch for that day. RUN is only counted when a day that is indicated as being available and subsequently offered a dispatch and
Deletethen it is refused/marked as unavailable or call is not answered. In
short – a day not worked."
Having said that - Seniority Callout too, accounts for continuity in the classroom, but does away with teachers employing other teachers (Requesting) - something many of your colleagues believe is unethical and full of favouritism, nepotism, and cronyism. I mean -- it's why the whole province of teachers walked out on the job this year to ensure they are not treated as such and are instead protected by seniority!
Please click on Ending Preferential Callout above to find page after page of extremely valid reasons why it needs to stop. The answer will be so clear, and I hope you pass it on :).
Does anyone know what happens at other locals?
ReplyDelete