Re: Kneecaps
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:14 pm
You spelt lowkul wrong.Rumsfeld wrote:The strike was going well until the union allowed wee todd to letter the picket signs.
"Suport yor local Teechers guyz"
You spelt lowkul wrong.Rumsfeld wrote:The strike was going well until the union allowed wee todd to letter the picket signs.
"Suport yor local Teechers guyz"
Hmm...I wonder if the article was cherry picking their interviews? Not one person I've talked to is worried about being starved out, or knows anyone who is.Topper wrote:News article last week talked to teachers who are arranging to defer mortgage payments and expand lines of credit. The government will starve them out.
Of course we're pissed with her. She's stripped out contract language, illegally, and refuses to budge in negotiations when we roll back our 'demands'. However, if anyone has a vendetta, I'd say it's Ms. Clark having a vendetta with the teachers. She was the one who started this 12 years ago. We didn't pick the fight in the beginning.Topper wrote:The BCTF needs to realize that their personal vendetta against Christie isn't going anywhere and they need to get in line with the other public sector unions. It reminds me of what the IWA did to my parents when I was a kid.
The whole outrage over massage thing is a typical red herring shell gameTopper wrote:And there will be further appeals no matter the decision from the Court of Appeal.
Also much of the reason they will not legislate the teachers back to work.
$3000 dollars annually for massages was a BCTF demand in the Spring, they were embarrassed enough by it that they reduced it. But how did it make it in the demands in the first place?
One of my sisters is a special needs teaching assistant, a CUPE member. She's out picketing with the teachers in absolute ignorance that one of the goals of the BCTF is to replace here with BCTF member special needs teachers. I laugh at the irony of it. i mentioned this on the phone to her and before she hung up on me, she naively said, "How could one union do that to another union?"
Yes but being found guilty this October in the BC Supreme Court of breaking the law and causing this messTopper wrote: And there will be further appeals no matter the decision from the Court of Appeal.
If they can't get the teachers to let them off the courtroom hook (by cutting a deal on composition)Topper wrote: Also much of the reason they will not legislate the teachers back to work.
Well that's not completely accurate, but THE POINT IS Christy had her facts completely wrong...Topper wrote: $3000 dollars annually for massages was a BCTF demand in the Spring, they were embarrassed enough by it that they reduced it. But how did it make it in the demands in the first place?
That would mean the BCTF is not negotiating in good faithStrangelove wrote:Nah, there is a reason the Libs are desperately trying to negotiate class composition RIGHT NOW.
And a reason why the teachers have not been willing to negotiate class composition AT ALL.