Contrary to what the government claims, the rigidity and heaviness in our education system do not come from our unions, but from administrative rules. We therefore do not understand what this discussion does in the negotiation of our collective agreement. But yes, definitely more lightness in education!
School management
The Legault government abolished school boards under the pretext of giving schools more flexibility. He then claimed to want to “depoliticize school governance”, “give more autonomy to schools” and “bring decision-making closer to those who know the students by name”.
But the schools gained no power. Service centers centralize resources. They are the ones who receive the budgets, and the least we can say is that they are slow to decentralize them. It takes several months before schools know what to expect in terms of budget… for the current year. A large part of the budgets is also kept to pay professionals who work centrally, but who do not offer any direct service to students.
When schools finally receive their budget envelopes, they are not always able to spend them. For what ? Because of the rigidity of ministerial criteria and the strict directives that accompany them.
On the other hand, it very regularly happens that envelopes arrive in schools in the spring, following a promise from the minister, and that they must be spent immediately, always according to the same rigid criteria.
A relaxation of ministerial directives would be enough to give schools more flexibility to spend budgets according to the needs of students.
Nothing to do with the teachers’ collective agreement.
School principals
When the management of a school is flexible, even fluid, it is thanks to the management. Good leadership understands pupils’ needs, ensures that resources are used effectively and supports staff in their work.
For a management to know their school, they must stay there for several years. However, the profession of school principal suffers the same desertion as that of teacher, partly for the same reasons. Lack of recognition and too difficult working conditions.
However, the management is not unionized. The minister already has all the powers necessary to remedy the situation immediately. In particular, it can give clear instructions to its service centers so that they stop moving directions like on a chessboard. It must therefore establish the salary of a principal based on their experience and/or expertise, and not according to the number of students in their school.
Nothing to do with the teachers’ collective agreement.
Student services
18 years ago, it was a matter of going to the management to get support for a student in difficulty. Now, for each of our students in difficulty, it is an obstacle course. We dive into the world of forms, questionnaires, meetings with external professionals, the educational advisor in special education, etc.
We must demonstrate that everything has been put in place in our class to avoid having to ask for services, and when we manage to convince all these beautiful people that the service is essential, we are told that there are none. is not available, or not enough, or not now.
In this case, it seems obvious to me that bureaucratic rigidity only serves to camouflage the lack of resources.
Nothing to do with the teachers’ collective agreement.
And what about the teachers?
As part of the current negotiation, several people were rightly surprised to hear the FAE representative explain that one of the sticking points is the possibility for teachers to telework during teaching days. What about it?
Until 2021, a teacher’s task was defined down to the minute. Indeed, at the start of the year, we had to come to an agreement with our management explaining what task we intended to accomplish between 9:25 a.m. and 10:23 a.m. Then between 10:23 a.m. and 10:25 a.m. finally, between 10:25 a.m. and 10:40 a.m.
This is not a caricature, but reality. I started teaching at 37, and it was one of my biggest shocks. This exercise, as arduous as it is useless, takes away valuable time from principals and teachers to accomplish much more important tasks.
If we had a period without students, we absolutely had to work at school, although our productivity often suffered greatly. The same goes for educational days. Even though we didn’t have any meetings scheduled.
You don’t have to be a teacher to understand that corrections or planning are best done in a calm work environment. It is not for nothing that we too often carry out these tasks at home, outside of our working hours.
In 2021, we won the right to work two hours at the location of our choice. It was a first small step to remove this rigidity.
Now, we claim real professional autonomy, which would allow us to make our own schedule, obviously taking into account teaching hours and other educational tasks which constitute the bulk of our work.
This real flexibility would constitute recognition of our profession, without costing taxpayers a penny. But the Legault government demonstrates unfailing rigidity on this subject.
Ultimately, the only thing that truly falls under our collective agreement is this recognition of our professional autonomy. For the rest, the Legault government already has all the tools in hand to instill this famous flexibility into the network.