Who would have thought that the strike we led would not ultimately be the event that aroused the most indignation among us, teachers of the Autonomous Education Federation (FAE)? The FAE is in the headlines again, but this time, to our great discouragement, it is not for better teaching conditions nor better learning conditions and it is especially not to fulfill a mandate that we have entrusted to it .
While we went on strike for five weeks without pay, when we resorted to food banks for the first time in our lives, when we accepted the explanations provided for the absence of a strike fund, we are outraged at learn this week that the FAE intends to finance the challenge to the Law on State Secularism before the Supreme Court, without even consulting its members. Already $1.2 million spent and more to come. These are colossal sums from our union dues and no one bothers to ask us if we agree with this expense!
If we are shocked, we are unfortunately not surprised by this democratic deficiency within the FAE. Indeed, the FAE has become a master in the art of consulting its members little or poorly, or even not consulting them at all, on substantive issues.
As proof, when we learned on December 28 that an agreement in principle had been reached at the sectoral negotiation tables, we learned at the same time that the FAE and its affiliated unions had decided to keep us in ignorance of its content until vote. We could not learn about the agreement ourselves, because it had to be “explained” to us, otherwise we would not be able to understand it. (So it’s not just the government that can show contempt). There was absolutely no need for the agreement to be shared and disseminated. This would have left too much room for questions, comments and opinions that could not have been reframed or put into context by “the right people”.
In short, if the FAE could not control the debate, it was better that there be no debate. “Always aim higher”, for school, yes; for democracy, we will come back.
Ultimately, we will have had unfair treatment: some members will end up receiving said documentation on the evening of the vote, others three to six days before. Then, learning of the unacceptable conditions in which the colleagues of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance had voted in the early morning, members of the SEO, affiliated with the FAE, requested that the voting formula be modified. They wanted the evening meeting to explain the agreement, but for the vote to be done electronically over the next 24 hours. “Impossible,” they were told. “This contravenes the Labor Law,” they were told.
What was their surprise and indignation when they learned, a few days later, that colleagues from the Haute-Yamaska Teachers’ Union, also affiliated with the FAE, had been able to hold their vote over a period of three days following their meeting! Wanting to make amends, the FAE is currently conducting a survey on our assessment of the progress of the last negotiation. Of the 205 boxes to check to answer it, not one question concerns the process of dissemination, explanation and voting on the agreement. We conclude that the FAE does not ask questions to which it does not wish to hear the answers.
Then, this week, another question on which the FAE does not wish to know our opinion surfaced: do we want our union dues to be used to finance a legal fight in the Supreme Court to challenge the use of the exemption provision mentioned in Law on the secularism of the State? Remember that the FAE has already challenged the said law in the Court of Appeal and lost. In his judgment, the judge reminded the FAE that the role of the court is not to “counter populism” nor to “show boldness”, but to verify the constitutional validity of laws.
If the FAE tries to fight against populism, let it lead by example and stop appropriating our mobilizing force and our funds to legitimize a legal fight to which we do not subscribe. May it itself show boldness by consulting its members regarding their desire to have the exemption provision invalidated in the Supreme Court. A legal and legitimate clause which, let us remember, is the minimum arrangement available to Quebec to exercise its parliamentary sovereignty within a constitution which was imposed on it without its consent. But hey, imposing one’s will without consent, it seems that is also the credo of the FAE. We deserve better.
We demand that the FAE withdraw from this legal debate until it has properly consulted all members on this specific issue.
* Co-signed this text: Claude Tousignant, teacher member of the SERL; Michèle Nadeau-Allard, teacher member of SEBL; Maude Boyer, teacher member of the SEOM; Hélène Frankland, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Hela Trabelsi, teacher member of SEO; Kamal Messaoudene, teacher member of SEO; Daniel Turmel, teacher member of SEO; Geneviève Robertson, teacher member of SEO; Serge Alfaro, teacher member of SEO; Nathalie Sarazin, teacher member of SEO; Carol-Ann Simmons, SEO member teacher; Geneviève Savage, teacher member of SEO; Sara Morin, teacher member of SEO; Claudia Cloutier-Provencher, teacher member of SEO; Patricia Duquette, teacher member of SEO; Cristèle Piché, teacher member of SEO; Huguette Gauvreau Robertson, teacher member of SEO; Janie Houle, teacher member of SEO; Nadine Beaudry, teacher member of SEO; Janique Lachance, teacher member of SEO; Christine Dufour, teacher member of SEO; Katleen Roberge, teacher member of SEO; Marie-Chantal Gagnon, teacher member of SEO; Sarah Lestage, teacher member of SEO; Karim Roy, teacher member of SEO; Julie Bouchard, teacher member of SEO; Nicole Beaupré, teacher member of SEO; Marie-Chantale Gervais, teacher member of SEO; Romain Vanhooren, teacher member of SEO; Manon Juneau, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Félix Pinel, teacher member of the Alliance of Montreal Teachers; Armand Dubois Ranjbaran, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Daniel Tremblay, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Catherine Poitras-Quiniou, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Marie-Christine Lavoie, teacher member of the Montreal Teachers’ Alliance; Jonathan Lépine, teacher member of the SEBL; Jean-Nicolas Néron, teacher member of SEBL; Marc-André Dupuis, teacher member of SEBL; Patrick Legault, teacher member of SEOM.