pending teachers strike, BCTF and the gov't

Ya this is a problem IMO. It is not helping the profession to have retired, more expensive teachers taking on call jobs from the new teachers.

On first glance it might seem a veteran teacher is taking a job from a new teacher, but really the veteran teacher has vacated a job so a new teacher can move from subbing to full time teaching. It is much better for younger teachers if the older teacher retires a bit early and then subs to supplement his or her income instead of hanging on a few more years.

Any of the kids I know of going to Uni for teaching pretty much stick up their nose to suggestions of looking further north to get work.

well I can understand that cuz there's no starbucks eh?

OTOH some of my young buds got jobs pretty much right out of school and tell me they r doing WAY better than their friends who stayd down south who don't have jobs and can't understand WTF anyone would come up north?

The one guy is subbing pretty much fulltime, he [HTML_REMOVED] the GF are buying a house which are pretty cheap up here … but no starbucks

Any of the kids I know of going to Uni for teaching pretty much stick up their nose to suggestions of looking further north to get work.

Well then all of those kids can go fuck themselves.

Btw….buckers in safeway xxx

On first glance it might seem a veteran teacher is taking a job from a new teacher, but really the veteran teacher has vacated a job so a new teacher can move from subbing to full time teaching. It is much better for younger teachers if the older teacher retires a bit early and then subs to supplement his or her income instead of hanging on a few more years.

Good point.

Well then all of those kids can go fuck themselves.

Btw….buckers in safeway xxx

they pretty much already have

its not a real starbucks

I heard that one of the issues is that as they are retiring the baby boomers are taking many of the temp jobs (subbing) and it's kind of hurting younger adults opportunities to get in there and get experience before getting their full time jobs.

These retirees also get to charge out at their higher pay grade as well. Not sure if it would be right to limit that or helpful, but it's definitely something I've seen in other jobs as well.

We've an older friend who retired, she is paid the same rate as every other sub, plus she is limited to 100h a year, and I gather there is a shortage in some districts, well at least for specialized teachers as she has been called in for science classes and she is or was an English teacher.

Ya this is a problem IMO. It is not helping the profession to have retired, more expensive teachers taking on call jobs from the new teachers.

And don't forget this … I'm not sure how it has impacted teaching, but it is starting to take effect in government

http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/mandatory-retirement/

"Effective January 1, 2008 British Columbia eliminated mandatory retirement. Amendments to the provincial Human Rights Code extend protection against age discrimination to those 65 and over. Previously, the definition of age under the Code was 19-64 which allowed mandatory retirement to be imposed on employees 65 and over."

On first glance it might seem a veteran teacher is taking a job from a new teacher, but really the veteran teacher has vacated a job so a new teacher can move from subbing to full time teaching. It is much better for younger teachers if the older teacher retires a bit early and then subs to supplement his or her income instead of hanging on a few more years.

That is true only if you assume they retired knowing that they could pick up days subbing, but I am not sure I buy that. I think a lot of people would jump at the chance if their employer told them at their retirement party, "I hope you enjoy retirement, BUT if you are ever bored and want to swing by for a day and do your old job we will pay you top dollar for the privilege."

The other down side is cost for the districts. The veteran makes a lot more per day.

And don't forget this … I'm not sure how it has impacted teaching, but it is starting to take effect in government

http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/mandatory-retirement/

"Effective January 1, 2008 British Columbia eliminated mandatory retirement. Amendments to the provincial Human Rights Code extend protection against age discrimination to those 65 and over. Previously, the definition of age under the Code was 19-64 which allowed mandatory retirement to be imposed on employees 65 and over."

And you thought government workers were slow before. :lol:

That is true only if you assume they retired knowing that they could pick up days subbing, but I am not sure I buy that. I think a lot of people would jump at the chance if their employer told them at their retirement party, "I hope you enjoy retirement, BUT if you are ever bored and want to swing by for a day and do your old job we will pay you top dollar for the privilege."

The other down side is cost for the districts. The veteran makes a lot more per day.

I'm almost positive sub rates are fixed…

…I just checked it out, it is until you've done four consecutive days, then it changes to scale for the forth and every consecutive day after.

I'm almost positive sub rates are fixed…

…I just checked it out, it is until you've done four consecutive days, then it changes to scale for the forth and every consecutive day after.

And after 3 consecutive days, they call a different sub, from what I've heard. Makes sense to keep costs down.

Wow. Pay cuts ruled legal. Didn't see that one coming.

Shitty that the gubermint can lock employees out of the workplace for certain times, then deduct 10% pay off them for being locked out. Even shittier is that the courts agree with this

Wow. Pay cuts ruled legal. Didn't see that one coming.

Shitty that the gubermint can lock employees out of the workplace for certain times, then deduct 10% pay off them for being locked out. Even shittier is that the courts agree with this

Interesting. So I guess we can start clawing back elected officials pensions then, right?

Interesting. So I guess we can start clawing back elected officials pensions then, right?

I would argue, in fact, that we the people should get a seat at the negotiating table and work out a deal to cut pay, benefits and raises for the cretins running this province.

To add, I rather a teacher get "overpaid" an extra $10,000 a year than another government crony give himself a 25% raise on top of his/her inflated 6 figure salary.