While students were getting ready for Easter break, there was hope that the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation (STF) and the ministry of education would come back to the negotiating table.
But as things have developed, the STF is not feeling as hopeful and is worried that they might be stuck again in contract negotiations.
Education Minister Jeremy Cockrill announced on Thursday that a memorandum of understanding (MOU) was offered to teachers with the support of the Saskatchewan School Boards Association.
Cockrill stated that all parties would collaborate to establish an accountability framework for the multi-year funding agreement signed earlier this year between the SSBA and the education ministry.
However, STF president Samantha Becotte mentioned that attitudes have changed on Tuesday.
“Unfortunately, their offer is once again one of those take-it-or-leave-it offers,” Becotte said. “They’re not willing to engage in a back-and-forth conversation.”
“We responded on Thursday, and both our staff at the federation, as well as ministry staff, made the commitment to work over the weekend to try and get the MOU to a place where we would be able to get back to the table.”
Becotte continued to say they wanted to negotiate on the framework accountability being in the binding contract. She said that despite the promise made in the MOU, the government won’t make it binding.
“In the past, we have seen MOUs being disregarded by the government, and without that dispute resolution process, there isn’t a way to hold anyone accountable,” Becotte said.
According to a statement from the government of Saskatchewan, late last week, the “Government-Trustee Bargaining Committee (GTBC) sent its weekly invitation to the STF to return to the bargaining table, as they have for the last several weeks. Conversations on resuming negotiations are still ongoing.”
“The government and school boards are firm that class size and complexity will not be included in the new collective agreement. However, the government has offered the STF the opportunity to participate in the development of the accountability framework MOU and the subsequent framework. Their involvement would allow teachers to have direct input in the formation of the accountability framework that would oversee how the $356.6 million for classroom supports, as announced in the 2024-25 provincial budget, is utilized.”
Despite both parties appearing to be at a standstill again, there may be other options.
“The government still has a lot of cards, whether or not they want to play them,” University of Regina business and administration associate professor Andrew Stevens said.
“Whether or not they’re constitutionally valid or if they could defend it publicly against scrutiny from the teachers or the member of the general populace is another question.”
Stevens suggested that the government could bring in an arbitrator or pass a legislative law to close negotiations.
On the STF side, Stevens said increased job action could continue, and a full strike is always on the table.
According to Stevens, the issue of binding arbitration is not something new to the government.
The local government has often been unwilling to use binding arbitration unnecessarily, as seen during the Co-op refinery lockout, according to him.
They might believe they can achieve their goals through current collective bargaining, and it's like challenging the teachers to take more action.
Stevens mentioned that it's understandable why the STF is worried about the MOU.
He mentioned that the MOU and its funding arrangement, which was decided without involving the teachers, doesn't have any conditions attached. Therefore, the teachers are right to be worried about it.
