Recommendation would mainly serve to weaken union

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 17/03/2021 (1844 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

“Some of the recommendations under this imperative include: reinforcing the centrality of the role of principals as instructional leaders; introducing a new model that removes principals and vice-principals from the Manitoba Teachers’ Society; and creating business manager positions to enable principals to focus primarily on the role of instructional leadership.”

— From the Report of the Commission on K to 12 Education

 

“I just worry that someone who has no experience is going to come in and start changing things that are actually really valuable.”

 

— Katie Hurst, a performing arts teacher in Winnipeg

 

Among the many startling changes proposed by the Manitoba government’s review of education — which was finally made public on Monday after a year-long delay — was a recommendation that principals and vice-principals be removed from the Manitoba Teachers’ Society, the union that represents teaching staff in this province.

It’s not exactly a new idea — removing principals and vice-principals from MTS has been floated before, mostly by those on the political right who would see the power of labour unions diminished when it comes to education.

For example, in a March 2008 report by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, writer Michael Zwaagstra proposed that the province follow the lead of British Columbia and Ontario and separate out principals and vice-principals due to what it called an “inherent conflict” within MTS.

“It is impossible or MTS to adequately represent the interests of principals when it regularly takes the side of teachers at Board of Arbitration hearings,” the analysis read. “Principals have found that the Manitoba Teachers’ Society has been an active opponent of any attempt to exercise their management prerogatives in areas such as work assignments to employees.”

Yet, rather than have these management positions merely chopped out of the union, the Frontier Centre think piece suggested that the province also create the Manitoba Principals’ Society — a regulatory body that would be akin to the College of Physicians & Surgeons of Manitoba, and oversee the qualifications of those individuals who handle school administration.

That kind of organization would alleviate at least one concern that was voiced by the performing arts teacher above in a conversation with CBC. Hurst said the removal of principals from the union could lead to anyone applying for a principal or vice-principal position, and that it was her opinion that someone with teaching experience should fill those roles.

We would tend to agree with that position, and the province needs to ensure that if it goes through with this plan, that such school administrators are more than just glorified bean counters.

In a conversation with CTV News on Monday, Nathan Martindale, vice-president of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society, said the union was strongly opposed to the removal of principals and vice-principals.

“We will strongly oppose that decision and fight back with all the force available to us,” said Martindale.

Martindale told CTV that he was worried such a move would create an “adversarial work environment” within Manitoba schools, and damage the current relationships between teachers and principals, thus preventing them from working together in the best interests of students.

Yet the Frontier Centre’s argument isn’t an unfair one. There is an inherent opposition built into union and management relationships. How can any one union represent the interests of principals and vice-principals that are charged with managerial duties, while also representing the teachers who need to abide by decisions made by that management?

Nevertheless, on the MTS website yesterday, Martindale was quoted as saying students have better outcomes when all educators — including principals and vice-principals — are part of the same union.

“In other jurisdictions where principals and teachers are not part of a common professional organization, a lot of energy and effort is redirected into dealing with union issues and other hierarchal conflicts. This undermines attempts to move forward, affecting the quality of teaching and student learning.”

And to Martindale’s point, principals and vice-principals have been part of the teachers’ union since its inception, so this would be a rather sizable change to the status quo. No doubt there already exist working solutions to how MTS represents all its members — if not, principals and vice-principals themselves would be actively agitating to be removed.

It’s obvious, then, that the loss of several hundred union members from its ranks will mostly serve to weaken the teachers’ union, a fact that makes Martindale’s opposition to the idea quite understandable.

It also strongly suggests the reasoning of our Progressive Conservative government, which has shown a proclivity for diminishing the influence of organized labour in this province, since it came to power.