Every labour dispute involves two groups trying to find common ground to ensure a fair deal is made.
The business between the South East Cornerstone Public School Division and their employees, represented by SEIU-West, who walked off the job on April 22, is not any different. This dispute is about what’s fair, for employees and employers, for taxpayers and students.
Cornerstone previously reached a deal with employees who are members of CUPE. It’s that same deal they have offered to the SEIU members, and Cornerstone has no plans to offer any more, in terms of compensation, than what the other group of employees has already agreed to.
The school division does happen to be in a difficult position in this regard. It may hardly seem fair to CUPE members, though some may say that’s tough, that you can’t get what you don’t ask for.
While we can sympathize with Cornerstone as an organization seeking to treat employees with parity, we can’t also expect or ask SEIU members to accept an offer somebody else gladly took. They clearly don’t feel the terms were acceptable. They wouldn’t have walked off the job if they did.
The strike, which involves education assistants, maintenance and custodial staff, cafeteria workers and bus drivers, wasn’t a tactic used early in the negotiating process, and nobody sees it as a sustainable situation in the long-term. Something must give, as it always does.
This dispute could be used as a platform for discussion about how and to what degree we fund our education systems.
Very plainly, Cornerstone has said the money isn’t there to offer more than the four per cent, two-year increase that has been sitting on the table since the beginning of negotiations. The school division doesn’t have a budget that’s very amenable to change.
SEIU has refuted that, saying money is available in the budget, but the school division has funneled it into areas it considers to be of greater importance.
Neither is wrong on these counts. Cornerstone’s funding comes from the Ministry of Education, and Cornerstone’s board of trustees and their negotiating team, along with the director of education, must determine how that money is spent. Certainly, there is money to offer more, but who’s to say these other priorities are unimportant? Who’s to say what the top priorities should be?
Ultimately, it’s the public. We have two groups trying to do the best for themselves while also recognizing the students they are meant to provide for. We have two groups pitted against one another, fighting for funds delivered from powers greater than themselves.
Priorities will always have to be set, but has the school division been put into a situation where it needs to pick between an array of areas that are all desperate for funds? When it comes to infrastructure, labour and other needs, there’s no shortage of places to put funds.
This isn’t really a question of whether or not there is enough funding for this group of employees represented by SEIU. It’s a question of whether or not there is enough funding to support our growing education network.
This strike provides everyone with a chance to ask those questions and determine their own answers. Perhaps we should be questioning our elected provincial representatives, who removed funding avenues from the school divisions three years ago.
There are a lot of people and groups who need a piece of the pie. Are we providing them with enough to share?
