Caveat Emptor Praeceptores

This week Ontario elementary school teachers are staging one day rotating “labour strikes” in light of their inability to negotiate a contract with the province of Ontario.  At least, that’s what they’re calling it, “labour strikes”.  The problem is, that’s not what's really happening, is it!

For one thing, a strike usually results from the breakdown of labour negotiations between the union and management (whomever they may be).  This has clearly not happened.  In most cases negotiations haven’t occurred yet; negotiations can’t break down if school boards refuse to come to the table.  In fact, one might ask just what message are teachers sending via their so-called labour strike.  Given present circumstances, perhaps that message is, “WE ASSUME THAT NEGOTIATIONS WON’T WORK!”  But that’s putting the cart before the horse, is it not?  And we all know what happens when we go assuming things, don’t we.

The fact is, Ontario’s teachers are making of themselves exactly what anyone else would make of himself when he refuses to engage in a process based on some presumed outcome.  The reason why rational people look down upon such presumptive people is that they are, in effect, opting for the more radical and confrontational mode of discourse before exhausting generally more productive and civilized modes of discourse.  This, as all rational people recognize, is not how mature adults act.  And, quite frankly, it is unacceptable behaviour in our teachers.  Why?  Because it's counter to the responsibility teachers take upon themselves when they choose their profession and it is contrary to one of the most importants roles a teacher serves in society--namely, training our young people to engage in, and seek out, the most civilized, productive, and non-confrontational forms of discourse.  

Perhaps I’m an idealist, but I hold teachers (myself among them) to a higher standard.  Those who we trust to civilize our children cannot do so if they choose confrontation over dialogue and choose, arguably, illegal action, when legal means are at their disposal.

What is more, the actions of Ontario teachers might justifiably be construed as a protest against democracy.  That’s right, I said, “against democracy”!  Consider this, in both the 2007 and 2011 provincial elections the Liberal Party of Ontario were swept into power with no little help from the endorsement they from Ontario School Teachers and their unions.  In other words, when Ontario teachers had their legitimate say in the legislation of our province they said, in no uncertain terms, that they trusted the governance of Ontario to the Liberal Party.  And when the time came to exercise their democratic right, they willingly gave the Liberal Party the power and the right to create the legislation they see as necessary to fulfilling this responsibility.  Unfortunately for our teachers, that legislation included Bill 115 and, apparently, our teachers are suffering from buyers remorse!

Two great disconnects are at work in this teacher debacle: On the one hand, labour negotiations are not the appropriate venue for political protest (especially when the instigators of the protest refuse to engage in the negotiation process).  On the other hand, political protest is entirely ineffectual when its instigators assert their right to speech, while refusing to enter into dialogue and when they extol the virtues of democracy while at the same time denouncing the product of its legitimate exercise.

I know there are teachers out there who not only understand the arguments I’ve made here, but support them and may have even voiced them!  Lets just hope that their calmer heads will prevail, and they are able to convince the strike mongers that the capacity to strike is not a necessary condition for the capacity for effective negotiations before their capacity for effective teaching is undermined by their inability to present themselves as sincere advocates of civilized dialogue and democracy.