Summer 2006 - The member magazine of the Elementary Teachers

OTF R EPORTReforming the College of Teachers– half measures are not acceptableby Hilda WatkinsNo otherprofessionalcollege has agoverning bodywith such aslim majority ofmembers of theprofession.… No otherprofessionalcollege has apublic interestcommittee.Hilda Watkins is the OTF TableOfficer for ETFO.T he Liberal party campaigned on theplatform of revitalizing the OntarioCollege of Teachers. Indeed, Liberal politiciansseemed to comprehend the teachers’dilemma – that teachers could only supportand respect the College if it were trulya self-regulatory professional body.This spring the government introduced Bill78, the Education Statute Law Amendment Act(Student Performance). The Bill addresses awide variety of issues. Particularly significant forOTF – and of grave concern – are the proposedchanges to the governance of the College. Thenew law proposes to:• Increase in the number of elected classroomteachers to 23 from 17• Create a public interest committee• Give the College responsibility to determine,through regulation, who is eligible tobe elected and what constitutes a conflict ofinterest• Shorten the maximum term of office to sixconsecutive years from 10 years• Introduce an oath of office.Although the legislation affords teachers sixadditional seats on the governing council, thisequates to a simple majority of one. (Other councilpositions include 14 government appointees,and one from each of the designated groups– principal, supervisory officer, private school representativeand faculty representative.) No otherprofessional college has a governing body withsuch a slim majority of members.The proposed public interest committee wouldbe comprised of people who are not members ofthe College. They would be government appointeeswho would provide advice relating to the dutyof the governing council and its members to serveand protect the public interest. This committeeseems redundant given that the mandate of thegoverning council, since its inception, has been toserve and protect the public interest. Further, theexistence of such a committee could be potentiallycostly and the teachers of Ontario would have tobear this expense. Additionally, no other professionalcollege has a public interest committee.The proposed eligibility requirements arepunitive and excessive. Teachers would not beallowed sit on the governing council if they wereemployed, elected or appointed at either the provincialor local level by any teachers’ federation.Such language has the potential to disenfranchiseany member who participates as a delegate at anannual general meeting or serves on a provincialor a local committee. Indeed, even local committeemembers who liaise with crisis centres couldbe deemed ineligible.Equally distasteful is the language around thedefinition of a teacher that could potentiallymake teachers on maternity and other leaves, aswell as occasional teachers, ineligible to stand forelection to OCT.The six-year limit on the term of elected councilorswill hamper the acquisition of experienceand the smooth transition between those whoare experienced and those new to the council.OTF and the affiliates have a short time framein which to address the difficulties inherent inBill 78. In particular, the issue of eligibility mustbe resolved prior to the election of the fourthcouncil, which is scheduled to begin on September5.36 etfo voice SUMMER 2006