Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

Page |1

De-bunking Drummond: An Overview


Why is the Drummond Report Misguided? Ontarios deficit was created by the financial crisis and recession, including the bail-out of private corporations, not by over-spending on public programs Cutbacks to the public sector only prolong recessionary conditions Investment in education is an essential pre-condition for stimulating economic growth and employment What do Drummonds Numbers really mean? Drummond is proposing annual public sector investment of .5%. The real per capita cut to public sector programs will be 12 Billion dollars annually by 2015-16. The deficit today is only 16 Billion dollars. Why is this just an attack on Public Sector Unions? In 1995-96, Mike Harris introduced cuts to public services at a time when the Debt to GDP ratio was 31.1% on a GDP of $327B. At that time the debt service charges were 17 of each tax dollar. In 2010-11, the Debt to GDP ratio is 34.9% on a GDP of $614B. Now the debt service charges are less than 10 of each tax dollar. The Liberals have forbidden tax increases to generate revenue for public services and have held firm to their election promise to reduce corporate taxes at a time when corporate profits in Ontario have risen 42% between 2009 and 2011.

Governments shouldnt be aggressively cutting spending when the economy is grasping for air...
Thats certainly the wrong prescription. Douglas Porter Chief economist, BMO Nesbitt Burns

Page |2

The Impact on our Members of Drummonds Recommendations: Questions and Answers Arising From the Drummond Report 1. Q.: Why does raising the class size by only two students have such a negative impact? A.: This is not about the number of students in your class. 22:1 is a ratio that generates funds that determine the number of teaching staff. Changing that number to 24:1 means cutting the number of OSSTF secondary teachers by about 8%. This means the loss of 2300 FTE teachers in our classrooms. 2. Q.: Who is affected when the report refers to eliminating 70% of 13,800 nonteaching positions? A.: These positions include members in all support staff bargaining units (EA, PSSP, OCT, and Plant) but also includes all non-teaching teachers (teacherlibrarians, guidance-teachers, consultants, and?....). This means a minimum further loss of 1867 FTE OSSTF support staff members and 500 nonteaching teachers. 3. Q.: What is the effect of imposing a cap of 32 on the number of credits that secondary students can earn? A.: This results in an enrolment decline that will lead to a further cut of 575 FTE OSSTF teachers and an undetermined number of support staff.

Page |3

4. Q.: What is the impact of cancelling Full Day Kindergarten? A.: Even Drummonds fall-back position of maintaining FDK with only teachers in the classroom, will result in job loss for all of our ECE members hired to staff the enriched Full Day Kindergarten program as it was originally envisioned. 5. Q.: What will happen if seniority provisions are removed from our collective agreements? A.: Without seniority provisions, the proposed job cuts envisioned by Drummond will occur at the whim of management. As the most expensive employees, those with greatest seniority will be most vulnerable to job loss. 6. Q.: Why is Drummond recommending that the determination of a teachers qualifications and experience be removed from our collective agreements? A.: Drummond identified compensation costs at 76% of the education budget as a main target for future cutbacks. The goal is to cut salaries by taking control of salary grids. In the new regime, our federation would have no ability to bargain salaries. Credit for experience would be arbitrarily decided by an outside body and qualifications would be recognized for salary by what Boards of Education deem useful and relevant in providing added value to students. In effect, salary grids would be reduced to individual merit pay, perhaps determined at the school level, by principals or parent councils.

Page |4

7. Q.: What are the implications of removing retirement gratuity provisions from collective agreements? A.: By altering the Education Act to remove school boards power to offer retirement gratuities, Drummond is effectively stripping the collective agreements of 57 OSSTF bargaining units. As a hard-won retirement benefit, gratuities have been protected by both bargaining units and individuals through the judicious use of sick leave over many years. It is conceivable that sick leave provisions will also be stripped away, and with them, job prospects for casual employees, as the government seeks to reduce future compensation expenditures. 8. Q.: What is the impact of Drummonds recommendations upon the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan? A.: The OTPP is a jointly sponsored pension plan. Our legislated partnership requires the sharing of risks and rewards. Any projected shortfall requires both partners, the Government of Ontario and OTF, to take joint responsibility for restoring the pension plan to a fully funded position through increased contributions and/or benefits changes. Drummonds proposal that only benefit reductions to retirees be permitted as a mechanism for achieving balance in the plan, violates the rules of our partnership as currently defined in legislation (Teacher Pension Act). By doubling the economic impact upon the long term health of our plan, it will inevitably lead to the further erosion of benefits for retirees. February 24, 2012

Вам также может понравиться