Gee the most powerful district in the union gets a long weekend! Many of the teachers demands are reasonable; however there is no reason to increase their salaries. There is a glut of certified teachers in BC leaving the labour market saturated. They love to refer to countries like Finland as examples to follow but neglect to mention that getting an education degree there is far more difficult, akin to a medical specialty or engineering in terms of standards for admission. Here we have teachers being paid extra for "advanced degrees" from the university of Phoenix and other degree mills thanks to the bar being set far too low. Teachers in Finland are professionals and many negotiate their own contracts, something most teachers here have good reason to fear.

Iker mentions BC spending "$1,000 per student less than the national average", but is that even part of the contract negotiations. Iker has also mentioned in the past that the average salary for BC teachers is in the $70,000 range plus dental benefits, way too many days off, etc. That's WAY more than the average salary for most people in BC. Sorry teacher, you get an F for fail.

I am a teacher (though of the sort that makes 20 K instead of 75 K, and that includes summer work) and I'm having a hard time undestanding how cutting salaries for teachers results in a better education.

Perhaps allowing in capitalistic concepts (value for money etc.) into education is essential in our competitive age. This image of the lazy overpaid teacher is clearly and firmly fixed in the minds of a vast proportion of the Canadian population.

Perhaps the public will get what it wants. But just a few words to the wise. Places with poorly paid teachers (take the southern U.S. for example) tend to have poor economic growth. Places with more private and charter schools tend to have higher education costs and worse public schools (see NYC for an example).

Education spending presents a paradox--the more you spend on teachers the less education costs. (Look at privatization of higher ed as an example) As education matters less to a society it begins to cost more.

Market-based solutions to education costs appear to be the solution, but in fact they are the problem.

Teachers who are paid more do not necessarily deliver better education. The problem with the Teacher's Union is that teachers do not get fired often. So even if you do not do your job properly, you can still keep your job. That's not right for the students.

Mark,first, the gov't is not interested in paying teachers in proportion to the rate of inflation. Your second point is bizarre: the teachers' union would have more credibility if more people were fired?? You assume that those who would do the firing actually understand more than teachers what students' education requires; further, you also imply that a large percentage deserve to be fired. By and large, teachers do a great job; firing someone must be a last resort that is arrived at after both parties are represented adequately. Those who knock unions are often the very people who need the protection that unions provide.