Opening Statement



Monday, 21 October 2013

Democracy in OECTA!


[My Ontario Teacher + Union Acronym Guide list is @ Dictionary]

The Catholic teachers of Ontario expect the government and OECTA to restore their faith in democracy and rule of law and also in the legal system that protects these cornerstones of Canadian society. Otherwise; how can teachers teach these concepts to the children of Ontario with any conviction? We, as teachers, evidently are not allowed to enjoy the very benefits of democracy and rule of law; and the attendant exercise of our voting rights and Charter rights; that we advocate so passionately in our classrooms.  


The very peace that law, order and good government provide in a democratic society is increasingly at risk. A democratic government is defined as “government that is established on trust to safeguard the rights of the people” (John Locke). A government that seeks to destroy or eradicate the rights of workers or any other target group of the people is by definition not a democratic government, and should more accurately be awarded an authoritarian label.  This reasoning also applies to OECTA. A union is established on trust to safeguard the rights of its members.  The increasing pressure for provincial “bargaining” in the education sector with the attendant lack of the requisite (inconvenient) ratification voting by the teachers and their local units is truly alarming. The local units are the closest to the actual members and actually know their needs. Voting is the only mechanism for approval or disapproval of a collective agreement that exists in a democratic system. If there is a total absence of member voting; there is no possibility of majority rule and hence no democracy.  

The provincial government did not allow teachers proper unfettered collective bargaining and OECTA provincial did not allow a lawful member ratification vote on their surprise Memorandum of Understanding dated July 5, 2012. Both the provincial government and OECTA Provincial claim to be democratic organizations governed by the will of the people/members. The secret collaboration of OECTA Provincial and the provincial government during the MOU debacle, did not serve either to preserve democracy or to increase citizen/member trust at all. Au contraire. 


Rebuilding democracy: It is not easy!
Now we have yet another debacle in OECTA that demonstrates an open disregard for the fundamental democratic right to freedom of opinion and expression, in addition to, the basic civil rights and natural justice rights of an OECTA member. Moreover, there is evidence of an open disregard for both the constitution/handbook of our association and Canadian Law. 

 To add yet more fuel to the fire of OECTA member distress, Halton Elementary President Richard Brock, was wrongfully dismissed in another OECTA Provincial travesty on August 22nd, 2012. Brock had been a publicly outspoken critic of OECTA Provincial’s MOU “deal” and was apparently contemplating taking steps to ensure that his unit kept some of its contract provisions despite the MOU  (as many units are doing). 
 President Brock was in the OLRB last year also trying to protect his members’ rights and by extension, all of our rights.  I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Brock at the OLRB when I was there as the co-leader of the Metro 7 group. We were in the Ontario Labour Relations Board to assert that teachers have a right to a ratification vote on their contract the same as any other workers in Ontario. I was very impressed with Mr. Brock’s courage and integrity at the time and regard him as a true hero to this day.  It takes much courage to stand up for what is right, especially when most people are just acquiescing to evil. Despite his courage or more likely due to it, President Brock was stripped of the unit President’s position that his unit members had repeatedly elected him to do (for the last 25 years)  in lawful unit elections. He recently told me, “I got fired from my job for doing my job”.   



Guest blogs + online petitions like Pams are one way to fight the good fight for democracy!

A petition is one of the increasingly limited democratic ways we can make member wishes known to Provincial OECTA.  I hope that teachers will embrace this opportunity to voice their dissatisfaction at the terrible injustice that has been inflicted upon our brother union member. 

I strongly urge all Ontario OECTA members to sign the justice committee’s petition and let OECTA Provincial know that we all want OECTA to be a union that is a democracy (not an oligarchy), and a democracy that safeguards the interests and rights of all its members, including the rights of President Richard Brock, as it is mandated to do.  

Free Richard! 
P. Spearns 

Staff Union Rep. Mary Ward CSS 

COMMENTS:

 

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great Blog! If OECTA is to be truly a democracy it needs at least two things : a BAN on ME TOO clauses and ONE MEMBER ONE VOTE on all tentative agreements and any candidates running for Provincial Executive. OECTA says it "SPEAKS FOR CHILDREN." Now it is time for James Ryan and the OECTA PROVINCIAL Executive to enact these two measures and remember the prime reason for OECTA's existence: "TO SPEAK FOR OECTA MEMBERS."
FREE RICHARD!

Anonymous said...

It should be interesting to see how much democracy there actually is when the Ontario government releases its teacher "bargaining" legislation today! The question arises ,"Why does teacher bargaining have to be legislated when there is no legislation for other profession?"

Anonymous said...

Free and unfettered collective bargaining? Now we have 3 parties on one side and the teachers' union on the other in provincial bargaining. Also the only weapon that union workers have if the bargaining is not going well is withdrawal of services. Have teachers lost that right as well?

Kate Tagseth said...

Maybe at the next COP, someone might make the point that provincial bargaining DOES NOT work for rank and file teachers.

Five rounds ago, we had NO provincial representatives at the table and we were able to achieve significant gains for members.

Four rounds ago, we had a secretariat member participate from time to time in an advisory capacity. There were significant gains for members.

Three rounds ago, we had a secretariat member at the table during bargaining. There were some gains for members, benefits were minimally improved.

Two rounds ago, we had a taste of provincial bargaining. There were "requirements" from provincial that had to be incorporated into the CA as well as whatever we wanted locally. We got redundant committees (staffing and PD), TBA benefits, and a four year contract. There were arguably more strips than gains, and the agreement imposed from provincial was more for the benefit of provincial. It was during this contract that I sent out a recommendation to the membership to reject the tentative agreement. Provincial responded and I countered. Bottom line, the CA is for members to make their own decision, not to be bullied by provincial into accepting something that was sub status quo. I was told my recommendation put our secretariat support staff in an awkward spot because he didn't have any more dates. So the question is, for whose benefit to we bargain? Maybe the secretariat staff should be beefed up during bargaining so they have enough personnel such that members can actually bargain and not have to worry about over stretching limited provincial resources. . . .

Last round brought the disaster of the MOU, local bargaining cuts, and we still have no hard copy of the tentative agreement. There was significantly more involvement from provincial, teachers lost more than ever before in the history of OECTA, and continue to lose with the fact that Provincial is squandering our dues to fight the legal challenges to the MOU instead of using our dues to fight the government and school boards. I find it curious that units who chose to disagree with provincial have basically been cut loose from funding (notwithstanding that at least 80% of local dues goes to the provincial office) from OECTA for their fights and apparently have to raise their own legal defence funds. Something is terribly wrong with the current set up when democracy is denied and disagreement is consequenced in so harsh a manner. The question of the day is "What exactly is the 'interests of the Association'"? Are those "interests" those of provincial (convenience for bargaining staff), or those of the membership? We now know they are not the same and the very people who are tasked with bargaining don't have to live with the fallout of the discussions. Make no mistake, members of the secretariat are NOT members of OECTA, they are OECTASA, and did not take the sick leave cuts, or any of the other cuts we've had foisted upon us. It's pretty clear that the more involved OECTA provincial becomes in our bargaining the worse off we are. These are trends I've been seeing for several years, ones that I spoke out against, and paid a significant price for having challenged.

Our union is at the lowest point it's ever been since its inception in 1944. Gone are the days of solidarity during the Social Contract, the pride from 1997 and the "Days of Action". Instead we've been co-opted by the "Education Friendly" government, then subsequently stabbed in the back.

So Liz Sandals, really a Tim Hudak plant, has decided to legislate the disaster that was the last round. I hope this is enough for Provincial to distance itself once and for all from this joke of a provincial government. "Education friendly" it is not. The gains of the last 20 years were written off (by our provincial association) with the stroke of a pen. Anyone paying any modicum of attention should be outraged. I hope many voices will express some of these sentiments at the next COP meeting.

Anonymous said...

We will have to read the new and improved legislation and see what it says....there is a lot of suspicion out there.....for some reason.

Anonymous said...

Tyranny always falls when members become aware and make leaders accountable for it! Free Richard to do the job he does so well!

David Chiarelli said...

Thanks to Charlie for advising me of the confusion some of you were having finding the link first thing this morning. I've removed all the other petition pictures + highlighted the good one twice in large letter set. It does work.

David Chiarelli said...

Hi all!

The Petition I posted was the first and only one I have seen. The one online at the link is the same. Regretful perhaps, but I'd hate to see the petition get torpedoed now. Signatures are needed for the cause.

I understand the later draft was more brief, had somewhat different semantics in a few cases + required readers to cut and paste out the form, but otherwise it was the same. Small consolation I suppose.

Perhaps the writers want to debrief later so it doesn't happen again? We can then continue to move forward and not lose any momentum. There's little or nothing I can do now.

Please know there will be a Q+A guest blog coming this week in which the intricacies of the case to "Free Richard Brock" could be discussed + clarified in greater depth. Since there have been a few guest blogs and contributions there is a schedule so nothing gets lost in the shuffle. There's one more before that, which is also directly related to the story. I'll see what I can do to compact the timelines.

Please keep the guest blogs coming, we are hearing some great voices, ideas and perspectives. Make sure you let me know if you are going to send one to me and stick to the time line. Get it in asap, because there could be other writers doing the same.

Solidarity!/
Cheers!

David C

Anonymous said...

Glad to see there is some gumption in OECTA! It was my impression that they are all scared rabbits running for the nearest hole for fear of offending anyone by telling the truth! Bravo to the originators of the petition! Good job!

David Chiarelli said...

Yes! The OECTA dissident movement has had a very hard time getting off the ground. I will grant you that. Now interest is growing. We have come a long way. Perhaps too far as far as some are concerned.

I hope the petition get sufficient names to be credible. Otherwise I fear attempts to censure anybody who speaks out, with the added bonus of also bullying others into submission will become a reality.

If so, then so much for all that effort by a few who have risked putting everything on the line, like Mr. Brock. He shot from the hip and wouldn't tolerate any BS. Have we got his back covered? Let's hope so.

I would encourage all OECTA members who are following whats happening here to sign and share the petition now. I understand there were other drafts circulating around that should've been sent to me first, but lets not let semantics and political posturing get in the way. Then we are no better then that which we oppose in helping rebuild our unions integrity and credibility for the upcoming contract talks. We must do what's best for the members and sort the rest out later.

However the various petitions were worded they asked for the exact same thing, for Mr. Brock to be reinstated as President of Halton Elementary. To walk away because of any wording differences will make everybody look stupid now. My regrets but there is no nice way to put this in the hour of need.

Sort out your differences later. It will help you to have 700 signatures for when the advocates make the case at COP, which is what will be crucial, and where the argument can be explained more precisely anyway.

Please think about this carefully. It's too bad but .......

Please sign and share the petition to reinstate Mr. Richard Brock to his elected position at OECTA Halton Elementary.

Solidarity!

David C

Anonymous said...

It is nice to see OECTA members finally getting together to express their outrage however too little too late unfortunately. The petition should have started July 5th 2012 the day O'Dwyer signed the MOU. Where was OECTA while all of the other federations were taking a beating in the press and public for standing up and fighting? I know you have been at all rallies David but I hope you understand the bitter taste this has left in ETFO and OSSTF members mouths.

David Chiarelli said...

Yes I understand very well. Please know I will turn my blog efforts to helping your affiliates much more again, and attending the rallies, during the difficult year ahead. Now if we can only help save our fledging OECTA dissident movement from getting trounced + crushed by the baddies. Know it isn't much but got to start somewhere + its taken forever just to get this far. Thanks for sharing. Here's to better protest/ political action days ahead!

Anonymous said...

Better late than never! Remember each dirty deed by OECTA Provincial is done in the summer. Teachers are usually trying to have a summer break then and not watching Provincial then understandably...

Anonymous said...

Sign and comment on the petition. We need to hear your valid reasons. Link: http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/oecta-executive-reinstate-richard-brock?utm_source=guides&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_created

Anonymous said...

This a great blog. I thought Angelo was supposed to have one where we could ask him questions. I have a few if he reads this.

What would you do locally if a member was disciplined and the rules were not followed? I just saw your comments on the petition.

In those comments you say that you disagree with some of the statements in the petition. What are they and why are you concerned about them?

You state in those comments the reasons you are signing. Specifically why are those reasons important to you?

I look forward to your guest blog.

Anonymous said...

i don't like how this petition is written but I am in full favour that justice be served, I agree with what Angelo wrote on the petition site. I posted three questions to Angelo on the "Trust" blog. I hope he answers them. Number one in Angelo's comments says it all, no matter what where truth and justice lead us. If we abandon the search for truth and justice out of fear or for ANY other reason we are done and our members can never trust the OECTA leadership again. This is what this is about. I just wish the petition stated this clearly. That being said, it is very important that this petition be signed. Those of us who do not like how it is written can take Angelo's advice and just state the real reasons why they are signing. Thanks, Angelo for once again showing the needed courage we so desperately need.

This what Angelo wrote on the petition site.

http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/oecta-executive-reinstate-richard-brock?utm_source=guides&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_created

Angelo Ippolito BELGRAVE, CANADA about 1 hour ago.

Although I disagree with how this petition is written and some of the statements found therein, I am signing it for the following reasons.

1. Seeking truth and justice is just the right thing to do.

2. Once truth and justice are clearly identified and reached, trust and unity can be restored.

3. This is not about individuals but about ensuring due process.

4. We need to always make sure that all the rules are followed when discipline occurs.

I ask others who may disagree with some of what is written in this petition, but agree that something needs to be done, to sign it and just clarify why you are signing it.

Anonymous said...

Seeking truth and justice seems a bit vague to me. Am I missing something? Truth and justice are pretty broad concepts- do you not like specifics and clarity. If so why not? Are u participating in a cover up or something?

Anonymous said...

Ensuring due process is a motherhood issue that can't be argued under Canadian law. Detailing the handbook rule violations is important and John Cafferky's last article "Reinstate Richard Brock does" that really well.

Anonymous said...

I am very busy locally but I will take a few minutes to reply.

My answers

Q. What would you do locally if a member was disciplined and the rules were not followed? I just saw your comments on the petition.
A. I would file a grievance and would clearly state which rules were not followed. I would fight to get the discipline decision reversed on these grounds.

Q. In those comments you say that you disagree with some of the statements in the petition. What are they and why are you concerned about them?
A. I would not have made any statements that pass judgement or personalize wrong doing. That is counter productive. I would have stuck only to seeking truth and justice without laying blame. Truth and justice are always in the best interests of the Association. It should have been written in this way. I still signed it and that was the right thing to do but I did it with the understanding that I am not interested in making this worse but only to seek truth and justice, whatever that may be.

Q. You state in those comments the reasons you are signing. Specifically why are those reasons important to you?
A. I am repeating myself. Seeking truth and justice is always in the best interests of the Association. If the truth is that the rules were not followed and injustice occurred then that needs to be determined in a fair, impartial, and objective way and corrected if needed. That is what I seek and what I have always stood for.

Raising the tension is not a good idea. Sticking to the facts is a good idea.

I have got to get back to work,

Angelo Ippolito
angelo4you@gmail.com

David Chiarelli said...

Please see my additional comments today under John Cafferky's blog on the subject of wording differences and moving forward. Kindly note, you can comment and clarify your concerns on the petition comment section, which it is my understanding is forwarded to OECTA Provincial via Change-org. Imagine them getting hundreds of these a day??? You can even mount a Phone Call Campaign + Media blitz strategy through using the tools on the page!

I consider my role here as providing an open free speech forum to facilitate our teachers grassroots concerns safe from censure or interference. I state my opinions, and maintain editorial control, of course, but I want the views to be different and challenging so we can all better share and develop our thoughts and projects to this end.

When you forward my blog link to others you broaden our access through the platform I've set up to a huge group of teacher and union readers. Check the reader visit counter on the top right of my blog page sometimes. I am most happy to facilitate this to get our teacher movement flying straight but its great if you can contribute guest blogs or get these initiatives going then forward here to me as a communication director of sorts.

I can assure you this blog takes a helluva lotta work to set up and run but its very nicely off the ground now for all of us to use, so go for it!

Solidarity!/
Cheers!

David C

PS: I've also commented on Ask Angelo, the new Q+A blog feature coming later this week. More info for now is posted under Johns blog.

Anonymous said...

How the petition reads;

We want to collect as many signatures on the petition as possible of people who like rule of law and due process in unions.

The petiiton reads





In recognition of OECTA’s wrongful dismissal of President Richard Brock of Halton, WE, the undersigned Members understand that an injustice has been perpetrated in the name of our Association and request that President James Ryan and the Provincial Executive:

1. Restore Richard Brock as Halton Elementary Unit President, acknowledging that his “trial” lacked fairness, transparency, and due process; that the discipline board lacked the authority to try him; that our Association opposes rather than perpetrates unfairness and inequality; that all members have a moral duty both to combat and to right injustices committed in the name of our Association.

2. Undertake to govern in accordance with the constitution and by-laws of our Association, promoting democracy, member rights and following the rule of law within OECTA.

3. Respect the right to free speech of all members.

4. Commit publicly and unreservedly to treat all members fairly and with due process, undertaking a disciplinary process that exhibits transparency and impartiality; that embodies fairness and justice; that clearly complies with the standards of administrative justice in Ontario and follows all the rules in the OECTA Handbook.

5. Admit in writing that the discipline board which met in February before the 2012 AGM did so without any Provincial Executive having appointed any of its members, and met without the knowledge or approval of the Provincial Executive of that year, and that the report they produced while not a legally constituted board is out of order as is true for any report submitted by any group that was illegally called to meet.

Please sign it at: http://www.change.org/petitions/oecta-executive-reinstate-richard-brock?utm_source=supporter_message&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_message_notice

Anyone who believes in due process and justice should sign this. OECTA members and anyone else who wants to stand up for the truth.

Anonymous said...

How the petition is now worded should satisfy any concerns. It is very well done.

What is the next step?

i am not willing to put Angelo on the chopping block even if he thinks there is nothing he has said or will say that is not in the best interests of the members. They will make things up, Presidents please stand beside him in support of truth, justice, freedom of speech, and due process. Angelo seems to believe in you, I hope, for his safety, that he's right.

As James Ryan wrote: Injustice against one is injustice against all.

James will you be there to support what you have always believed in? We need you now.

Anonymous said...

James
Do the right thing!!!

Anonymous said...

If the search for truth raises tension who cares? OECTA has been characterized by secrecy, division and abuse of power over the last two years. A thorough tension filled cleaning is needed!

Anonymous said...

The truth will raise the tension. If we stick to the truth and seeking the truth, democracy and justice will be restored, I think Angelo was saying that we do not have to pass judgment and all we have to do is seek the truth. The truth will demand justice and accountability and that scares the heck out of the unjust. We don't need to act like them. If it is the truth that raises tension then that is appropriate and those who deal, or have dealt. in falsehoods or injustice would need to deal with it,

Let the truth ring free and strong.

“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.”
― Fran├žois de La Rochefoucauld

“If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.”
― C.S. Lewis

Anonymous said...

A healthy tension is the way to create balance. It gets things fixed if we name what is wrong specifically. Who needs airy, fairy pronouncements, we get them from politicians everyday!

Anonymous said...

In James' letter to COP, he has already admitted that number 5 in the petition is true. This should be over right now and Mr. Brock should be reinstated to his presidency.

We already know that the board met in February without the knowledge or appointment of the PE. That violated at least two by-laws and the constitution. That meeting was illegal and not constituted. At that meeting a report was written and sent to the PE. Under any interpretation of the handbook or Robert's Rules (our constitution), that report was out of order. This means and proves in writing from James Ryan that the board that fired Mr. Brock did not exist under our own rules. We already have it in writing.

Who called the six people to this February meeting? Why were there three OECTA staff there and still the PE had no knowledge or appointment motions to make that meeting valid under any sense of our internal rule of law. This was a direct insult to the jurisdiction and authority of the AGM.

Please sign the petition because the PE is clearly in a cover up and relying on untruths to defend themselves. A court pf law would be extremely severe in how it would treat OECTA.

James solve this now or put up the for sale sign on 65 St. Clair Avenue East.

From the Petition

5. Admit in writing that the discipline board which met in February before the 2012 AGM did so without any Provincial Executive having appointed any of its members, and met without the knowledge or approval of the Provincial Executive of that year, and that the report they produced while not a legally constituted board is out of order as is true for any report submitted by any group that was illegally called to meet.

The truth brings the required and inescapable tension.

Anonymous said...

When OECTA's AGM promised to follow a certain procedure that followed the by-laws, it became mandatory and a duty of administration that it act fairly and implement its promise, and that the implementation cannot interfere with its statutory duty in the by-laws. In this way the procedural fairness through a promise by the AGM is satisfied. There are requirements for what constitutes a legitimate expectation.

OECTA made a legal promise,
That promise is to follow the constitution, by-laws and procedure where the constitution and by-laws supersede the procedures and must be met first.
In respect to an interested person, they must rely and act upon that promise.

In this case that promise and duty was broken, not relied upon, and not acted upon. Therefore, due process was not met, rules were disregarded, no attempt was made to address the breaking of a legal promise, justice was not served, and the AGM's authority was disobeyed.

OECTA has shown a total disregard for what is legal, right, reasonable, and of procedural correctness. Under any appropriate scrutiny there is no choice but to reinstate Richard Brock and find accountable those who broke this legal duty and legal promise.

OECTA you broke your solemn contract with your members.

Anonymous said...

The last post states it very clearly. So let me understand this.

If a discipline board met in February, or before that, and produced a report, that report must be rejected as out of order. Not to do this would be to agree to breaking by-laws and the constitution. Under our constitution (1.10) this is not possible as it would always be out of order.

Any reliance and action on a report that was submitted by a group that was called illegally to a meeting simply is not allowed under our constitution.

On this blog, it has been made evident that the board that fired Richard Brock absolutely had no constituted authority to do anything, never mind fire someone. By not reversing this decision on the grounds that it was made without ANY authority would mean that OECTA has decided that the AGM and the Handbook have become subservient to illegal practices and unauthorized procedures.

It has been asked before but needs to be repeated. Who called the participants to meet at the February discipline board meeting and under what motions to appoint all six of them was this done? Since there was no appointment motion to call this meeting, to which James Ryan has already admitted in writing, someone acted in contravention of the very rules they are bound to follow.

James Ryan and Provincial Executives, the truth is already self-evident. Defend the Handbook, the AGM, and your own authority by stating that the Discipline Board that met in February did not legally exist and thus any report they submitted and any action taken on that report that must be out of order and so there was no legal board in place at anytime up to and including the day Richard Brock was disciplined. Any other conclusion defies all standards of due process, justice, and would send a message to all members that the PE does not care about the by-laws and constitution you must follow. Perceptions and realities of cover ups are then unavoidable.

Press the easy button and just tell the truth. You do believe in telling the truth, don't you?

Anonymous said...

To all the COP
caveat

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemoller

Anonymous said...

Well written, Martin and so true. OECTA members stand up, although you are seen as traitors, it may not be too late, so show that you stand with your brothers and sisters, get of your ***** and do SOMETHING! I had such high hopes for James Ryan but not now. Bitterly disappointed with Kevin O'Dwyers' appointment. He is EVERY teachers' nightmare in this province.

Anonymous said...

Scary Halloween Costume Ideas: Going out dressed as the 5 members of OECTA's Provincial Executive who voted YES to the MOU.

David Chiarelli said...

BTW: Kudos to Pamela who has advised me of how she had the dubious distinction of an informal sit down meal with a number of our teachers and a member of the PE who tried to use the opportunity to extol for all the many virtues of the OECTA MOU. Lucky Pam was there to take her to task! Remember, you are all our frontline troops whenever something like this happens. You have every right to ask good questions + clearly voice that you disagree. You are the union, not the PE.

David Chiarelli said...

BTW Pamela has advised me that she revised the Petition preamble on the change.org site to note that James Ryan was one of Richards witnessed who was not allowed to speak at the Discipline Panel hearing where Richard was judged and dismissed.

Anonymous said...

It is time for the PE to share power with the rank and file OECTA members.

Anonymous said...

Parachute Club said it best "RISE UP and SHARE YOUR POWER."

Anonymous said...

I want to focus on the undemocratic use of a report submitted to the PE from the February meeting of the Discipline Board.

FACT: The people who met In February had no authority to exist. We have this in writing from James Ryan/

FACT: A board that did not exist wrote a report. Since the board did not exist the report cannot exist. You can't have SOMETHING appear out of a NOTHING.

FACT: The PE accepted a report that did not exist. As has been made clear on many posts, any motion that is not in accordance with a by-law is always out of order.

FACT: The rules were not followed and thus due process was not achieved.

FACT: By-laws must be followed first before any procedure is implemented. The Discipline Board followed a procedure that was in violation of several by-laws and the constitution.

FACT: That report was used to make by-laws and the constitution invalid or so it is legal counsels, "belief". This means that a procedure and report overrode the by-laws and the constitution. That is simply and without question, impossible.

FACT: The PE acted in opposition to several by-laws and the constitution.

FACT: The PE failed to correct the situation once they found out the by-laws and the constitution were not followed. They disobeyed their first duty in the Handbook plus many others. The PE is not allowed to defend a process that in contrary to the by-laws. If they did this the by-laws do not mean anything and the PE does not have ANY authority to not follow the by-laws.

FACT: A non existent report from a non existent group was used to fire someone.

FACT: The PE have failed to inform us as to who appointed the Discipline Board that met in February and under what authority that report was written.

FACT: A board that was not appointed produced a report that could not exist but still that report is being relied upon to justify the trashing of the AGM who put the rules in place.

CONCLUSION: This is only one aspect of injustice, lack of due process, and avoidance of the truth. Richard Brock was tried in an unfair manner without due process and this non existent report is being used to violate the authority of the members as stated by the AGM. You cannot fire someone without all the rules being followed. Any union that supports a firing without due process, constituted authority, and rule of law, is being what unions have fought against throughout all our history. OECTA is acting without the mandate to fire because that mandate is clearly written in the Handbook and can only be relied upon if those rules are all followed. Richard Brock was not dismissed because the board that did it could not exist.

Provincial Executives, please comment on this by relying on the Handbook, Robert's Rules (constitution), and due process, to achieve justice through truth. PE you need a full, honest, and timely discussion. Please do this so we can trust you.

Post a Comment

Communist Girls ARE More Fun!

Communist Girls ARE More Fun!
See below ...

Youtube Bar: Afrika Bambaataa!

Loading...

Communist Girls Are More Fun #1

Communist Girls Are More Fun #1

Communist Grrrls are More Fun #2

Communist Grrrls are More Fun #2

Communist Grrrls Are More Fun #3

Communist Grrrls Are More Fun #3

Communist Girls Are More Fun #4

Communist Girls Are More Fun #4

Art at the Paris Louvre: What does it mean?!?

Art at the Paris Louvre: What does it mean?!?
A careful analytical study!

Help! I Have No Arms!

Help! I Have No Arms!
Please scratch my back.

I can't find my underwear!.

I can't find my underwear!.
Have you seen them!

Weee! I can fly!

Weee! I can fly!
Look! I can crawl thru walls!

I have a headache!

I have a headache!
And a broken nose.

I have a square hole in my bum!

I have a square hole in my bum!

Here try this, it's very good!

Here try this, it's very good!
No. You have a bird face.

I have an ugly baby!

I have an ugly baby!
No I'm not!

Let's save all our money + buy pants!

Let's save all our money + buy pants!
OK but I need a new hand too!

Oh no! I got something in my eye!

Oh no! I got something in my eye!

You don't look well.

You don't look well.
No. My head hurts +I have a sore chest.

Would you like a bun?

Would you like a bun?

Chichen-Itza: Lost Maya City of Ruins!

Chichen-Itza: Lost Maya City of Ruins!
The Temple of Kukulkan!

Gotta love it!

Gotta love it!
Truly amazing!

Under Reconstruction!

Under Reconstruction!

Temples + Snakes!

Temples + Snakes!

The Snake!

The Snake!
It runs the length of the ball field!