CARNETCOLL-7-ang:CARNETS Carnet 09-03-05 14:21 Page 1

IN THIS ISSUE | Teaching Profession | Governance with a Private Twist | Start Preparing Now for the Next Negotiations! | CÉEC Report || News in Brief | Declaration Making PublicEducation The Quebec Priority |

Fédération nationale des enseignantes et des enseignants du Québec No. 7 February 2009

Carnetcollégial

CARNETCOLL-7-ang:CARNETS 09-03-05 14:21 Page 1

2 CaRNet collégial no 7 • february 2009

C o n t e n t s 2 Working Group on the

Teaching Profession3 Governance with a Private Twist4 Start Preparing Now

for the Next Negotiations!6 CÉEC Report7 News in Brief 8 Declaration Making Public

Education The Quebec Priority

E D I T O R I A L WORKING GROUP ON THE TEACHING PROFESSION

New Obstruction from the Federation of Cegeps

The Federation of Cegeps loudly pro-claims, to any media that will listen,its desire to contribute to Québec'sdevelopment. It calls for innovation,for international action, and proclaimsthat the government can count on thecegeps to relaunch the economy.Good. It also invites us to be a “part-ner” and to discuss the future ofcegeps. But at the same time, it cannothide its stubborn refusal to recognizethe fundamental nature of the teach-ing profession: teaching, its prepara-tion and the many different aspects ofthe teacher-student relationship.

Many among us have concluded thatthe Federation of Cegeps has contempttowards teachers. It's up to its represen-tatives and to our college's administra-tors to prove the contrary. We believethat through its refusal to recognize that

this is its business, the Federation ofCegeps is not only turning its back tothe union federations, but also to col-lege teachers, those most responsible forcarrying out the mission of a cegep.

Since we refused to extend our collec-tive agreement six years ago, the unionshave repeatedly shown how workloadsinherent to teaching have grown heav-ier. To counter this evidence, we haveheard repeatedly the condescendingrefrain: your workload hasn't increasedwith the reform, it has just “evolved”!

Twice, during the last negotiations thatended with the decree in 2005 andbefore the allocation of the federaltransfer payments last year, the repre-sentatives of the Federation of Cegepsdid everything that they could toensure that the meagre resources inject-ed into the college system could not beused to relieve directly the workload ofteachers in their classes. This is whytoday they are systematically obstruct-ing the parity committee on the teach-ing profession, preventing any seriousadvance since the completion of theportrait of the profession in April 2008.

Ignore the fact that in the spring of2008 90% of cegep boards of gover-nors accepted the necessity of recog-nizing the teaching profession. Seenfrom the outside, we can say thatcegep administrations have two levels

of discourse: one towards the teachersin their schools, and another throughthe representatives of the employer’sassociation!

The next negotiations cannot be con-ducted in this manner. FNEEQ calls onthe Federation of Cegeps to break withits practice of claiming for itself thesole power to decide how to allocatenew teaching resources, in particularwhen these contribute to increasingworkloads.

Teaching at the College Level… A Profile ofthe Profession amply shows to whatextent reality has changed and requiresa rewriting of how we take into accountthe multiple facets of the work done byall teachers covered by our collectiveagreement. The Federation of Cegepsand union federations are meeting todiscuss teaching resources, and in orderfor these meetings to be a success, theFederation of Cegeps must say at thenegotiation table the same things thatit leads us to believe through its state-ments made elsewhere in other forums.

Ronald Cameron, FNEEQ President

Carnet collégial is a publication of theFédération nationale des enseignantes et desenseignants du Québec. FNEEQ represents almost25,000 members in cegeps, private schools anduniversities. It is the union federation most repre-sentative of higher education across Québec.

FNEEQ–CSN1601, avenue De Lorimier, Montréal (Québec) H2K 4M5Tél. : 514 598-2241 • Téléc. : 514 [email protected] • www.fneeq.qc.ca

Editorial Committee: Ronald Cameron, Micheline Thibodeau, Jean Trudelle et France Désaulniers. • Translation: Stephen Bryce • Cover photo: MichelGiroux • Graphic design: Brunel Design • Printing:Impart-Litho • Print run: 1,300 copies • Legaldeposit: Bibliothèque et archives nationales duQuébec, Library and Archives Canada.

This publication is printed on Québec-manufacturedpaper made from 100% post-consumer recycled fibresfrom the urban forest: recycling in enterprises. As aresult, we save up to seven trees. We value our forest.

PH

OT

O:

MIC

HE

L G

IRO

UX


… Modelled primarily on the ActRespecting the Governance of State-owned Enterprises, the two billsfocus their attack on Boards ofGovernors and may, if adopted intheir current state, upset the cul-ture of university and collegecommunities by calling into ques-tion their autonomy of manage-ment. Among the changes pro-posed: a significant increase inthe number of so-called “external”members on boards (with a conse-quent reduction in the number ofinternal members), the creationof new committees (ethics, finan-cial review, and human resources)and a new emphasis on account-ability…

A Major Impact on Higher EducationInstitutions

The management of the universityworks on the principle of collegial-ity and on the basis of the consen-sus that results from the interac-tion between the different groupsthat make up the university com-munity. It’s precisely at this colle-giality that the IGOPP1 and theMinister’s proposed law attacks.They take aim at marginalizing the

university community in the deci-sion-making process and alsothreaten the culture of universities,by concentrating power in closedand authoritarian boards of gover-nors, by reducing the requirementof transparent management to theuniversity community while at thesame time increasing governmentcontrol. The proposed law seeks tochange the balance of representa-tion on boards of internal mem-bers by ensuring a large majority ofexternal members from outside theuniversity community, on the pre-text that these members are trulyindependent. This will profoundlyweaken university institutions byinstalling a governance that mini-mizes the participation of all partsof the university community indefining the orientations and incarrying out the missions of theuniversity. It’s in this denial oflegitimacy that contributes to theestablishment of a culture of secre-cy in boards, as is the case in thecronyism throughout the businessworld, in the name of establishinga more “efficient” management ofinstitutions.

For cegeps, the government’sapproach is the same. Remove

from the board parents, the Aca-demic Dean and former students;impose instead a board that includes11 external members, which isno joke when we recognize theproblems that these peoplehave in truly understanding thechallenges, the culture and theactual dynamics of a cegep. Howcan one even begin, by attendingfour or five meetings per year andreading stacks of dry, indigestibledocuments, to understand and putthem in their proper context?...

FNEEQ recommends the extensionand reinforcement of collegialityin all decision-making bodies ofhigher education institutions. Thegovernment seeks to profit fromthe under-financing of universitiesto tighten control mechanismsand reduce the participation ofinternal actors in exercising theirpower in these institutions. In ouropinion, good governance restsboth on democratic participationand on the expertise of membersof the community, whose bestinterest is to come to a consensusand to make mutual concessions.This is what we believe is morepromising than the ideas put for-ward by IGOPP. ▲

With the election of a majority Liberal government, the reappointment ofMichelle Courchesne as Minister of Education, Leisure and Sports mayappear to be a choice that allows government action not to be delayed,with regards to recognizing the work of teachers in the education system. But it seems as though that’s not the issue she wants to act onwithout delay; rather it’s on the governance of post-secondary educationinstitutions, starting with the proposed legislation introduced onDecember 8, 2008. Now, this approach is a poor start, as the FNEEQSchool and Society Committee found in a report prepared before the holidays. We present here an extract from that article. You can find thefull article (in French) on the FNEEQ website, a document that the Federal Council adopted as our first reflection on the two proposed lawsfor universities and cegeps.

GovernanceWith a Private Twist

CaRNet collégial no 7 • february 2009 3

1 The Institut sur la gouvernance d’organismes privés et publics (IGOPP), is attached to the École des HEC Montréal and the John-Molson School of Business at Concordia University. It produced the Toulouse Report in 2007.


By Micheline Thibodeau, coordinator of the FNEEQ Regroupement Cégep

At the outset of this new round ofnegotiations, many factors lead usto believe that the history of ournegotiations need not necessarilyrepeat itself. Some elements in thecurrent circumstances, which willbe presented, debated and analyz -ed among us in the coming weeks,lead us to believe that there is nopre-determined ending. There fore,an essential factor for success in these negotiations is to beginwithout delay to get approval fromall unions and their members forthe proposed negotiation processand main issues as quickly as possible.

Even more important, we mustestablish a clear vision and assess-ment of the context of the coming

negotiations, which will take upan enormous amount of our timeand mobilize lots of energy in thecoming months.

Being Positive in Difficult CircumstancesFirst of all, note the political andlegal situation in which the Charestgovernment finds itself. They lostthe legal battle over Law 30, theywere found guilty by the ILO con-cerning the 2005 decree and legalproceedings in Quebec concerningthis law are still to come betweennow and the start of the negotia-tions. In this context, they mustshow their good faith.

This is one of the reasons that ledthe government to invite unionorganizations to participate in dis-cussions about the regulations onnegotiations. This work, suspend-ed during the election campaign,started again in February. Wehope to find out during the nextfew weeks whether there is a realwillingness to negotiate from thegovernment.

In addition, creating a large com-mon front is now supported by

most union organizations. Madeup of the CSN, the FTQ and theSISP1, a common front for thenext round of negotiations couldbring together a large majority ofpublic and parapublic sectorworkers. Exchanges are underwayin order to establish a workingprotocol and discussions are tak-ing place to see if there is a possi-bility of putting in place a no-raiding agreement that mightsolidify the relations betweenthese organizations.

Concerning the current economicsituation, it must be rememberedthat in the past, the desire to con-trol public spending is what led toconstraints on hiring and salariesthroughout the public and para-public sectors. These choices arestill having major impacts in thequality of health care and educa-tion. At a time when governmentsare increasing public spending for,among other things, infrastructureprojects, we must find support forthis policy to stimulate the econo-my in order to show that publicservices and education and theirpersonnel can and must also bepart of the solution to the crisis.


December 15, 2005: a date we all remember. By decree, the government abruptly interrupted thenegotiations, forcing an agreement on sectoral issues and decreeing central table conditions (retire-ment, salaries and parental rights). Throughout the negotiations and, in particular, by the way theydecreed their end, the government demonstrated their contempt towards their employees. Whereare we now? While the economic context makes us wary of a repeat of the same scenario, we hopethat many other factors may push in the opposite direction!

Start Preparing Now for the Next Negotiations!

I M P R O V E O U R W O R K I N G C O N D I T I O N S

PH

OT

O:

MIC

HE

L G

IRO

UX



Overview of Preparation in the Cegeps

The FNEEQ Regroupement Cegepincludes over two thirds of theteachers of the college system.Because of its very representativenature, the positions that are takenin the coming months, arisingfrom consultations with membersat all cegeps, will be definitive inconducting the negotiations.

The negotiation and mobilizationcommittee has been at work sincethe beginning of January. It ismade up of members of unionswith experience of the nego -tiations both at the local andprovincial levels. The equilibriumsought, between being connectedto members and negotiation expe-rience, has been achieved. Thecommittee has started its work. Atour of the unions is on its workplan for the coming weeks. Listen-ing and exchanging with membersof unions are among its priorities.

The work of this committee buildson that undertaken by FNEEQsince the abrupt end of the lastround of negotiations. As muchpart of the struggle against thedecree as in preparing unions, the Cap sur la relève (An Eye onRenewal) campaign led to manyactions, including the important

work of integrating new teachersto union life. Many guides to be used by members have been produced, for example the oneson the rights of nonpermanentteachers in union life and parentalrights, available on the FNEEQwebsite. In addition, training ses-sions are now held each year fornew members of union execu-tives. In other words, betweennegotiation periods, we have notgiven up and have worked contin-uously to renew union life.

The Battle for theCollege Teaching ProfessionThe work on the teaching profes-sion, which has mobilized a greatdeal of energy since the 2005decree, continues. At the FNEEQRegroupement Cegep meeting on September 29 and 30, it wasdecided to continue the follow-upwork linked with preparations forthe next round of negotiations.

The results of this work will serveto orient our demands on teacherworkloads.

In addition, teacher salary levelsare among the causes of recruit-ment problems for cegeps. Thishas been confirmed by the Institutde la statistique du Québec (ISQ) for all public sector employees; we will have to document morespecifically the salary situation forcegep teachers, based on the valueof the work of teaching. It isalready clear that a salary catch-upis needed.

The mobilization stuctures havebeen put in place, consultationsare starting soon. As in all nego -tiations, whether provincial orlocal, the obvious strength anddetermination of teachers is unde-niable. We therefore invite you to participate actively in thesepreparations and the launch ofthe negotiations. ▲

1 The Secrétariat intersyndical du secteur public (SISP) includes the Centrale des syndicats du Québec (CSQ), the Syndicat de la fonctionpublique du Québec (SFPQ), the Syndicat de professionnelles et professionnels du gouvernement du Québec (SPGQ), the Fédérationinterprofessionnelle de la santé du Québec (FIQ) and the Alliance du personnel professionnel et technique de la santé et des servicessociaux (APTS).

A N D T H E Q U A L I T Y O F E D U C AT I O N

PH

OT

O:

MIC

HE

L G

IRO

UX



By Ronald Cameron

First, it’s important to rememberthat the implementation of thereforms beginning in 1993 elicit-ed strong reactions and that thedebate is still not over in manyareas, in particular on the compe-tency-based approach and onpedagogical decentralization. Aswell, the reforms as a whole hadconsequences in the classroomand an impact on the workloadof teachers.

The commission demands that“evaluation of student learning”be a “priority intervention”, andthat the relationships of technicalprograms with businesses and ofpre-university programs with uni-versities be reinforced. It’s impor-tant to recall with regards to thisthat we believe that teaching restson the means provided and not on an obligation to produceresults. The implementation of the“reform” pedagogy required anincrease in workload that we havehad problems getting recognized.

Teachers have been engagedthrough out these years in improv-ing the success of cegep studentsin their studies. And we salute theposition of the commission in rec-ognizing that students “receive a quality education.” At the sametime, for these recommendationsto be included in a process of con-tinuous improvement, it is neces-sary that teachers receive the sup-port needed through a more com-plete recognition of the work theydo and a reinforcement of themeans to do so. ▲

PROGRAM EVALUATIONS

The CEEC Concludes that Quality is at theHeart of the Cegep ReformsThe Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial (CEEC) made public on January 20 its report l’Évaluation deprogrammes du renouveau de l’enseignement collégial. We note a definite change in tone from the approach taken by theCEEC in recent years. The commission looks in a more positive way at the quality of education instruction provided bythe college system. In fact, we note the insistence that the commission uses to recognize these gains rather thanfocussing its attention on the problems.



News in BriefNews in Brief28th FNEEQ Congress

Teachers Moving in Solidarity

The 28th FNEEQ Congress will takeplace in May at Mont Sainte-Anne,near the location of FNEEQ’s foundingcongress at Lac-Beauport. This will bea special event as in 2009 we celebratethe federation’s 40th birthday. FNEEQwas “born” in 1969 out of the desire ofunions from classical and technicalcolleges, as well as the younger cegepteacher unions, to come together andfound a federation that would be apolitical vehicle for teachers as professionals linked to a confederalworker’s organization. Ever since,FNEEQ has played an important rolein higher education, welcoming in particular new unions of universityhourly-paid lecturers.

The celebration that we hope to enjoywill include those who have helped tobuild FNEEQ since 1969. In order to doso, we are planning an event that willallow some of them to come togetherwith the union delegations who willparticipate in the congress. But we willnot just dwell on FNEEQ’s past; we alsowant to recognize the involvement and

commitment of a new generation ofmilitants… those who will be writingtheir own chapter of our history in thenext 40 years, and more!

Centre d’études du Mont-Tremblant

The Instruction Provided Is in Regular TeachingIn a decision made public on November21, 2008, arbitrator Jean-Marie Lavoieagreed with the union position and rec-ognized that the instruction provided atthe Centre d’études collégiales de Mont-Tremblant is regular day-division teach-ing. He ruled that “the College mustapply at this Centre all of the relevantprovisions of the collective agreement”.Teaching began in September 2008, butno agreement was made betweenFNEEQ and our employers’ Comitépatronal de négociation des collèges(CPNC) on the working conditions forteachers. FNEEQ, which supported theestablishment of the centre, tried manytimes to get the CPNC to recognize theneed for an agreement on this specialcase. For FNEEQ, the fact that the

teaching provided was regular day-division instruction was self-evident.We have always sought to take intoaccount the realities of these estab-lishments, without sacrificing workingconditions.

www.lescegeps.comLe Portail de l’enseignement collégialBrought on-line recently, this websiteseeks to promote the unique contribu-tion of cegeps to the education systemand society of Québec. You can contribute, as the Portail de l’enseigne-ment collégial (College Teaching Por-tal) is open to all who teach or supportstudent success, who are or havestudied or contributed to its develop-ment, or who is simply interested indoing so. It offers a wide range ofproducts including many interestingwritten documents and multimediapresentations which have remained upto now unrecognized or hard to find.Bookmark this website!



A First in Education!

Eleven union and student organi-zations, representing half a millionpeople who work and study in theeducation system from pre-schoolto university, made public a decla-ration entitled Making Public Educa-tion The Quebec Priority in Novem-ber 2008. The CSN and its affiliatedfederations in the education sectorwere part of this initiative.

It asks the questions: “As a society,can we accept that one out of threestudents leaves high school withouta diploma? Can we accept that Que-bec citizens do not have the educa-tion that is minimally requiredto lead comfortable lives? Can weaccept that Quebec is in the groupof Canadian provinces with thelowest rates of adult participation inon-the-job training activities?”

If giant steps have been accom-plished with regards to participa-tion in education and in access toa quality education, the zero-deficitdogma and the denial of stateresponsibility has threatened thedemocratic education project formany years.

For the partner signatories, wemust start acting now, for democ -ratizing education and developingpublic education are not currentlytrue priorities. By satisfying itselfwith simply managing its contra-dictions and problems, the gov-ernment of Quebec is failing totake on the oversight of the educa-tion system. We see this particular-ly in the under-financing that theentire education system has suf-fered for far too long.

“Making public education thenumber one priority in Quebec isto choose to invest convincinglyin our collective future and in ourability to meet the challenges ofthe 21st century with knowledgeand confidence. Quebec must makethis commitment now…”

You can access the whole documentat www.fneeq.qc.ca ▲

Jean Trudelle


Documents

CARNETCOLL-7-ang:CARNETS Carnet 09-03-05 14:21 Page 1