NLTA ELECTION 2024
Questions and Answers
for Presidential and Vice-Presidential Candidates
QUESTION 1 from Samantha Tiller
How do you plan to bring awareness to the necessity of updating curriculum as it relates to human rights and genocide?
ANSWERS to Question 1
QUESTION 2 from Samantha Tiller
What strategies will you implement to raise awareness among educators and students about current and historical genocides?
ANSWERS to Question 2
QUESTION 3 from Samantha Tiller
How do you envision collaborating with organizations focused on human rights to promote advocacy within schools?
ANSWERS to Question 3
QUESTION 4 from Samantha Tiller
Will you support training programs for teachers to equip them with the tools to discuss sensitive topics related to genocide and human rights effectively? What do you envision these training programs to look like?
ANSWERS to Question 4
QUESTION 5 from Samantha Tiller
What role do you believe teachers’ unions should play in supporting communities affected by genocide?
ANSWERS to Question 5
QUESTION 6 from Samantha Tiller
How would you work with lawmakers to advocate for policies that address and prevent genocide?
ANSWERS to Question 6
QUESTION 7 from Samantha Tiller
What initiatives would you propose to engage students in activism against genocide and promote global citizenship?
ANSWERS to Question 7
QUESTION 8 from Samantha Tiller
How do you plan to address and monitor hate speech or discrimination within educational environments?
ANSWERS to Question 8
QUESTION 9 from Samantha Tiller
What resources would you allocate to schools to help them address and educate about genocide and its impact?
ANSWERS to Question 9
QUESTION 10 from Samantha Tiller
How do you plan to ensure a commitment to advocate collectively against genocide remains a long-term priority within the education system?
ANSWERS to Question 10
QUESTION 11 from NLTA SLP Special Interest Council
There are currently vacancies in this province for both speech-language pathologists (SLP) and educational psychologists.
In regard to SLPs there are a variety of reasons for this such as massively over the recommended limit caseloads, an increase in complex needs students, lack of appropriate physical space to work from in schools, travel requirements and a lack of an allowance structure to recognize the speciality requirements just to name a few. How would you advocate to make sure we make these positions more attractive so that they are not only filled but also sought after in this province?
ANSWERS to Question 11
Logistically, all SLP’s need defined work spaces within the schools they work in. Before the school year begins the administration must work with the SLP to decide on where the defined work space will be for the year. Communication needs to made to other members of the staff that this is the SLP’s defined work space and will be available when the SLP is working in the school. Any items and materials in the SLP’s work space will not be removed without the SLP’s permission.
To attract more SLP’s to the province we need to increase salaries so they are on par with their colleagues in other provinces. In regards to incentives, funds need to be made available for appropriate, specific SLP professional learning and dedicated funding for speech language pathology resources as presently there is no consistency for resources to assist SLP’s in their work with students and parents.
I would advocate for SLP’s at the provincial government level that we need more SLP’s in our province to help all students succeed. Smaller caseloads for SLP’s means students are serviced more often resulting in improvements to their physical, mental and social development. We also need a wrap-around service in our schools that includes more collaboration with NL Health Services SLP’s during Kinderstart sessions and the first year of Kindergarten. I would also advocate for community health nurses to be reinstated for preschool health checks. These checks are vital in assisting the student, parent, and teacher in the students’ early development. As a result of preschool health checks no longer completed in this province, it is making SLP’s jobs more difficult as they are identifying speech issues for the first time much later in children.
I will also encourage the continued partnership between the NLTA and EDU to provide specific PL for speech language pathologists. This process was initiated in October, 2024 and should be continued.
Having conversations with all stakeholders, been open and flexible to change from “the way things have always been done” is the only way to move forward to provide more SLP service to the students of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The information cited above should be incentive enough for our employer to invest more in SLPs. Not to mention the fact that early intervention is crucial if these students are going to improve and/or overcome the various speech and language issues that affect them. I believe we need to make sure that our employer is aware of each and every issue that you face in trying to do your job under current allocations and we need to make them understand that without your work, many of these students will always have trouble navigating through life and communicating with family, friends and future employers. We need to educate them because they obviously do not ‘get’ the true value of the work that you do. Educating our employer is the first step.
I would go so far as to argue that almost every primary school should have its own SLP on staff. After all, early diagnosis and intervention is key. A dramatic increase in SLPs is no doubt needed. SLPs should also have a designated work space and not have to work out of a glorified closet or find a free space to work from. This is not good enough. How can anyone feel like a valuable member of a profession when they don’t even have a home-base, so to speak.
I know that the Speech Language Pathologists Council does exceptional work, so as president, I would want to work very closely with them to make sure that I fully understand all of the issues. It would be a good idea to invite the SIC to do a presentation at Joint Council/BGM and to accompany the president to meetings with our employer. Our membership also needs to be aware of the issues you face. I would personally want to sit down with some of our province’s SLP’s if elected so that I have all the facts and knowledge that I need to take to our employer to fully advocate for you.
At the end of the day, we all want to feel valued, heard and respected. I firmly believe that the things I’ve mentioned above can help make the positions more attractive and sought after
As you can see, hopefully, I have been brought up to speed by your members on the many issues you are all facing. And, if successful, it would be my intention to continue to meet regularly with your SLPSIC Executive to further my understanding of your issues/concerns, or any others which may arise.
However, you did ask me a question. “How would you advocate to make sure we make these positions more attractive so that they are not only filled but also sought after in this province?”
I feel very confident, after my time as your SLPSIC’s liaison, that I am able to speak assertively and passionately about the needs of both our SLP’s and those students who avail (or need to avail) of your services. I believe it is necessary to highlight for our employer, and the public, the importance of the vital communication services you provide. Not the least of which is the direct connection between speech-language services and our students’ ability to read. This is vitally important to all stakeholders within a system which has seen reading levels suffer dramatically over the past several years. As communication needs increase, so should the allocation for SLP services. In areas, like Labrador, where recruitment remains an ongoing issue, improved recruitment bonuses is a must. As well, improvements to remuneration (allowances) for all SLP’s across the province must be sought through collective bargaining. In the short-term, I would suggest that our employer create two full-time “substitute SLP’s” who could be used to replace your members who may be away from work for valid reasons (for extended periods), and could also be used to decrease caseloads for all current SLP’s.
My intention, if elected as President, is to inform the employer, parents/guardians, and the public as to the inadequacies that currently exist in SLP services for students, and by continuing my relationship with your SIC, we must set out a manageable plan for the future. I certainly do not claim to have all the expertise in this area, you can all supply that. However, I will have a voice, as President, and I intend to use that for the betterment of the professional lives of all NLTA members (regardless of their numbers within the Association.) We will be in this Together!
QUESTION 12 from Todd Fry
For years now, when teachers need time off to go on a vacation (many times their spouse cannot choose their time off to match a teacher’s schedule) it seems to be common to be denied leave without pay. Approval for leave without pay is always approved or denied much after it has been requested but booking flights and the like has to be done earlier. My question is what are the candidates’ plan is to deal with the issue. It seems the employer would rather deny the leave without pay and have a teacher use sick time. Then the employer has to pay the teacher and the sub, whereas if they just approve the leave, they will only have to pay one person for the same time period.
ANSWERS to Question 12
Thank you for your question.
Certainly, teachers are in a different situation than many people in other fields of employment in that there is a defined work year of 195 days, whereas most employees work approximately 250 days a year in Canada, however, they can take annual leave during almost any month of the year.
While it has always been challenging for teachers to take leave during instructional periods, they have always been entitled to ask for leave without pay and this never seemed to be an issue in the past.
Based on my reading of the Collective Agreement, it is my understanding the Board has the power to arbitrarily grant or deny an unpaid leave request based on what they deem to be valid reasons.
I have also heard that the Board is now evaluating unpaid leave requests through the lens of substitute teacher shortages, and as a result, they are choosing to deny most unpaid leave requests outright. If this is indeed true, then this is a significant problem because if teachers who want to be upfront and honest ask for leave without pay, but are simply denied, then the Board is creating a situation where teachers might be inclined to use a type of leave which is not intended to be used for holiday purposes.
As a candidate, while I cannot endorse teachers using other types of negotiated leave for reasons other than for what it was intended, I do see the dilemma teachers find themselves in when they wish to take unpaid leave.
I believe that in the immediate future, it is incumbent on the Association to raise this with the Board to see if they will be more flexible in granting unpaid leave requests. That said, the only way to address this issue in the long term is through collective bargaining.
Whether it will be possible to alter the wording of the Collective Agreement so that the granting of unpaid leave is automatic upon request may prove to be very challenging. Nevertheless, it may be possible to include specific criteria which would limit the reasons the Employer could use to deny a legitimate unpaid leave request and add transparency to the process which is lacking at the present time.
This is a clear instance of how we need to ensure that the employer understands the ramifications of such decisions on the retention of current employees.
Denying such applications for unpaid leave does nothing other than force our members to dip into their sick bank. Members willing to go unpaid for a leave of absence clearly are attempting to be honest and open with the employer, and this should be commended. If it is for the fact that there is a shortage of substitutes, then NLSchools is trading one problem for another, in that they will eventually lose good teachers to other teaching jurisdictions, or other career paths for a lack of flexibility.
Time and time again, government has offered us “gains” that would be financially advantageous to them, meaning gains that cost them nothing. This is one of these gains that if we can have added to the collective agreement, and convince them that it is in their best interest to have it there, for reasons as, like you said, it actually saves them money, then that needs to be our spin.
I would add that perhaps there would need to be a very clear timeline in place to alleviate stresses on substitutes, say having an application submitted or approved 30 or 60 days in advance for the employer to agree. But, if the proposal is sound in reasoning and backed by logic, then I feel there should be no reason for this to be ignored going forward.
One key point is this; as we all have learned time and time again, that unless we have this explicitly stated in our collective agreement, then there is no way to simply lobby the employer on this matter. Our lobbying has been nothing short of ineffective, and this has put even greater pressure on the collective bargaining process.
With regards to requests for unpaid leave, I believe that members should be provided with a response within a reasonable amount of time. One should not have to wait a lengthy amount of time to receive approval. That is certainly a discussion that I could have with the decision makers and it is something that could potentially be added to our Collective Agreement through negotiations. We have been successful in the past with having specific time frames in our agreement. Leaving members in a state of limbo can certainly take its toll on an individual and add to the ever-increasing stress that our members are already under.
Undoubtedly, it is likely easier to procure a substitute in a larger, more urban center than a smaller, more isolated community, but one shouldn’t be penalized because of this. I would hope that when such a request is made, that a sound rationale for the decision is provided.
To answer your question, I believe this is a topic best suited for the next Negotiating Team, provided it is brought up as a concern to the Collective Bargaining Committee.
Thank you.
I feel that the creation of “personal leave” would allow members the flexibility to use their accrued leave in situations that require us to be absent from work due to the unforeseen circumstances that can arise in our lives, but may never show up in a prescribed list of situations (as is the case with Family Leave) in our Collective Agreement.
With regards to members being denied “unpaid leave” by the employer, I can’t speak for their rationale. However, I will state that there shouldn’t be a double-standard in terms of giving approval for leaves based on the availability of a substitute. I know of many circumstances where leave has been granted to members involved in extracurricular activities, when no substitute was available, and internal coverage was necessary. If these types of leaves can be approved for the benefit of the social-emotional wellness of students (which I understand), shouldn’t unpaid leave requests also be approved for the sake of the social-emotional health of the employees?