Dear Editor:
Re: Teachers Put Brakes on Program, Nov. 23 news story
It was with disappointment, but not surprise, that I read Martin Stuible's comments regarding the Fuel Your School program in the Nov. 23 edition of the North Shore listed as Local 44 on the British CNews. Representing the North Vancouver Teachers' Association, olumbia Teachers' Federation website, Mr. Stuible is quoted as saying that a big part of their "job action was to try and bring attention to the fact that our public education system is under funded." We, the public, were told, through myriad advertisements and sound bites by the BCTF, that the job action was all about bettering the education of the students.
Chevron is offering to do exactly that, namely give money towards the under funded (according to Mr. Stuible) education system, and he is recommending to his union members to turn it down. That implies that the strike was not so much about the kids, but more about politics and making the current government look bad. The Fuel Your School program website clearly states that there will be absolutely no advertising in the schools, nor is there anything on the website suggesting a requirement by teachers to promote Chevron in the classrooms.
Mr. Stuible is also quoted as saying that Chevron "is a big corporation which clearly, probably (sic) has ulterior motives." While Mr. Stuible's grasp of proper grammar in this quote may be tenuous at best, he is correct. Chevron is a "for profit" organization, and they have a duty to their shareholders. Could it just be possible that the "ulterior" benefit to which Mr. Stuible refers, is simply the hope that drivers will choose to fill up at Chevron instead of their competitors, knowing that, if they fill up at Chevron, some of the money being paid is going back into the community?
The vast majority of teachers are passionate about their work and many are frustrated about the limited resources available in order to do their job as well as they would like to do it. The prolonged teachers' strike last spring, summer and fall, which caused hardship to many teachers, students and parents, made it obvious that the government is not going to easily hand over more of the taxpayers money to the schools. So now we have a taxpayer in the community ready to step up and fill that void and the local chapter of the BCTF is advising its members not to accept it. Hopefully, Mr. Stuible's and the BCTF's views will prove to be inconsistent with those of the vast majority of teachers who really do have
the best interests of their students as their top priority when teaching. The BCTF should forget about politics and champion those that are willing to contribute to our education system without asking anything in return, other than the hope that consumers, which we all are, will choose to buy products from retailers that are giving back to the community over those that are not.
Jonathan J. Lazar
North Vancouver
