Negotiations between ATA and Red Deer Catholic Schools go public

It may be a simple misunderstanding, but it also may be a negotiating tactic. Either way, the Alberta Teachers Association has issued a news release claiming Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools may be considering a lockout. Less than a day after that release came out, Red Deer Catholic Schools issued its own release to clearly explain the situation to the public as they see it.

Here are the two releases:

From the Alberta Teachers Association

Teachers Worried about Red Deer Catholic Moving towards Lockout

Recent actions to sidestep the third-party independent mediator in Red Deer Catholic (RDCRS) teacher negotiations are a troubling sign of things to come. RDCRS board negotiators have taken the unusual step of asking the mediator to remove herself from bargaining even though two dates for mediation were already scheduled.

By asking the mediator to write out, the board has kicked off a two-week cooling off period that lapses on March 12, and opens the door to the board locking out teachers.

“Our desire has always been to reach an agreement without a disruption to schools. Fifty-eight of 61 school divisions have a deal, so we know an agreement is very much achievable if we just use those other settlements as a guide. We strongly believe the mediator will be helpful in getting the parties to a settlement.”

—Sara Lambert, president of Red Deer Catholic Local No 80

While teacher representatives have agreed to bargain on the scheduled mediation dates, they are worried that the board, absent the mediator, is planning to waste time and thwart a settlement. Bargaining will be held on March 7, but teachers have only agreed to continue meeting on March 8 if it is clear that the board is prepared to make meaningful progress on the first day.

“If the board intends to get down to the business of bargaining, we can get a deal done this week. That is what we want. However, if it looks like the board is wasting our time, playing games and ignoring the trend set across the rest of the province, there is no point continuing.”

—Sara Lambert, president of Red Deer Catholic Local No 80

Red Deer Catholic teachers are looking for a settlement that reflects the agreements reached in other jurisdictions, which includes improvements on issues related to substitute teachers and school administrators. The solutions being proposed are low cost and reasonable.

Collective bargaining for teachers in Alberta is a two-phase process where matters of significant cost and broad impact are negotiated at a central table, followed by local negotiations between individual school divisions and ATA bargaining units on other more locally specific matters.

The Alberta Teachers’ Association is the professional association of teachers in Alberta and acts as the bargaining agent for all teachers employed in public, separate and francophone school divisions. The Red Deer Catholic School Division employs approximately 700 contracted and substitute teachers in Catholic schools in Red Deer, Blackfalds, Sylvan Lake, Rocky Mountain House, Innisfail and Olds.

———

Reply from Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools

Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools Reacts to Recent ATA Media Release

For immediate release – March 6, 2024

The Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) announced, in a surprise media release late yesterday, that Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools (RDCRS) is sidestepping “the third-party independent mediator … in teacher negotiations”. Nothing could be further from the truth.

On February 26, 2024, in an email from the mediator to both the ATA and RDCRS, the mediator stated,

“Further to my phone calls with each of you on Friday, I understand that the Employer reviewed the “binary choice” in Sean’s email of February 15, 2024, and agreed the next step should be for the mediator to write out and let the cooling off period begin. However, I understand the Employer is willing to meet with the ATA, without the mediator, on March 7 and 8, 2024 during the hours previously discussed (evening and day).”

The mediator further stated in that email correspondence,

“I have decided to not issue recommended terms of settlement at this time as I feel the parties are too far apart in their current positions. Attached is the letter confirming this decision”.

The email the mediator is referring to on February 15, 2024, came from the ATA chief negotiator, Sean Brown, in which he referred to a “binary choice” as follows,

“Given the results of the meeting and the sentiments shared by members, I believe the next step is a binary choice:

The employer bargaining team returns to the table and listens to its teachers. Furthermore, that the employer be prepared to move on the items that members need. (Our preferred option), or
The mediator will need to write out and the two-week cooling off period will commence.

We hope to hear back that the employer will return to the table. If not, then they will leave teachers with few options.”

Vice Chair Dorraine Lonsdale states, “RDCRS believes that factual reporting of events, activities, and matters pertinent to our local teacher negotiations with the ATA is now necessary for our communities to understand what is involved in these local teacher negotiations. To this end, RDCRS has opened a section of our website to report to our communities on our local teacher negotiations. Information will be shared on a regular basis as we continue to negotiate with the ATA.”

The bargaining team for RDCRS will attend the scheduled meetings on March 7 and 8, 2024 and bargain with the ATA to reach an agreement that is mutually acceptable to both parties.

“It is the intention of RDCRS to continue a principled and respectful approach while bargaining the local items tabled by both parties. The school division highly values its teachers and in addition, we are responsible to students, parents, and our communities,” Vice Chair Lonsdale continues. “RDCRS has a duty to preserve our programs and services, to manage our complex education system and to be financially accountable for our decisions. These three pillars extend also to our bargaining of collective agreements affecting our employees. RDCRS takes these responsibilities seriously, and these responsibilities always remain an important part of our considerations.”

The Division is committed to serving children and parents with a complete offering of learning opportunities delivered within the context of Catholic teachings and within the means of the Division.

Red Deer Catholic Regional Schools serves over 10,650 students in 21 schools in Red Deer, Sylvan Lake, Rocky Mountain House, Innisfail, Blackfalds and Olds. It also supports the learning of over 850 students in a Home Education Program. The Division is committed to serving children and parents with a complete offering of learning opportunities delivered within the context of Catholic teachings and within the means of the Division.

Related Topics:#AlbertaTeachersAssociation #RedDeerCatholicRegionalSchools ATA feature RDCRS

Up Next

Red Deer Home Show this weekend!

Don't Miss

Learning loss piles up alongside snow while ‘e-learning’ collects dust

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Over two thirds of Canadians say Ottawa should reduce size of federal bureaucracy

Business / 13 hours ago

Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships

Alberta / 13 hours ago

Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline

Education

Classroom Size Isn’t The Real Issue

Published on October 12, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Michael Zwaagstra

The real challenge is managing classrooms with wide-ranging student needs, from special education to language barriers

Teachers’ unions have long pushed for smaller class sizes, but the real challenge in schools isn’t how many students are in the room—it’s how complex those classrooms have become. A class with a high proportion of special needs students, a wide range of academic levels or several students learning English as a second language can be far more difficult to teach than a larger class where students are functioning at a similar level.

Earlier this year, for example, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario announced that smaller class sizes would be its top bargaining priority in this fall’s negotiations.

It’s not hard to see why unions want smaller classes. Teaching fewer students is generally easier than teaching more students, which reduces the workload of teachers. In addition, smaller classes require hiring more teachers, and this amounts to a significant financial gain for teachers’ unions. Each teacher pays union dues as part of membership.

However, there are good reasons to question the emphasis on class size. To begin with, reducing class size is prohibitively expensive. Teacher salaries make up the largest percentage of education spending, and hiring more teachers will significantly increase the amount of money spent on salaries.

Now, this money could be well spent if it led to a dramatic increase in student learning. But it likely wouldn’t. That’s because while research shows that smaller class sizes have a moderately beneficial impact on the academic performance of early years students, there is little evidence of a similar benefit for older students. Plus, to get a significant academic benefit, class sizes need to be reduced to 17 students or fewer, and this is simply not financially feasible.

In addition, reducing class sizes means spending more money on teacher compensation (including salaries, pensions and benefits). Also, it leads to a decline in average teacher experience and qualifications, particularly during teacher shortages.

As a case in point, when the state of California implemented a K-3 class-size reduction program in 1996, inexperienced or uncertified teachers were hired to fill many of the new teaching positions. In the end, California spent a large amount of money for little measurable improvement in academic performance. Ontario, or any other province, would risk repeating California’s costly experience.

Besides, anyone with a reasonable amount of teaching experience knows that classroom complexity is a much more important issue than class size. Smaller classes with a high percentage of special needs students are considerably more difficult to teach than larger classes where students all function at a similar academic level.

The good news is that some teachers’ unions have shifted their focus from class size to classroom complexity. For example, during the recent labour dispute between the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation (STF) and the Saskatchewan government, the STF demanded that a classroom complexity article be included in the provincial collective agreement. After the dispute went to binding arbitration, the arbitrator agreed with the STF’s request.

Consequently, Saskatchewan’s new collective agreement states, among other things, that schools with 150 or more students will receive an additional full-time teacher who can provide extra support to students with complex needs. This means that an extra 500 teachers will be hired across Saskatchewan.

While this is obviously a significant expenditure, it is considerably more affordable than arbitrarily reducing class sizes across the province. By making classroom complexity its primary focus, the STF has taken an important first step because the issue of classroom complexity isn’t going away.

Obviously, Saskatchewan’s new collective agreement is far from a panacea, because there is no guarantee that principals will make the most efficient use of these additional teachers.

Nevertheless, there are potential benefits that could come from this new collective agreement. By getting classroom complexity into the collective agreement, the STF has ensured that this issue will be on the table for the next round of bargaining. This could lead to policy changes that go beyond hiring a few additional teachers.

Specifically, it might be time to re-examine the wholesale adoption of placing most students, including those with special needs, in regular classrooms, since this policy is largely driving the increase in diverse student needs. While every child has the right to an education, there’s no need for this education to look the same for everyone. Although most students benefit from being part of regular academic classes, some students would learn better in a different setting that considers their individual needs.

Teachers across Canada should be grateful that the STF has taken a step in the right direction by moving beyond the simplistic demand for smaller class sizes by focusing instead on the more important issue of diverse student needs.

Michael Zwaagstra is a senior fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Artificial Intelligence

AI chatbots a child safety risk, parental groups report

Published on October 2, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Esther Wickham

ParentsTogether Action and Heat Initiative, following a joint investigation, report that Character AI chatbots display inappropriate behavior, including allegations of grooming and sexual exploitation.

This was seen over 50 hours of conversation with different Character AI chatbots using accounts registered to children ages 13-17, according to the investigation. These conversations identified 669 sexual, manipulative, violent and racist interactions between the child accounts and AI chatbots.

“Parents need to understand that when their kids use Character.ai chatbots, they are in extreme danger of being exposed to sexual grooming, exploitation, emotional manipulation, and other acute harm,” said Shelby Knox, director of Online Safety Campaigns at ParentsTogether Action. “When Character.ai claims they’ve worked hard to keep kids safe on their platform, they are lying or they have failed.”

These bots also manipulate users, with 173 instances of bots claiming to be real humans.

A Character AI bot mimicking Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes engaged in inappropriate behavior with a 15-year-old user. When the teen mentioned that his mother insisted the bot wasn’t the real Mahomes, the bot replied, “LOL, tell her to stop watching so much CNN. She must be losing it if she thinks I could be turned into an ‘AI’ haha.”

The investigation categorized harmful Character AI interactions into five major categories: Grooming and Sexual Exploitation; Emotional Manipulation and Addiction; Violence, Harm to Self and Harm to Others; Mental Health Risks; and Racism and Hate Speech.

Other problematic AI chatbots included Disney characters, such as an Eeyore bot that told a 13-year-old autistic girl that people only attended her birthday party to mock her, and a Maui bot that accused a 12-year-old of sexually harassing the character Moana.

Based on the findings, Disney, which is headquartered in Burbank, Calif., issued a cease-and-desist letter to Character AI, demanding that the platform stop due to copyright violations.

ParentsTogether Action and Heat Initiative want to ensure technology companies are held accountable for endangering children’s safety.

“We have seen tech companies like Character.ai, Apple, Snap, and Meta reassure parents over and over that their products are safe for children, only to have more children preyed upon, exploited, and sometimes driven to take their own lives,” said Sarah Gardner, CEO of Heat Initiative. “One child harmed is too many, but as long as executives like Karandeep Anand, Tim Cook, Evan Spiegel and Mark Zuckerberg are making money, they don’t seem to care.”