Teachers and transparency

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 17/06/2025 (190 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The intricate dance of governance within any large organization relies heavily on established processes, clear lines of authority, and, crucially, mutual trust among its various bodies. A recent decision by the provincial council of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society (MTS) regarding the appointment of its executive director (ED) offers a critical lens through which to examine the profound consequences of potentially ill- or under-informed decisions, focusing not on personalities, but on the integrity of the process itself.

The MTS bylaws meticulously outline the framework for its operations. Key among them is the stipulation that the ED must be appointed by the provincial executive (PX), after the ED selection committee forwards a name for consideration.

In the spring, this ED selection committee carried out its mandate, recommending a candidate. PX voted against this individual. Confidentiality, understandably, shrouded the specific reasons and the name of the recommended candidate at this stage.

However, the narrative took an unexpected turn when, at the end of May, the provincial council voted to choose the very individual the ED selection committee had initially recommended, despite PX’s rejection. Neither the candidate’s name, nor PX’s rationale for rejection, were shared with provincial council. Only after this motion passed was the individual’s name officially shared.

This sequence of events raises significant questions about the robustness of the society’s governance and the potential for unintended consequences. When provincial council overrides a decision made by its PX, particularly one resulting from a carefully constructed selection process, it sparks questions about the level of confidence council places in the executive.

The provincial executive is elected by the council precisely to make critical decisions, to hold confidential information, and to act on behalf of the society’s broader interests between council sessions. A public overturning risks signaling internal disunity and undermining the roles and responsibilities defined within the society’s own foundational documents.

Making a decision of such magnitude — appointing the most important position in the Manitoba Teachers’ Society — without the full, official disclosure of the candidate’s name or the detailed rationale behind PX’s rejection, is inherently problematic. It suggests a decision potentially influenced by incomplete information, speculation, or external pressures rather than comprehensive due diligence.

Beyond the immediate implications for the PX, such actions can have a chilling effect on future volunteer engagement. Why would individuals seek election to the PX if their decisions, particularly on weighty matters like leadership appointments, are subject to reversal without public explanation of the rationale?

Why should teachers care? For teachers, the internal health and governance of their union are not abstract concepts; they directly impact their working lives and professional standing. A dysfunctional or opaque internal process within the MTS suggests a leadership potentially compromised by internal strife or questionable decision-making. This weakens the collective power of the union, affecting its ability to effectively advocate for members’ rights, working conditions, and professional development.

When the process for appointing the executive director — a role vital to the day-to-day operations and strategic direction of the society — is perceived as undermined, it directly impacts the confidence teachers can place in their own representative body.

Why should the public care? The public has a vested interest in the internal workings of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society because the actions of this union directly and significantly impact the quality and accessibility of public education. When a union’s internal dynamics lead to decisions that appear to prioritize internal politics over sound governance, it can hinder efforts to improve teaching practices and overall school performance.

Consider the ripple effects: a stable, well-governed union contributes to a stable educational environment, benefiting students. If the union’s leadership is compromised by a breakdown in process, it can affect its ability to make responsible decisions regarding public spending, teacher quality, and accountability.

MTS has an important role in shaping public education. Proper governance is not an internal affair, it is the pillar on which credibility and effectiveness stand. Furthermore, the public trusts the education system to uphold high standards; if the very body responsible for representing teachers operates without clear accountability and transparency, it erodes that trust. In essence, any powerful organization influencing public services, including a teacher’s union, must operate with the utmost integrity to serve the common good.

The recent decision by the provincial council serves as a critical moment for reflection. It underscores the vital importance of adhering to established governance structures, fostering transparency, and ensuring that all major decisions are made with full, informed consideration.

Sean Giesbrecht is a teacher-librarian and former MTS provincial executive member-at-large.