By Jim Wilson
I attended the school board candidates meeting in NDG this week. One of the candidates running on the Team Angela Mancini slate is former President of the Montreal Teachers Association (MTA) Ruth Rosenfield. Considering that she uses her union background as being a qualification to be a commissioner, I questioned her record of financial transparency as a union president.
I made following remarks at the public meeting. Firstly, that Ms Rosenfield used the union contingency funds to pay herself in one year $40,000 in overtime. Secondly, that she arranged for the same contingency fund to provide a member of the executive with an interest free loan. Ms. Rosenfield made no effort to deny these charges. Thirdly, despite some members demanding clarification of union spending, pointing out that documents provided [by the union] were incomplete, and amongst other things formally demanding to be given access to view the itemized Amex bills paid by the MTA dating back five years. Rosenfield’s view is that once the financial review is accepted at the annual general meeting, the books are closed and members are no longer entitled to access any information on previous years.
In a perverse manner, Rosenfield’s actions mirrors those of the school board, school taxes increase as enrollment falls , so as the number of teachers decreased, their dues increased to provide for higher MTA staff salaries and benefits. However, would this similarity of practices be considered as a good reason to elect her?
Former President of The Pearson Teachers Union
Ed’s Note: Those wishing to learn more about Team Angela Mancini candidate Ruth Rosenfield’s record as union President might want to consult the following articles:
- Keeping the Members in the Dark: On the MTA’s Growing Culture of Secrecy
- Ruth Rosenfield’s Attempt to Deny MTA Members Access to Financial Documents Must Be Rejected: An Open Letter to All MTA Members
- Forced Transfer and the MTA Hunger Games
- Ruth Rosenfield and the MTA Memory Hole
- Open Letter: MTA Members Should Vote ‘No’ on the MEPAF Referendum