This is a blog posting I published at www.blackburnnews.com and www.981freefm.ca this week under my banner of Morning News Anchor. It just offers a little peek into something that can go on behind the scenes.
I was accused of bias in an online news posting this week, not an accusation I take lightly. 
Several writers (all teachers) said they felt the use of the term “job action” to describe their refusal to supervise extra-curricular activities was inflammatory and one-sided. I used the term on air and in the story I posted online.
A quick check of stories posted by The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, CTV and other news outlets showed they all assessed the situation the same way and used the term “job action” to describe teachers’ response to Bill 115 that imposes a new contract on them. That contract means a 2-year wage freeze and it removes their right to strike.
Many teachers I’ve heard speak about their displeasure say the right to strike is the major issue. The teachers who wrote to me said they didn’t feel that any involvement with the extra-curriculars was part of their job and therefore pulling out of them isn’t job action.
I disagree and so do my colleagues across the country.
If you assume a duty it becomes your job. If someone counts on you to, say, lead a football practice every Tuesday and Thursday, then it’s your job. If you stop doing it because of a dispute with your employer, it’s job action. Referring to it that way does not assume to take a side. I welcome differing opinions and listener input but it was insulting to even level that accusation. I can only assume that, to be fair, The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, CTV and others all received the same complaint.
I agree! If you make a commitment to supervise an extra-curricular activity, then that or any similar activity becomes part of your job function based on a pattern of behavior and thus the withdrawal of said commitment a job action.