EDMONTON — Premier Danielle Smith is making a public appeal to Alberta teachers: call off the looming province-wide strike and return to the bargaining table. In a recent social media post, Smith reiterated her government’s willingness to negotiate—and framed the proposed deal as a solid foundation for compromise.
Smith’s post states:
“We all want a fair agreement that teachers can support. Teachers, parents, and students deserve stability.”
She goes on to note that on two separate occasions, union leadership backed agreements that Teachers did not ratify, which included:
✅ 12–17 % salary increase
✅ 3,000 new teachers to reduce class sizes
✅ 1,500 educational assistants to support teachers
She urged the Alberta Teachers’ Association leadership to “engage with teachers, determine what supports they need, and come back to the bargaining table so we can get a deal that keeps kids in the classroom.”
Smith’s intervention comes amid high tensions in the education sector. After the latest offer from the government was overwhelmingly rejected, teachers appear poised to strike beginning October 6.
The Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) responded by challenging the notion that the government’s proposals were sufficient. According to ATA President Jason Schilling, the latest offer’s figures do not meaningfully address systemic issues such as class size caps and inflationary wage erosion. He has described the rejection of the offer—by 89.5 % of members—as a clear signal that teachers expect more.
Among teachers and supporters, Smith’s call is being viewed as tone-setting but insufficient. Many argue that the crisis in public education is deeper than incremental wage increases and hiring pledges. Some point out that previous agreements backed by union leadership were rejected by the teaching rank and file precisely because they were viewed as inadequate or lacking enforceable structural commitments (e.g., class size limits).
Smith’s appeal seeks to cast the government’s position as reasonable and responsible. By invoking teacher leadership’s past ratification failures, she positions the ATA leadership as a potential impediment to progress. Her argument implicitly frames the teachers’ strike not as a refusal to negotiate, but as a failure of internal union consensus.
However, the political risk is high: if the strike proceeds, Smith will face pressure from parents, media, and opposition parties who view educational disruption as unacceptable. Her government has already signaled contingency measures like “DIY curriculum kits” for home schooling and $30-a-day payments to parents.
With no new formal bargaining sessions scheduled, the standoff rests on whether either side shifts their public posture. Teachers are prepared to walk out; Smith is trying to prevent the strike from taking root.
If negotiations are to resume, Smith’s public appeal may be the opening salvo. But many observers doubt that rhetoric alone can bridge the divide—unless the government is ready to revise or expand its offer meaningfully.
About the Author
