By Sarun Balaranjan, Contributor
Note: Sarun Balaranjan is a member of the Board of Directors for OPIRG.
Before I begin, I must acknowledge my conflict of interest as a member of the Board of Directors for OPIRG. This year has been troubling for OPIRG in many respects. The Student Choice Initiative forced us to terminate all of our staff. The new Board of Directors had almost no prior experience with OPIRG. Oh, and the McMaster Students Union decided to threaten our very existence.
OPIRG McMaster is a unique group on campus in that it is not a service provided by the MSU, but the MSU plays a role in the process of funnelling our annual budget from students. Because we are autonomous from the MSU, we are able to provide a platform for students who want to engage in activism that the MSU may not condone, potentially for bureaucratic reasons. We are currently supporting new groups like Divest McMaster, a student-run initiative aiming to push McMaster administration to sell the investments tied up in the extraction of fossil fuels through McMaster University’s endowment fund. A group like Divest McMaster would likely have no clear place in advocacy through the MSU, since intuitively, the MSU would protect the interests of the university. By putting OPIRG McMaster to referendum and potentially defunding this organization, the MSU is limiting the extent of student activism.
On Nov. 29, 2019, the Student Representative Assembly proposed sending OPIRG to referendum. A major reason was that we were spending too much money on staffing and administration. Granted, this was fair given the preliminary budget received by the finance committee showed that roughly 87 per cent of our funds were allocated towards staffing and administrative costs. However, upon receiving our opt-out rates, we updated our budget to reflect that only a reasonable 30 per cent of our costs would be allocated towards staffing. Despite this change, the MSU continued to cite this 87 per cent figure in proceeding OPIRG referendum documents.
On Feb. 9, The board of directors were brought in a second time to delegate on the topic of being sent to referendum on the grounds of bylaw infractions. By this time, the previously cited staffing cost issues were pushed into the background in favour of bylaw infractions. At this point, it was clear that the MSU had an agenda to push and that moving goalposts was well within their capacity. One of the broken bylaws cited by the MSU was a late budget submission. Yes, we were four days late in submitting our budget, but we had only received the opt-out numbers near the end of September with an Oct. 15 due date. In addition, our treasurer, the primary point of contact with the MSU, had been taken out of commission with serious personal issues and we were still negotiating with our Union regarding budgeting limitations. Some leniency would have been appreciated in receiving our updated budget, but we admit that there were communication issues due to these external circumstances.
In terms of the other infractions, the associate vice-president (Finance) and their committee ruled, without any consultation with the SRA, that we broke Bylaw 5, article 3.1.2 on financial transparency. Some of these bylaws are fairly vague in phrasing and describe only general tenets that must be followed. I would like to remind you that, originally, the vote to send us to referendum passed by only two votes. On Feb. 23, we returned to delegate to the SRA in the hopes of reconsidering the motion to send OPIRG to referendum on Feb. 9. The motion to reconsider the original referendum decision had seven SRA members in favour, nine members opposed, and the final six members abstained. The ambiguity and uncertainty in the room was palpable each time. It seems inherently unjust that this decision on a bylaw violation was determined by a small subset of the elected body that is supposed to prioritize student interests.
Democracy is a process. The continual reforming, reshaping and restructuring of practices are based on a common understanding of what works and what fails society. A major issue ingrained in democracy is that democratic leaders need flashy campaigns for upward mobility. Sure, whoever spearheads this movement gets to say on their resume that they managed to create “tangible corrective action” against a “financially opaque group.” Or, maybe on their next election platform, they get to flex themselves as proponents of financial transparency. Again, maybe the SRA should provide their own input as to what constitutes a bylaw violation, rather than leave it in the hands of a small, potentially biased group to act as arbiters.
We as a board are deeply aware of the importance of student choice. This is why we advertise students’ choices so that students can opt out of our fees should they feel that they want to. A referendum sounds like the MSU is putting power back into the hands of the students, but, in reality, the opportunity is being provided for the majority of McMaster students to take a platform of free speech and social justice away from a marginalized minority. Even if the majority of students do not believe in the value of OPIRG, the organization remains an important outlet of free speech and support for alienated students who want to engage in activism.
The punishment that has been carried out doesn’t quite reflect the crime.
September 2019 marked the first of possibly many registration periods in which students could opt-out of student union fees deemed non-essential. This change, instituted by the Government of Ontario in January 2019, is part of the widely criticised Student Choice Initiative. In the past, McMaster’s student union fees for all clubs and services have been mandatory. Non-essential fees range from a few dollars, like the $1 fee for Mac Farmstands or $2 for Horizons, to $13.72 for CFMU 93.3FM or $17.50 for Campus Events. As early as January, student groups have feared the worst and prepared for the inevitable cuts.
Nearly two months after the SCI was introduced, the impact on students and the MSU isn’t entirely clear. Despite other universities having already released comprehensive opt-out rates to their university’s student unions, McMaster’s registrar’s office still hasn’t released final numbers. According to Alex Johnston, the MSU’s vice-president (finance), an official breakdown won’t be released until registration is finalized. The final registration numbers have yet to be disclosed by the university.
As a result of the Student Choice Initiative, many aspects of what the MSU offers to students will become financially optional between September. 12-20. The MSU encourages students to #ChooseStudentLife. Learn more about how your money is spent at: https://t.co/GdcabjjSMF. pic.twitter.com/EOvrhnB3bY
— McMaster Students Union (MSU) (@MSU_McMaster) September 10, 2019
What we do know is that students opted out of services at a rate of roughly 32 per cent of across non-essential fees. These fees include services such as campus events, Shinerama and Mac Farmstand. How this 32 per cent rate translates into absolute dollar losses for the MSU is unclear, and Johnston says it’s difficult to speculate. Throughout the opt-out period, Johnston states that the MSU prioritized transparency. For example, the MSU created a “Choose Student Life” page to encourage undergraduate students to learn about the MSU services and fee breakdown before opting out.
“We did communicate that this could lead to the potential for a pay-for-service model or a reduction of overall services or just reduction in service operations. So those are things we did communicate. Where we actually end up going right now, again I think it’s a little too soon to tell,” said Johnston.
Despite the MSU’s focus on transparency, some felt that the MSU could have done more.
Ed, a part-time manager of a student service deemed non-essential that asked not to be identified, said that they were displeased with the MSU’s communication leading up to and throughout the SCI implementation.
“Communication has been fraught. Everytime I would bring it up I would receive a ‘we don’t know for sure yet’. And then no follow ups,” said Ed.
Daniel, another PTM who asked not to be identified, felt that work they had previously done to improve their service’s finances hadn’t been taken into consideration. They felt that the MSU should have encourage more discussion about SCI leading before the opt-out period.
“I knew for the majority of my role finances are important … which is why I made a lot of changes … I don’t want to say they weren’t willing to have that conversation really early, but I kind of wish we had that conversation early,” said Daniel.
As for faculty societies, whose fees were also deemed non-essential, the SCI’s impact is unclear.
Madeleine Raad, the McMaster social sciences society president, said that the society is being careful about spending, although the alumni society has stepped up to fill their funding gaps.
“From my understanding, the social sciences opt-out was not as high per say maybe other faculties I might have heard of. However our fee is one of the lower fees, our fee is $16,” said Raad.
Although it may be too soon to see the long term impact of the SCI, changes are already being made to non-essential services.
To prepare for the possibility of high opt-out rates, all MSU services were asked by the executive board to make pre-emptive cuts to their operating budgets for the 2019-2020 school year
“[We] cut back on things most companies cut back on which is promotions … The last thing you want to cut back on are salaries and wages and actual staffing positions,” said Sandeep Bhandari, the campus radio station’s administrative director.
In the Oct. 20, 2019 SRA meeting, Johnston gave a report on audited statements from the MSU’s 2018-2019 fiscal year. While optimistic, the numbers reflected deficits across the MSU. Johnson mentioned that the Underground, the Silhouette, and 1280 bar and grill all had large deficits and outlined plans for improving finances going forward. Johnston also said that the MSU is soliciting proposals from an external consultant to assist with financial changes the MSU will need to make going forward as the SCI becomes an annual affair.
“If we continue the way we’re going, we’re going to deplete our operating funds in two years. So that’s obviously not sustainable so we need to make some changes going forward,” said Johnston.
Johnston also reported that the MSU’s executive board, comprised of full-time staff and SRA members, had also made decisions that impact part-time services. The Executive Board has decided to push back the hiring of PTMs for Macycle and Farmstand into 2020, although they are traditionally hired in the fall. Johnston said this decision was made to buy the MSU more time to figure out a financial plan going forward. While this is a temporary push-back, there are still worries that the PTMs will be expected to participate in the hiring process after their terms without pay or be cut out of the important process it entirely.
“This is a discussion that happened in close session … but we did decide to delay the hiring for Farmstand and Macycle. Typically those part time managers are hired … but due to the fact that we don’t have final opt-in numbers yet we did decide to delay their hiring so we could re-evaluate then move onwards,” said Johnston.
The executive board also made the decision to pause all operations for the Creating Leadership Amongst Youth conference for the 2020 year. Typically CLAY happens in May, but this year will be the exception.
“We did decide to put a hold on operations for CLAY 2020 just because we couldn’t delay the hiring and then have the part-time manager start later because the conference just couldn’t function,” said Johnston.
Johnston says these decisions are a part of the MSU’s efforts to develop a strategy to make the union more sustainable going forward. The long term impacts of the SCI are unclear, but the MSU is doing what it can to adapt, including expanding The Grind in an attempt to alleviate 1280’s running deficit and hiring a full complement of staff for the Underground so it can operate at full capacity.
A big concern for most non-essential service employees was job security.
James Tennant, CFMU program director, and Bhandari stressed the importance of student radio, especially for student staff who can’t get these unique experiential learning opportunities elsewhere.
“We do have a very small staff compared to some other services on campus. But it’s definitely a concern, and it’s the last thing we would want to do … Because they’re valuable to us and the experience they get in the positions is valuable to the students,” said Tennant.
Bhandari said, “It’s been said for many years it’s giving a voice to those who don’t otherwise have access to the airways. And that is the nature of campus community radio across the country.”
Daniel also reflected on the SCI. He expressed dismay that his efforts to improve his service’s financials weren’t headed leading up to the SCI implementation, despite clearly outlining ways the service could improve financially going forward in the wake of the SCI.
Ed wished that there had been a bigger push over the months leading up to the opt-out period, not just during it.
“SCI’s really bad but the MSU’s attitude of not talking about it makes everything worse,” said Ed.
Ed also had hoped for solidarity amongst all MSU services, not just advocacy from the ones impacted. He felt like nearly enough people weren’t talking about it.
Indeed, when Sandy Shaw, MPP for Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, visited campus in February 2019 to talk about the provincial policies impacting students, the MSU gave her a tour of the PCC, Maccess and WGEN—three services deemed essential and therefore not at risk of being impacted by the SCI.
Despite criticism of the SCI’s rollout and MSU advocacy efforts, many PTMs are are just worried for the future of their services.
Daniel said, “Thats been the biggest impact of SCI: emotionally. The worry for the future of the service.”
Ed said, “If my service doesn’t run its going to affect the people who volunteer for me and it’s going to affect all those people who use my service regularly.”
“I’m sad because I don’t want my service to die,” said Ed.
With the SCI mandated for the next two years, with possibility for renewal, the long-term implications could be dire. Without a clear path forward, part-time student staff, volunteers and services users are left to worry for what is to come. MSU advocacy may have mitigated what could have been worse opt-out numbers, but future efforts will be essential to keep services afloat.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
On Nov. 21, the Ontario Divisional Court struck down the Student Choice Initiative, a controversial directive introduced by the provincial government which required universities and colleges to allow students to opt-out of student fees deemed “non-essential.” Three judges unanimously ruled that the government did not have the legal authority to interfere with the autonomous and democratic decision-making process between universities and student unions.
On Jan. 17, 2019, Ontario’s Ministry of Colleges and Universities publicly announced the SCI alongside a series of changes to post secondary funding, including cuts to the Ontario Student Assistance Program. When students were given the opportunity to opt-out in September 2019, services deemed non-essential such as food banks, student societies and campus media became vulnerable to funding cuts.
On May 24, the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario and the York Federation of Students launched a joint legal challenge against the provincial government’s SCI directive, claiming that the SCI was unlawful, proposed in bad faith and carried out in a way that was procedurally unfair. On the basis of the legality of the SCI, the Divisional Court of Ontario ruled in favour of CFS-O and YFS on Nov. 21.
The legal document explaining the judges’ decision cites previous Supreme Court rulings, which concluded that, while universities are regulated and funded by the government, “it by no means follows, however, that universities are organs of government … The fact is that each of the universities has its own governing body … The government thus has no legal power to control the universities even if it wished to do so.”
"Student unions can confidently budget again ... For students to access the services of their student unions" - CFSO Rep https://t.co/c3XO2R6LOZ
— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) November 22, 2019
The Ontario government attempted to defend themselves by arguing that the SCI was a “core policy decision” not subject to judicial review, and that they were exercising their prerogative power over spending decisions. However, the Court’s legal documents state that, “with the exception of narrowly defined powers in the MTCU [Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities] Act, policy-making and governance authority over a university is vested in its [university’s] Boards of Governors and Senates.”
THE DECISION
The Divisional Court found that by interfering with the agreement between student unions and universities, the SCI posed a threat to universities’ autonomy from the government.
Louis Century, an associate at Goldblatt Partners and lawyer for the CFS-O, sees the decision as proof of the importance of student unions.
“I would hope that student unions would read this decision as an affirmation of the central role that they play on campuses. That was a core part of the Court’s decision, is recognizing that . . . they’re actually core to what happens on campuses at universities, so much so that the government overriding their affairs is overriding the autonomy of the university generally,” he said.
“I would hope that student unions would read this decision as an affirmation of the central role that they play on campuses. That was a core part of the Court’s decision, is recognizing that . . . they’re actually core to what happens on campuses at universities, so much so that the government overriding their affairs is overriding the autonomy of the university generally,” said Louis Century, an associate at Goldblatt Partners and lawyer for the CFS-O.
The YFS and CFS-O also argued that the government had implemented the SCI in bad faith, on the basis of a politically-motivated attack on student unions. While the Court heard this evidence, it did not end up being a factor in determining the legality of the SCI.
In a fundraising email sent to the Conservative party in February, Premier Doug Ford wrote, “Students were forced into unions and forced to pay for those unions. I think we all know what kind of crazy Marxist nonsense student unions get up to. So, we fixed that. Student union fees are now opt-in.”
Kayla Weiler, the National Executive Representative of the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario, believes that the SCI was about silencing the organizations critical of the Ford government that advocate on behalf of students.
“This was never about choice. It was always about the Ford government trying to silence the exact bodies that hold them accountable and challenge them to do better,” Weiler stated during a press conference on Nov. 22.
“This was never about choice. It was always about the Ford government trying to silence the exact bodies that hold them accountable and challenge them to do better,” Weiler stated during a press conference on Nov. 22.
Since its introduction, the SCI has been widely criticized. Student union representatives have argued that, while the purpose of the SCI was to allow students to decide where their money would go, student unions already have democratic procedures in place that allow students to decide which services to fund. At McMaster, for example, undergraduate students have the opportunity to vote on fees during annual general meetings, referenda and other processes.
Weiler believes that the implementation of the SCI was to question the validity of student unions as valid democracies and valid organizations.
“It’s about time for the government to recognize us as autonomous organizations. . .What we want is to be recognized as autonomous organizations that fight for student rights, and we don’t want to have government interference into our budgets or the work that we do and we don’t want the Premier to comment on the fact that we are crazy Marxists. What we want is legislation that protects us and not hurt us,” said Weiler.
“It’s important for these conversations to be held in a particular campus because Doug Ford is not a student in 2019. The Minister of Colleges and Universities is not a student in 2019 at Algoma University or the University of Windsor or George Brown College, so why are they making decisions for the students on these campuses?”
WHAT HAPPENS NOW?
Unless the decision is successfully appealed, the fee structure for student unions will return to normal.
“Any legal requirements that existed before this case was brought are now restored,” said Century.
The MSU, however, will not implement the results of the Court’s decision until the appeal period closes.
“Until we have the appeal period, and until we have that final decision, we do need to operate in the most financially stable way, which is assuming that those agreements are still in place,” said MSU president Josh Marando.
“Until we have the appeal period, and until we have that final decision, we do need to operate in the most financially stable way, which is assuming that those agreements are still in place,” said MSU president Josh Marando.
If the decision is upheld in Court, the results of the SCI will still be felt at universities and colleges across the province. Some Ontario student unions had to cut entire jobs and services this year as a result of SCI.
MSU general manager John McGowan pointed out that McMaster was lucky to be able to rely on reserve funds this year. However, student services have still felt the impact. With their budgets uncertain, services have had to hold off on hiring and long-term planning.
Furthermore, the MSU dedicated resources towards implementing the SCI and educating students about the process.
“There has been quite a bit of time and energy put into creating the fees, educating students on what those fees look like, as well as making sure that we're compliant with the framework and the new tuition and ancillary fee framework,” said Marando.
If the SCI decision is upheld in court, it will mean that an unlawful directive caused harm to campus services and student unions. Chris Glover, the MPP for Spadina–Fort York and the Ontario New Democratic Party’s postsecondary critic, noted that many campus services are currently struggling financially as a result of the SCI. Glover called on Ford to reimburse student services for the losses they incurred under SCI.
“I really think that the government should step up … Their actions were unlawful and now students are suffering, campus services are suffering, and the government should make up for this shortfall, Doug Ford should make up for this shortfall,” said Glover during a press conference.
If the student fee structure that existed before the SCI is restored, it is unclear how services and clubs whose funds have been negatively impacted may be compensated, if at all. Both CFS-O and YFS representatives emphasized that, at the very least, the Court’s decision should be a lesson as to the importance of engaging with and protecting the democratic processes at all universities and colleges.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
