p.8
Comi
NUIT BULLSHIT Like banging your
cs
head against a video installation, page 2
the newspaper
University of Toronto’s Independent Weekly
Vol. XXXII N0.
October 8, 2009
governing Council cancels board meetings While Canada’s largest university faces a 31 per cent decline in endowment, funding problems, and pressing student-life issues, its Governing Council has decided to postpone most of its fall 2009 meetings, citing “insufficient business.” The U of T Governing Council’s general meeting on Oct. 22 has been pushed to Dec. 10. Meetings of the Academic and University Affairs Boards, associated with the Council, have seen substantial delays. The Council is the university’s highest decision-making body. It consists of 50 members who, through numerous boards and sub-committees, plan everything from budget-allocation to academic policy.
When a Governing Council meeting is suspended, UofT adopts the policy of ‘Presidential Authority.’ Essentially, the delays ensure that most major decisions (at least until December) will be made directly by President David Naylor and his associates, and will not be up for public discussion. Under Bylaw 2, Section 11 of the University of Toronto Act of 1971, the Governing Council is allowed to postpone one of its meetings, given that this is declared four days in advance. This means that the Council’s recent actions fall completely within its legal rights. What makes many students uncomfortable, however, is the vague, and even undemocratic, fashion in which these actions have been carried out.
In July 2009, Council members received an email notice stating that, due to the results of an online poll, the general meeting would be held at the end of the fall term. The email was slim on any other details; only the term “insufficient business” was mentioned. Student Governor Joeita Gupta said she found its offhandedness disconcerting: “to have already decided in July that there will be nothing to discuss at the end of October is, suffice to say, somewhat absurd. Before student or faculty groups even had a chance to suggest possible topics for the agenda, the Council had already shut its doors.” Gupta voiced further concerns over the online poll on Continued on page 3
ALEX NURSALL
TeJas parasHer
ryerson radio’s dead air CUpe 3902 votes It has been over a year and a half since the turmoil at CKLN 88.1 FM began, but it looks like it won’t be over anytime soon. After broadcasting little more than archived programming and dead air for the past six months, the station is finally back live on-air after an emergency meeting in which the Board of Directors voted to resume live programming. The past couple of years have been tumultuous for the station. Starting in February 2008, a disgruntled group of volunteers and hosts tried to impeach the current management of the sta-
tion, including Station Manager Mike Phillips, who has been at the centre of the controversy surrounding the station. What followed was a rash of firings and lockouts of various volunteers and staff, including the hosts of a number of feminist and Afro-centric shows. For a year following the first firings of various hosts, around 50 volunteers were removed from their positions with little to no warning; many staff members resigned or were let go. Disgruntled ex-hosts, hoping to bring the station back to its previous stature, created a number of grassroots campaigns, bringing a fair amount of attention to
ALEX NURSALL
aLeX nUrsaLL
the station’s plight, including gaining support from a number of campus stations across the country, including CKUT, CHRY, CJUM, and CFRU. Even though the station has returned to live programming as of last month, there is still a myriad of problems that need to be sorted out if they plan to stay on-air in the future. In the past, CKLN faced a number of budgetary problems, which amounted to them being in the red for a number of years. During the fracas in 2008, the station was found to be deeply in the red, which resulted in an eventual lockout supposedly orchestrated by the RSU after the dismissal of Phillips. The full lockout of volunteers and staff began on March 11, 2009 after a notice was placed on the door by the administration stating that due to “security issues,” everyone was barred from the station. CKLN, which has been broadcasting archived programming and static since mid-March, is now back after a summer spent trying to get the station up and running again, but is still not out of the red. Past CKLN treasurer Peter Toh went on record about sizContinued on page 3
“yes” on strike
TyLer IrvIng Over the course of October 5 and 6, a strike vote was held by CUPE local 3902, Unit 3. Seventy per cent of respondents answered ‘yes’ to the question “I authorize the Executive Committee of CUPE 3902 to call a Strike in the event that all other reasonable efforts to arrive at a collective agreement are unsuccessful.” Unit 3 of CUPE 3902 represents sessional lecturers, as distinct from TAs and course instructors, which are represented by Unit 1. Typically, Unit 3 members have doctoral degrees and are contracted to teach for the university on a course-by-course basis. According to literature produced by CUPE 3902, sessional lecturers deliver just under 30 percent of undergraduate courses, and earn about $6,500 per half course, or approximately $15,000 per year. The union and the university began negotiations for a new contract in July after the previous one’s expiration. Agreement was reached on a number of peripheral issues, but as the weeks went by, it became clear that the two sides were far apart on issues such as job security. Currently,
sessional lecturers must reapply for each course they teach, which can be as frequently as every four to eight months. The union would like to see a system that guarantees a sessional lecturer three subsequent appointments with each contract, consistent with the current contract for TAs. By the end of August, progress was no longer being made, and both sides applied jointly for conciliation, which began on October 7. The union held the strike vote to demonstrate that its members are strongly in support of the proposed changes. Unit 3 representative Leslie Jermyn explained, “[We] will use a ‘yes’ vote to reiterate our commitment to improving our members’ working lives.” Both sides, however, are quick to point out that having a strike vote does not necessarily mean there will be a strike. “It is not at all unusual for a union to hold a strike vote,” said Vice-President of Human Resources Angela Hildyard, one of the university’s lead negotiators. “The university remains committed to reaching a responsive Continued on page 3