THE STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW
VoLUME
2, IssuE 4 •
}ANUARY
23, 2001 . www. 1aw.utoronto.ca/ultravires
Phillips to Donate Raise $25,000 to fund criminology research BY LoRI STEIN Professor Jim Phillips, a critic of recent pay in· creases at the Faculty of Law, has made a committment to donate $25,000 to boost graduate work in Criminology at U ofT The Gniversiry matched Phillips' donation for a total of$50,000, which cr~ated the John Beattie Research Fund in Nowmhcr. The donation is payahie over two years, and the amount is approximate ro Phillips' sh:~re of the s:~bry increase which the Law Faculty lobbied for this fall. Although Ph1lltps ha, not publicized his donation, UV became aware ofthe endowment from a source outside the law school. P~1llips explained, "when I got this money, I prelerred not to benctlt from what I thought was an inappropriate increase." He said he thought it was wrong for law faculty to so distance themselves from the majority of their colleagues in the university. Phillip~ also thought all professors should be properly remunerated, and that salary increases should be sought through the Faculty li·,.......,~" t
x:i
The. Law FolUes cast of"Cdebriry Law & Order": 0-A:ft 10 right) Vilwn- Hohou, l.nuisejames, Rob ~Rochcs,l.M Vateh. Dave Patacahk, 'KaTm Segal, Sudit Ranade, PannindeT BraT, Brenda Did)k, Claire Hunter. FOT rev~a~~. see page \0.
tion. ~~~~~~
In addotion, Phillips d isputed hmh <•frhc mam
reasons advanced ro justify the pay increase. First, he found the argument that U ofT had to com· pete with elite American law schools or risk a mass southern migration of its professors "not empirically true." (As he pointed out in a letter to UV in October, only one U ofT professor has moved to the United States for financial reasons, and that was a number oi years ago.) Phillips does not begrudge any of his colleagues who chose to keep their pay increases. When asked if he was 'making a statement' by donating his raise, Phillips replied, "I suppose everything you do makes a statement. I'm certainly making a statement about the appropriateness of the salary increase. And I'm making a statement about John Beattie."
Please see "Criminology", page 5
INSIDE • • • • • • •
Law Games Report, p2 Insight: Why do DLS?, p4 Mental Health Feature, p6,7 Judge disappoint_s first,year, p8 The 2000 SCC Awards, p9 Review of The Associates, p11 !'lot,So,Real UV News, pl2
Faculty and students express concerns over rush ed process BY NoAH GITTERMAN Ronald Daniels was reappointed to another six· year term as Dean of the Faculty of Law amid serious concern over the procedure used by the Search Committee that recommended the reappomtment. Some students and faculty complained vigorously that not enough nonce or nme was given for students to make substantive submis· sions to the committee. "There was definitely a problem with the proc· ess," said Anna Maria DiStasio, Students' Law Society President and student repre.sentative on the committee. "We had a whole selection ofstu· dent letters saying this is ridiculous, we need more time." The concerns over nming came to a head at the second-last meeting of the committee on Dec. 8. Oi Stasio argued that the last meeting should be moved mto january, in order to allow students to compile submissions over the winter break. A majority of the committee rejected her pleas. Although the deliberations are confidential, Oi Stasio was able to explain in a memo to students that the committee felt that •the aura of the proc· ess will be tarnished" if there was any delay in recommending ~eappointment. Vice-PreSident
and Provost Adel Sedra, who was also chair of che committee, expanded in broad terms on r:his rea.o;onmg. "The concern about delays was based on not sending the message that che comminee was uncertain about its course," Sedra said. "The com· mittee didn't want to :;end any ~ignals that would be interpreted negativelr." Several committee memlxrs and members of the law school community did not feel that this was an adequate response to the student con· cems. "By pushing it through the way they did- that is what tarnished the process," said Professor Hudson Janisch, a faculty member on the com· mittee. "Moving it mm January... would have made the process a reality." Oi Stasio also did not accept the reasoning. "Regardless of the outcome, is it wise to continue to conclude the committee's work without get· ting a chance to hear what students have to say, and with leaving them with a bitter taste in their mouths?" she said. "It implies !that) student con· cems are not a prionry for the committee." Sedra was adamant that there were no major procedural problems, and that enough input was gathered from all concerned parties.
"M~· job \I11S to make sure char cht• procedure followed wa< fair and clean, and I thmk 1r "<1'," he said. "'Xi: ha\·e allow~d a \'Cry reasonable amount of time w everyone concerned." Student concerns a rose out of a combmation of notice and riming issues. There was an original understanding that rhe last meeung of the com· mince was scheduled for January. When the December submissions deadline was announced, Di Stasio put a notice in Head notes cxrlaming that while students should strive m meet that date, 1t might be possible that the committee would re· ceive submissions up unul the new year. Shortly afrer that announcement, however. the final meet· ing was officially scheduled for Ol-e. 20. This came right at the end of the busiest time of year for students. "When 1t came down to do the ana)y,is {at the committee meeting) we d1d not have any sub,tantive submissioru from student~." 0. Stasio smd. Sedra believes, however, that the amount of input in thi> search wa comparable with others done around the University, p!.linting to student involvement through their repre.sentanves on the comnunee.