Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Page 1

Bro, do you even veg? Author and bodybuilder Robert Cheeke talks plantbased diets and bodybuilding lifestyle. >> Pg. 4

thegazette

1 1 2 1 81 47 1 3 1 0 Chakma received double 9 0 1 8 5 0 annual salary in 2014 9 3 9 2014 SALARIES OF TOP ADMINISTRATORS 7 4 7 9 3 2 0 5 4 3 4 9 1 2 0 7 Lost in the Arts & Humanities building since 1906

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2015

Iain Boekhoff EDITOR-IN-CHIEF @IainAtGazette

Western University President Amit Chakma received a cash payment last year — doubling his annual compensation — when he continued working instead of taking a year of administrative leave. This was met with a swift backlash from the community with over 2,700 signing a petition to hold a non-confidence vote in the University’s senate for both Chakma and the chair of the board of governors, Chirag Shah. Chakma’s salary was disclosed on Friday when Western released its full list of employees making over $100,000 a year as part of Ontario’s Sunshine List. His $924,000.04 salary disclosure for last year made headlines as it was double his annual salary. It also included a bonus of 10 per cent of his base salary — $44,000 — for performance indicators set by the board of governors and another $43,244.88 in taxable benefits. His total compensation last year made him the fourth highest paid public sector employee in Ontario. Chirag Shah, chair of the board of governors, explained the lump sum of cash was part of Chakma’s contract. He added that Chakma’s $440,000 annual salary has been frozen since the first year of his contract and will continue to be frozen for the duration of his second term as president, ending in 2019. Chakma accrues 2.4 months of administrative leave every year of his contract, which made him entitled to one year’s worth of leave at the expiry of his first five-year contract in June 2014. Shah said it was “mutually decided that it would be beneficial to the university” that Chakma would continue in an active leadership role over the past year. >> see SUNSHINE pg.2

WESTERN UNIVERSITY • CANADA’S ONLY DAILY STUDENT NEWSPAPER • FOUNDED 1906

TODAY high 5 low -3

TOMORROW high 6 low -6

VOLUME 108, ISSUE 95

President Amit Chakma $924,000.04 Provost Janice Deakin $343,000.08 Vice-president Operations & Resources Gitta Kulczycki $294,540 Vice-president External Kelly Cole $295,999.96 Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry Dean Dr. Michael Strong $462,125.92 Richard Ivey School of Business Robert Kennedy $441,499.84 Huron Principal Stephen McClatchie $239,192.04 Brescia Principal Colleen Hanycz $265,000.06 King’s Principal David Sylvester $253,035.10

Source: Public Sector Salary Disclosure 2015, Government of Ontario

>> TEAM SOPHIE VS. ELECTIONS COMMITTEE APPEAL

Elections committee grilled at hearing Rita Rahmati GAZETTE STAFF @uwogazette

The ongoing controversy surrounding the University Students’ Council’s presidential election came to a head on Sunday in an intense appeals board hearing where Team Sophie appealed the decision made by the elections committee to grant Team Litchfield 30 demerit points, one shy of automatic disqualification. The two main issues debated during the afternoon hearing were the Facebook post-campaigning and campaigning off-campus without proper consent violations by Team Litchfield. There were three parties

questioned by the seven member appeals board: Team Litchfield, Team Sophie and the elections committee. During USC president-elect Jack Litchfield’s opening statement, he mentioned that the allegations caused “significant damage to the reputations of those accused.” One of the central complaints of the appeal was post-campaigning online. On Facebook, Team Litchfield posted 21 times encouraging students to vote with a link attached to his platform. This was deemed post-campaigning and Team Litchfield was given 15 demerit points for all 21 posts, whereas Team Sophie received three

demerits for one post. “It’s very clear that there have been issues with candidates with the rules … clearly the rules are just up for different interpretations,” Jacob Kriszenfeld, governance officer, said. The second concern was off-campus campaigning in Luxe and Somerset Place apartment complexes. One confirmed door tag was posted at Luxe without the consent of the resident and this violation received three demerit points. Some members of the appeals board explored the possibility that this warranted trespassing, therefore violating municipal law. Litchfield said he did not condone members of his team breaking

the law. “We never intended to push the boundary between right and wrong,” Litchfield said. Team Litchfield printed 500 door tags and over 170 were placed at Somerset Place. These were hung without the consent of the building managers, who brought forth a complaint. None of the members of Team Litchfield at the hearing could account for the approximately 300 remaining door tags. It was discovered that the elections committee did not look into this during the initial decision. >> see APPEALS pg.3


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.