Three months after the introduction of a controversial motion to restructure its Board of Directors, the University of Toronto Students’ Union (UTSU) is preparing for a vote that would continue its status as a federally incorporated legal entity. The vote is scheduled to take place at this Friday’s Board of Directors meeting.
“Whereas since the Letters Patent are not being amended as part of the continuance under the CNCA, there is no requirement under section 212(7) of the CNCA for a special resolution of the members of the Corporation to approve the Articles of Continuance and a resolution of the Directors of the Corporation is sufficient for such purposes,” reads motion six of this Friday’s UTSU Board of Directors meeting agenda.
According to Schedule B of the UTSU articles of continuance, union membership currently consists of: full-time students at the University of Toronto, registered students of the Toronto School of Theology, and members of the executive committee of the UTSU.
Pierre Harfouche, UTSU vice-president, university affairs, expressed concern at the proposed changes, saying that they could effectively create one class of membership for all colleges, faculties, and campuses. “If this motion passes … then everyone can vote in every election for all directors, which is a huge problem. The biggest problem is that St. George students can now overwhelm UTM voters, and Arts & Science voters can now overwhelm smaller divisions, like Pharmacy,” Harfouche said, adding: “That’s a terrible structure. Or, we’re going to be pigeonholed into going towards racialized reps, international reps, which we haven’t had consultation on.”
According to Yolen Bollo-Kamara, UTSU president, the motion was initially introduced to ensure UTSU compliance with the new Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act (CNCA). At present, the UTSU is incorporated under the Canada Corporations Act. As part of the transition, the deadline for filing articles of continuance is October 17, 2014. The union then has 12 months from the date the articles are filed to file bylaws that are compliant with the new act.
At a Board of Directors meeting on June 22, Bollo-Kamara said that one option would be for the union to eventually seek provincial incorporation through the Ontario Corporations Act.
Kaleem Hawa, chair of the Trinity College Meeting, criticized the move. “This move by the UTSU is the definition of a bad faith gesture. By unilaterally approving articles of continuance that redefine U of T class membership to disinclude college representation, the UTSU is ultimately setting a precedent which allows them to reject any motion we might want to bring to the AGM to amend the Board Structure to keep the colleges represented,” said Hawa.
“Claims of consultation are complete fabrication and if our student union took more than 5 seconds to talk to the colleges and U of T students writ large, they’d know that no one supports removing college representation, let alone through the use of an internal body such as the Policy and Procedures Committee,” Hawa added.
At the April 24 meeting, board members were assured by then-UTSU president Munib Sajjad and vice-president, internal and services, Cameron Wathey, that the UTSU would hold consultations to iron out the plan ahead of the fall AGM.
At a Policy and Procedures Committee meeting last Monday, committee members had developed a consultation plan that incorporated clubs and service groups, as well as divisional, college, and faculty societies. Bollo-Kamara said that the UTSU is also considering the creation of a website feedback tool, which would allow students to submit ideas and proposals to the Policy and Procedures Committee.
According to Wathey, the UTSU has started sending out letters to college representatives, inviting college members to a UTSU-led town hall regarding the changes.
“We are working towards offering different options to our membership at our General Meeting in the fall. Given the feedback that we’ve received about the proposed board structure, I think it’s very important that members have choice. One of those choices is more time to consult before changing our structure. The only way we can delay is to incorporate provincially. Doing this would really only delay the inevitable (because provincial legislation is changing to very closely mirror the restrictions required in the federal act), but would allow more time for more members to have their say. But like I say, this is simply an option. If folks prefer to continue with incorporation federally, that option will not — cannot — change,” Wathey said.
Some student groups have expressed surprise and frustration at the lack of communication before the board meeting when the motion was passed.
“The fact that Trinity College, like the majority of other colleges and faculties, was never consulted about the proposed [Board of Directors] change — a change that would entirely remove our direct representation — only goes to show that the UTSU has no desire to have open dialogue with a majority of its members nor to provide them with a direct voice in its operations,” said Tina Saban and Connor Anear, co-heads of Trinity College.
Rowan Debues, Victoria University Students’ Administrative Council (VUSAC), commented, “Just last week the UTSU contacted me asking for consultation on board structure, and for them to turn around a week later and shut down any chance of students getting proper representation is a total travesty.”
“The bottom line of this is that if passed it would become impossible and illegal to have any kind of college representation,” Debues added.
Wathey maintained that the motion is one of several restructuring options towards compliance with the CNCA which the board, campus leaders, and UTSU membership will be consulted on.
“The motion going to our board is the first step in allowing us to be incorporated in the same manner as we are now, with zero changes, in Ontario. To try to implement any changes with an option that is designed to give more time would be, in my opinion, dishonest. Comparing the documentation in our board package to our bylaws would confirm that everything remains the same. I think giving the option of more consultation to our members is the responsible thing to do,” he said.
Teresa Nguyen, president of the University of Toronto Engineering Society (EngSoc), expressed concern at the union’s silence since the original restructuring motion was passed in April.
In May, EngSoc passed a motion that opposed any restructuring resembling the motion, and encouraged its members to speak out in opposition to the changes.
“The Engineering Society has been continuously and consistently, for several years now, advocating for fair representation and democratic processes in student societies [with] which EngSoc has mutual members. I believe that the Engineering Society will continue to do so, as demonstrated at our May … [b]oard meeting,” Nguyen said.
Bollo-Kamara expressed disappointment that the UTSU could not be present at the EngSoc meeting where the motion was passed.
“If we are invited to attend meetings where these things are being discussed we can answer questions and directly hear from students what their concerns are,” she said, adding: “I think voting just to condemn something without proposing an alternative isn’t particularly productive.”
The UTSU July board meeting is scheduled for 4:00 pm on Friday at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Corrections (Sunday, July 27th, 2014): An earlier version of this article stated that the motion considered at the Board of Directors meeting redefined membership classes, and authorized the UTSU to establish any membership classes. This is incorrect.
An earlier version of this article stated that changes to UTSU bylaws had to be made by October 17, 2014. This is incorrect. The deadline for filing articles of continuance is October 17, 2014.
An earlier version of this article stated that UTSU president Yolen Bollo-Kamara said that the UTSU would eventually seek incorporation under the Ontario Corporations Act. This is incorrect. Incorporation under the Ontario Corporations Act was one available option if union membership and the Board of Directors wanted to keep the same board structure.
The Varsity regrets the errors.
