Administrative changes across all of U of T have made it necessary for the Faculty of Arts and Science to amend its bylaws and constitution to comply with new guidelines. This is similar to how the University of Toronto Students’ Union (UTSU) must restructure its Board of Directors in order to become compliant with the Canada-Non-For-Profit Corporations Act (CNCA). However, both organizations have approached reform in completely different ways.
The Arts & Science Council, which is the faculty’s governing body, has addressed the need for regulatory compliance separately from discussing any substantial changes. The council appointed a body to review the existing constitution and recommend changes, which were presented to the Agenda Committee. That committee immediately separated the only two substantive changes from the rest of what was suggested, and decided to put them to the council in a format that would make it possible to consider the substantive issues separately from the pro forma ones.
By comparison, the UTSU used the opportunity presented by the CNCA to overhaul its structure. CFS-backed executives proposed replacing college representation on the board of directors with a series of constituency representatives who would be elected by a confusing array of groups around campus, from First Nations to varsity athletes.
Meanwhile, the UTSU has been locked in an ongoing battle with many of the smaller colleges and faculties on campus, as these constituencies’ previous calls for fee diversion remain unresolved. Critics, such as myself, see UTSU’s tactic as little more than a ploy to abolish its opponent’s representation by gerrymandering dissenters into larger groups of supporters.
Other faculties then blocked the changes from moving forward at the UTSU Annual General Meeting, a one-time event, with very low attendance. The ongoing struggle threatens to lead to the dissolution of the UTSU as an organization through non-compliance with Canadian law.
Meanwhile, moderate students around campus have worked to break the logjam. Most recently, engineering director Ryan Gomes, as well as fellow students Natalie Petra and Nish Chankar held a public meeting to solicit proposals that might be mutually acceptable to all parties. Discussion at this meeting, and other events throughout the year, has made clear that another catastrophic result of the CFS executives’ action is a lack of clarity.
Discussion must center on what approach to take to a board structure — basically, how students should be electing directors, and how to compromise to comply with the law. The result of this, and the absence of professional advice, means that many substantive ideas must be thrown out for legal reasons, and potential technical solutions are deemed unacceptable, because they would require sacrifices from angry parties.
If CFS backed executives had consulted with students about whether to adopt pro forma changes that would assure legal compliance before beginning the political process, the union would not be in danger of dissolution. This would also allow a clear and productive conversation to take place around campus about how to organize the union rather than causing the mad struggle now taking place.
The results of this academic year show examples of both responsible and incompetent governance at this university — hopefully the UTSU can learn from others.
Jeffrey Schulman is a second-year student at Trinity College studying classics.
