Dear Members,
Below and attached please find a joint letter to Board Chair Kate Chisholm from NASA President Elizabeth Johannson and myself in response to the Board of Governor's decision earlier today to disregard a recommended motion from the General Faculties Council.
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Board Chair Chisholm,
As the unions representing academic and support staff at the University of Alberta, AASUA and NASA have always been staunch defenders of the academic ideal of collegial governance. Our bicameral structure ensures that decisions about academic oversight, programs, and structures are arrived at through careful debate and deliberation by academics themselves through the General Faculties Council. The role of the Board of Governors has historically been to make decisions with regard to the University’s administrative and management budgets and structures, but to defer to the recommendations of GFC on academic matters.
We were dismayed and disappointed, therefore, at the board’s decision to disregard the GFC recommendation of a college model that would function collegially and without the imposition of anything resembling an Executive Dean or an additional layer of academic administration. The board’s adoption of a college model that creates a position called “college dean” is a direct contradiction of the spirit of GFC’s recommendation—a recommendation that was arrived at after careful and extensive consideration, deliberation, and debate—and an affront to the principle of collegial governance.
We are especially concerned by the repeated assertion by numerous members of the Board of Governors that, because of their experience in the corporate sector, they have a better sense of what will serve the academic mission of the university than do the members of GFC. Members of GFC are immersed daily in supporting and delivering the university’s academic programs and research, and are in a better position than anyone else to determine what models and structures will best facilitate and enable academic excellence across campus.
The University of Alberta is an institution of higher learning and advanced research in the public interest, not a corporation whose goal is the maximization of profit and share value. That public interest mission demands an understanding of teaching, learning, research, and collegiality that goes far beyond the standard top-down hierarchical models of the corporate sector. This decision by the board marks a significant step backward in that sense.
Finally, we express our assertion once again that to create and fund three new high-level and highly paid senior leadership positions at a time when the university is eliminating an estimated 1,100 frontline positions in the name of cost savings sends a very negative message about who and what the university’s leadership and governors support and value. Despite President Flanagan’s assertion at the start of today’s meeting, there has been no evidence presented to the University of Alberta community that a model with Executive or College Deans will yield more savings than one without them. This decision, therefore, can only be understood as an ideological preference for upper-level leadership positions than for positions on the frontlines of teaching, research, and support.
We call on the Board of Governors to reconsider its decision, respect collegial governance and bi-cameral decision-making, and approve the recommendation sent to it by the General Faculties Council.
Sincerely,
[original signed]
Elizabeth Johannson Ricardo Acuña
NASA President AASUA President
10 Comments
Great letter Ricardo and Elizabeth. I wonder if using the term "democracy" in conjunction with "collegial governance" might help. We are familiar with what collegial governance means but I suspect few outside academe do (I sure didn't) and think it has something to with being nice, or inclusive, or considerate. But, we are talking about a democratic governance system where the members have rights and responsibilities to contribute to decision making. Just as in the democracy people are more familiar with, we are engaged citizens. The university is a model of democracy in action. It is messy but many voices are heard - not just the hierarchical leaders. Of course, few businesses run that way - but our society does and should. Thank you to everyone who is fighting to keep our democracy.
Thank you both, Ricardo and Elizabeth, for this letter. Is there a possibility for writing an op ed for the Edmonton Journal?
Hear, hear! This is an outrageous decision and an affront to democratic process and autonomy.
This seems worth walking out over. Why do we even have a General Faculties Council?
Kathleen Lowrey At the very least, a stringent work to rule.
Thank you Ricardo and Elizabeth. I spent half of my vacation day observing the Board of Governors' meeting, and was equally entertained and affronted by their inability to follow Roberts' Rules, how uninformed many were regarding how universities operate, and the disdain some apparently held for academics. Some BoG members needed to be advised that deans are already accountable for fiscal and academic matters, that collegial governance works and can work quickly (as the past few weeks have demonstrated), and that deans are peers, not bosses. Primus inter pares seems to be a concept many of the BoG would benefit from learning. It was not entertaining to watch attempts to amend in a few minutes, GFC's motions which were themselves the result of months of extensive and (latterly) democratic deliberation, and shocking to see thinly veiled attempts to gainsay the recommendations of GFC and micromanage the responsibilities of the President and Provost. It was embarrassing to think that this BoG are the people charged with management, government and control of the university buildings and land (per PSLA sections 16-19). I am grateful that you have written on our behalf.
Perhaps it's time we abandoned the idea of collegial governance. It clearly isn't holding the BoG and the university administration back, it relying on it may constrain our own ability to act. It seems clear to me that, if collegial governance ever meant anything, it was really only a convention that we are powerless to enforce. (Walking out is something we can do, but I think that would certainly indicate we have left collegial governance behind).
I disagree that we live in a democracy, but that's beside the point: what is to the point is that the neoliberal restructuring of higher education is not "coming" or "in process"; it has already been completed. Perhaps we would be better off embracing our status as a trade union rather than a faculty association. Certainly the BoG and administration are happy to treat us as labour; we should respond by leaving collegial governance behind and treating them as what they are - management.
I'm still shocked and speechless at the act of the Board of Governors. After months of thinking, discussing, analyzing, and coming up with ideas a compromise was struck in the democratic General Faculties Council only to have it overturned in a few short orders by people who don't even know that much about universities to begin with. This is an outrage.
And this is the completely misleading spin that the president of the U of A put on it: "I want to thank the members of both General Faculties Council and the Board of Governors for wrestling with these critical and difficult questions. This week, we witnessed our community making challenging decisions with respect and collegiality." As faculty have pointed out, the decision was in no way respectful and in no way collegial. It was simply bulldozed through by force.
And this is Kate Chisholm's spin on it. According to her, the whole process was a shining example of democracy from A to Z lol. That is, if "democracy" means that in the end those in power get their way.
"The important decisions made this week reflect well on the U of A’s very strong governance. GFC heard the Administration’s recommendation but elected, after diligent and careful deliberation, to amend it. The Board of Governors then heard and carefully considered GFC’s recommendations but amended one of them. This is exactly the process envisioned in the Post- Secondary Learning Act and it allowed us to arrive at a structure that will enable collegiality within the colleges while also ensuring that we can meet our budget milestones. Now, we can move on to working together to build a strong future."