IN OO RO I -A CHANCE T O S$ P E A K Oo UT EE MEDIATION :‘ Ite Students Perspective n response to the coverage of the media- tion between the Faculty Association and the Administration, (Planet of the Arts, Dec. ’88 and Jan. ‘89), I would like to offer my perspective on the matter. I am the student who has “caused all the trouble” (according to the all too familiar blame-the-victim syndrome). I chose not to speak publicly sooner about the events for reasons of legality, as well as a personal desire to retain some degree of control and discretion until the outcome was determined. In addition, I do not feel compelled to disclose my personal identity, nor those of the others in- volved, for the issues here are ultimately more impor- tant than the individuals. I made an official complaint in writing (as verbal grievances haven’t amounted to much in terms of bureauc- tracy) and submitted it to both the Faculty Association and the Administration. In the letter I expressed concern regarding the inappropriate remarks made to me by a Faculty member. The initial remark had sexist and racist overtones; when I approached the instructor to clarify any possible misunderstanding, he verbally abused and insulted me again. (By the way I never had any kind of formal contact (classes, crits, etc.) with this instructor, so personal vindictiveness was definitely not my motive). I did what I had to do: I dared speak out against such blatant abuse, I braved the consequences (such as rumours and ostraciza- tion), and most importantly, I attempted to exercise my rights according to the Human Rights Act - and as a student. So, contrary to unfounded rumours that I “ran” to the Administration like some “cry baby”, I'd like to repeat that I addressed my concerns to both the Faculty Association and the Administration. When I expressed acute concern about not wanting to become a political pawn for the Administration, the Faculty Association President sympa- thetically informed me that I must respect “the process”. Apparently he was as caught in “‘the process” as I was. I’m disappointed to report that “the process” is extremely antagonistic and divisive and operates on an unenlightened “us-vs.-them” mentality. With the exception of a few brave instructors who came to my aid, I received very little real support from Faculty other than non-public utterances of sympathy in the hallways. It seemed to me that most people I spoke to from the Faculty had a skeptical sense of powerlessness in the face of “the process” - that is, very little faith in it’s ability to deal with such issues. In short, what happened is that instead of the issue of (pos- sible) sexual and racial discrimination being addressed and reviewed, I was caught between two highly antagonistic groups engaged in a power struggle. Each group has strong respective interests to defend, and in the midst of all this, I was unfairly branded, by some, as a “traitor” on the Administration’s “side”. I wasn’t on anybody’s “side” but my own; I wanted my voice, my complaint, to be taken seriously. The Planet of the Art’s coverage of the mediation is another clue of how this negative yet pervasive power struggle affects us as students. Although I have no doubt as to the good intentions of the writer, the facts were framed in a way which subtly favoured the Faculty member in question, without an overall examination of the focal issue at hand — again, that of (possible) racism and sexism. To be fair, I was not available to personally clarify and comment on the events; however, how easily we get side- tracked and caught up in their power struggle signals the necessity of regaining power where power is due — with us, the students. To set the record straight, my understanding is that the perceived racist-sexist remark could have been “ a mis- understanding”, but during the mediation it was found that indeed the instructor in question did behave abusively and extremely inappropriately. The records have not been cleared as implied in the Planet article of Jan. ’89. On the contrary, the instructor has a number of other complaints made against him by both students and other faculty STUDENT SULIETY REPORT Well, the spring thaw has set in, and once again the school populace panics as year-end and grad draw ever closer. In my three years at Emily Carr, I can’t recall ever seeing the school in more of a turmoil - wracked with more internal stress and dissent. I guess we expected more answers at the March 2nd Public Meeting of the Board. What began as a polite and obviously quite private back- patting party (Board members mumbled congratulations to each other, ignoring microphones and the unusually large public gallery), ended as a discouraging display of political indifference to an obviously concerned body of students, faculty and support staff. What do we do when questions are continually dodged? When valid points are continually swept under the carpet? Yes, Mr. Barkley and Mr. Campbell, this process works for a while. But what happens when you have more rubbish than carpet? Students made an impressive showing though - and more of the same at every Board meeting might make a difference. But for now we are at a crossroads. A number of people have asked me “what now?” Indeed, “What now?” Shaun Gleason Prez-Student Society lit members, and if there are any future complaints, these records will be used against him. He therefore did not “win” as I’ve heard it said. Racism and sexism are not win-or-lose issues; it is a process of attempting to assert a strong voice by those who have been historically and politically silenced. Hence, it’s not a simple matter of the Administration being heavy handed. When basic rights are threatened, people behave and react in ways based on defensive knee- jerk politics. And in light of the recent abrupt unexplained firing of Tom Kowall and Doug Weir, and the various other staff resignations, these are indeed precarious political times. We, as students, must demand that our needs be met first. It is no longer the time to take on a victim persona; we must fight to take back our intrinsic rights as students to be considered as the primary reason the instructors and the Administration are employed in the first place. This means growing up politically, as I certainly did during this nearly year-long process. The Faculty Association should set up an independ- ent internal committee to review such complaints and to establish its’ own disciplinary measures to ensure that Faculty Members are accountable for their behaviour. Obviously, since the Dean’s Committee was not utilized, it in itself is not sufficient. Student representation must also be a priority when investigative mechanisms are set up so that we have some direct say and control in how “the process” is handled. Neither the Administration, nor the Faculty Associa- tion, have to exert power and control over all us supposed underlings; it’s time to invert this hierarchy on it’s head ! We, as students, must resist being the victims of polarized politics. We have to analyze the political situation and organize to voice our concerns so that next time the real concerns of such a case don’t get lost in the power struggle which exists between the Faculty Association and the igi pita 5 (NAME WITHHELD BY REQUEST) The March 14th. Student Soci- ety meeting was attended by two Student Society Executives, the Foundation representative, a Planet reporter, and six concerned 3rd. year Graphic Design students. This unusually large turnout was due toa specifically unpleasant incident of concern to all. The Graphic Design students, who had held a pub night March 10th. to raise money for their upcoming class trip to San Francisco, were anxious to see justice done regarding nearly $200.00 lost during their pub night through the circulation of 124 false beer tickets. At the Student Society meeting the Foundation representative stepped forward and presented a letter of apology, in which he admitted the scam to have been a spontaneous and drunken act of boyish stupidity. He and several friends had left the school during the pub night and returned shortly with a roll of tickets the same colour and style as those being sold to monitor beer purchases that night. The Foundation rep nobly ac- cepted soleresponsibility for the fraud, and emphasized that none of the other Student Society Executives were in any way responsible for the ticket fraud. He further promised to personally compensate the Graphic Design stu- dents for the revenue lost due to the ticket scam. This repayment will not come from Student Society funds. Rumours which had begun to circulate concerning past pub nights - losing money were dispelled at this meeting. Lack of organization was cited as the real reason previous pubs had shown little if any profit. When well organized, a pub night can earn approximately $450.00, as the Graphic Design students proved. The final result of the meeting was that the Graphic Design students accepted the apology, and the Founda- tion rep resigned from his position on Student Society. Unless someone comes forward there will be no Foun- dation rep for the remainder of this semester. It should be noted that while one person accepted full responsibility for the ticket fraud, anyone who enjoyed “free” beer that night, thereby robbing their fellow students, should be ashamed of themselves. Joe Reportage -A MEDIATION: ( She Students t ) nn response tothe coverage ofthe media- tion between the Faculty Assocation and the Adminstration, Planet ofthe Ars, Dec. ’88 and Jan. '89), 1 would lke to ‘offer my perspective on the matter. Tam ‘the student who has “caused al the trouble” (aceording ‘to the all to famillar blame-the-victm syndrome). T ‘chose not to speak publicly sooner about the events for reasons of legality, as well as a personal desire to retain some degree of control and discretion until the outcome ‘was determined. In addition, I do not feel compelled to disclose my personal Identity, nor those of the others in- volved, forthe issues here are ultimately more impor- tant than the individuals, made an official complaint in writing (s verbal grievances haven't amounted to mich in tems of bureauc- ‘acy) and submited ito both the Faculty Association and the Adminisation. Inthe ltr I expressed concem ‘regarding the inappropriate remarks mado to me by a Faculty member. The intial remark had sexist and racist overtones; when I approached the instractor to clarify any possible misunderstanding, he verbally abused and insulted sme again. (By the way [never had any kind of formal contact (classes, eis, et.) with his instructor, so personal vindictiveness was definitely not my motive). Tid what 1 had to do: I dared speak out against such blatant abuse, I braved the consequences (such as rumours and ostaciza- tion), and most importantly, I attempted to exercise my rights according to the Human Rights Act - and asa student. So, contrary to unfounded rumours that "ran tothe ‘Administration like some “ery baby”, I'd like to repeat that addressed my concems o both the Faculty Association and the Administration. When I expressed acute concer shout not wanting to become a politial pawn for the ‘Administration, the Faulty Association President sympa: thetcally informed me that must respect “the process”. “Apparently he was as eaught in “the process” as I was. CHANCE TO EE 1'm disappointed to repor that “the process” is ‘extremely antagonistic and divisive and operates on an ‘unenlightened “us-vs.-them mentality. With the exception of few brave instructors who came to my ai received ‘very ltl real support from Faculty other than non-poblic Uteranes of sympathy in the hallways. It seemed to me ‘that most people I spoke to from the Faclty had a skeptical sense of powerlessness in the face of “the process” thats, ‘very litle faith in it's ability to deal with such issues. In shor, what happened i that instead ofthe issue of (pos- sible) sexual and racial discrimination being addressed and reviewed, I was caught between two highly antagonistic groups engaged ina power struggle. Exch group has strong respective interests to defend, and in the midst of all his, I ‘was unfily branded, by some, as a "wrator”on the i “side™ I wasnt on anybody's “side” but wanted my Voice, my complain, tobe taken ‘The Planet of the An's coverage of the mediation is, ‘nother clue of how this negative yet pervasive power struggle affects us as students. Although Thave no doubt as to the good intentions ofthe writer, the facts were framed ‘na way which sublly favoured the Faculty member in ‘question, without an overall examination of the focal issue athand — again, that of (possible) racism and sexism. To be fair, Lwas not available to personally clarify and ‘comment onthe events; however, hw easily we get side tracked and caught up in their power struggle signals the necessity of regaining power where power is due — with us, the students. ‘To set the record suaight, my understanding is that the perceived racist sexist remark could have been "a mi “understanding”, but during the mediation it was found th indeed the instructor in question did behave abusvely and ‘extremely inappropriately. The records have not been cleared a implied in the Planet article of Jan. "89. On the contrary, the instractor has a numberof other complains ‘made against him by both students and other faculty SPEAK out Devspective members, and if there are any future compen, these records willbe used against him, He therefore dd not “win” a I've heard it said, Racism and sexism are not win-or-lose issues; it isa process of atempting to assert a strong Voice by those who have been historically and politically silenced. Hence, it's nota simple mater of the Administration ng heavy handed, When basi right ae threatened, people behave and react in ways based on defensive knee jerk politics. And in ight of the recent abropt unexplained firing of Tom Kowall and Doug Weir, and the various other staff resignations, thse ae indeed precarious political times. We, as students, must demand tat our needs be met first. Its no longer the time to take ona victim persona; ‘we must fight wo take back our intnsi rights as students to ‘be considered asthe primary reason the instructors andthe ‘Administration are employed in the first place. This means ‘rowing up poliealy, as I ersinly did during this nearly ‘year-long process ‘The Faculty Associaton should set up an independ ent internal committe to review such complains and to establish its’ own disciplinary measures to ensure that Faculty Members are accountable for their behaviour. ‘Obviously, since the Dean's Committee was not ulized it in itself is not sufficient. Student representation must also be priority when investigative mechanisms are setup 0 that we have some direct say and control in how “the process” is handled. Neither the Administration, nor the Faculty Associa- tion, have to exert power and control overall us supposed. underlings; ts time wo invert this hierarchy on it's head! ‘We, as students, must resist being the victims of polarized politics. We have 1 analyze the political situation and ‘organize to voice our eoncers so that net time the real ‘concems of such a case don't get lost inthe power struggle ‘hich exists between the Faculty Associaton andthe ‘Administration. STUDENT sOCiETY REPORT ‘Wel, the spring thaw has set in, and once again the school poplace panics as year-end and grad draw ever closer. Inmy thre years at Emily Carr, I cant recall ever ‘seeing the school in more of a turmoil - wracked with more internal stress and dissent. I guess we expected more answers atthe March 2nd Public Meeting ofthe Board. ‘What began as polite and obviously quite private back- patting party Board members mumbled congratulations to ‘each other, ignoring microphones and the unusually large ‘public gallery), ended asa discouraging display of politcal indifference to an obviously concemed body of studens, faculty and support staff. What do we do when questions are continually dodged? When valid point are continually ‘swept under the carpet? Yes, Mr. Barkley and Mr. ‘Campbell this process works for a while. But what ‘happens when you have more rubbish than carpet? ‘Snudents made an impressive showing though - and ‘more ofthe same at every Board meeting might make a difference. But fornow we areata crossroads. A number of people have asked me “what now?” Indeed, "What now?” BEER NGAN ‘The March 14th. Student Soci- ety meeting was attended by two Student Soclety Executives, the ‘drunken act of boyish stupid snd several friends had left the school during the pub night and remmed y. He had shown litle if any profit. When well organized, a pub night can ear pproximately$450.00, asthe Graphic Foundation representative,a Planet shorly with aollof tickets the same Design students proved. reporter,andsixconcerned3rd.year colour and style as those being sold to ‘The final result of the meeting Graphle Design students. This monitor beer purchases that night. was thatthe Graphic Design stodents ‘unusually large turnout was dueton specifically unpleasant Incident of concern tall. "The GraphicDesignstodents, who tna eld a pub night March 10th. to ‘The Foundation rep nobly 2c- cepted soleresponsibility forthe fraud, and emphasized that none ofthe other Smdent Society Executives were in ‘ny way responsible forthe ticket fraud. sccepted the apology, and the Founda- tion rep resigned from his position on Student Society. Unless. someone ‘comes forward there will be no Foun- dation rep for the remainder of this ‘ise money for their upcoming class He further promised to personally ee tripto SenPranciso, were anxious to compensate the Graphic Design st- should be noted that while one see justice done regarding nearly dents for the revenue lost due to the person accepted full responsibility for $200.00 lost during thei pub night ticket scam. This repayment will not the ticket fraud, anyone who enjoyed through the circulation of 124 false come from Student Society funds. “free” beer that ight, thereby robbing beer tickets, At the Student Society Rumours which had begun to their fellow students, should be ‘meeting the Foundation representative circulate conceming past pub nights _ashamed of themselves. stepped forward and resented aletter losing money were dispelled at this ‘of epology in which he admitted the meeting. Lack of organization was, Joe Reportage ‘seam to have been a spontaneous and ited as the eal reason previous pubs