Category: Other

Lessons from the CAUT New Activists Workshop

Elise Lepage, FAUW Board member
On November 24, I attended the Canadian Association of University Teachers’ New Activists Workshop in Ottawa on behalf of FAUW. This was the second edition of this day-long workshop and it was well attended by more than 40 colleagues representing universities from coast to coast. I found it both well- thought-out and structured, and yet just open enough for effective and meaningful discussions to happen.
The workshop started with an open discussion to identify the challenges faced by post-secondary education. The list was long and it appears that despite the major differences in terms of size, location, and mission of each university, all of us share very similar concerns.
We summed this list of concerns up in four keywords: austerity, solidarity, equity, and (lack of) collegial governance. Groups were formed around these major topics to further the discussion, and offer some strategies.
Another keyword that came up in all the discussions was indigenization, and it appears that Canadian universities are at very different stages in this process. Good practices have to be shared. CAUT offered its support in facilitating this academic culture shift.
[Editor’s note: University Affairs has a good overview of indigenization efforts across Canada (and criticisms of such), and the University of Regina offers 100 ways to Indigenize and decolonize academic programs and courses (PDF).]
There were also hands-on sessions in which we developed communication and organizational skills such as writing a grievance or a press release, or producing awareness-raising materials such as posters and videos.

Overall, it was a very useful and informative workshop, and I am looking forward to sharing and applying some of these ideas and skills in my work with FAUW.

The Hagey Lecture Perspective: 2003

The Hagey lectures are the University of Waterloo’s premier invitational public lecture series. Since 1970, outstanding individuals, who have distinguished themselves internationally in some area of scholarly or creative endeavour have given talks intended to challenge, stimulate and enrich not only the faculty, staff and students of the University of Waterloo, but all members of this community.

These annual lectures are co-sponsored by the Faculty Association and the university.

This is the third post in a series on past Hagey Lectures from a few years ago – we just found the unpublished draft and thought we’d share it with you. Stay tuned for an announcement soon about the next lecture, coming up in March 2017.

Atom Egoyan Hagey Lecture PosterBetween the last flight of the Concorde and a lunar eclipse, the Theatre of the Humanities was graced with the presence of Academy Award nominated director Atom Egoyan, who took the stage to discuss his latest film, Ararat, in a lecture titled Poetic License and the Incarnation of History. The film is about the 1915 slaughter of Turkey’s Armenian minority, an atrocity that is still officially denied by the Turkish government. Seamlessly shifting back and forth through time, Ararat explores how history – both personal and political – can inspire a legacy of uncertainty and insecurity (Canadian Encyclopedia). The film was awarded Best Film on Human Rights by the Political Film Society of Hollywood and the Freedom of Expression Award from the National Board of Review in New York.

With a body of work that has been critically acclaimed at the Cannes Film Festival, the Grand Prix, and the Toronto International Film Festival, Egoyan has also been recognized as a great Canadian storyteller at home, being awarded the Order of Canada in 1999. His most well-known films include Calendar, Exotica, The Sweet Hereafter, and more recently, Chloe. His art installations have gained similar recognition, including works completed for the Irish Museum of Modern Art in Dublin, the Venice Biennale and Le Frenoy in France.

During the colloquium held in the Theatre of Arts in the Modern Languages building, Egoyan discussed his work and answered questions from students, including aspiring directors and filmmakers at UW. It was a privilege to host a lecture from such a great Canadian filmmaker, a man whose star is still rising.

Lecturers Survey Report Released

FAUW’s Lecturers Committee has just released its final report on the results of last year’s survey of all lecturers at Waterloo.

The Lecturers Committee advises the FAUW Board on the development and revision of University policies pertaining to Lecturers. In November 2015, the committee sent a survey to the 180 lecturers of UW to capture the diversity of their working conditions. The response rate was impressively high (83%), and the respondents also shared copious comments which are extremely valuable to this portrait of lecturers across campus.

The survey results cover five main topics:

  1. Questions about terms of appointment gathered data on length of employment at Waterloo; the ratio of research, teaching, and service; and the possibility of promotion.
  2. Comparing teaching loads can prove to be challenging given the diversity of disciplines taught at Waterloo. The report highlights that lecturers are being tasked with a wide range of teaching loads.
  3. 70% of lecturers teach in all three terms. Lecturers are entitled to take one out of every six terms as a non-teaching term, yet only one-third of lecturers have ever had a non-teaching term. As for the others, it seems that the possibility, the conditions, and the perception of requesting a non-teaching term are not clear.
  4. There is also a lack of clarity around what is expected of lecturers in terms of service roles. The survey demonstrates great involvement of lecturers in their units, but uncertainty about their eligibility for a number of roles.
  5. The suggested options for new titles to replace the terms “Lecturer” and “Continuing Lecturer.” The preferred set of titles was Assistant Professor / Associate Professor / Professor, Teaching Stream.

The Committee shared some highlights of this report at FAUW’s Fall General Meeting in 2015. This final report synthesizes additional comments from the respondents in these five areas, and also on topics not covered in the survey, such as short-term and “less-a-day” contracts, respect for lecturers among other faculty, and compensation.

The full report is available on the FAUW website.

FAUW is very grateful to the Lecturers Committee for this insightful report.

Sexual Violence Policy Update

Sally Gunz, FAUW President

A number of you will have been following issues relating to the new policy on sexual violence (Policy 42). The province has mandated that all Ontario universities have sexual violence policies in place by January 1, 2017. There is no flexibility in terms of the date. The draft presented at the last Senate meeting was the work of PACE (Provost’s Advisory Committee on Equity) and was headed by the university equity officer, Mahejabeen Ebrahim.

FAUW is supportive of this initiative and very grateful for all PACE’s hard work. Our concerns in no way are a reflection of the effort and contribution of all involved in creating the current draft. Rather, and put quite simply, developing and approving a fully working policy and procedures within the timeline imposed by the government was a near impossible task. The Policy 33 (Ethical Behavior) revision committee has been grappling with closely related issues for a lengthy period and has still not managed to propose a workable process.

The policy itself was approved by the Board of Governors on October 25th and FAUW was supportive. FAUW and others argued for the delay of the accompanying procedures/protocols because the current version had elements with which we could not agree.

FAUW’s concerns

Our most immediate concerns involve aspects that relate to potential disciplinary investigations and measures against faculty members, as these touch directly upon the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA). We need to ensure that these are handled in a way that is fully consistent with the principles of natural justice.

From FAUW’s perspective, it is undoubtedly very important (and legally necessary) that the university provide an environment whereby any person who has suffered trauma of any kind receive the quickest and most appropriate support and care.

It is also undoubtedly very important (and legally necessary) that anyone – staff, student, or faculty – who might be implicated as a perpetrator of that trauma has a right to all the protections of a sound disciplinary process. The consequences can be very serious for alleged perpetrators including exclusion from the university and dismissal. It is the responsibility of everyone helping draft these policies and procedures to get this balance right and FAUW is committed to working with others to achieve this.

We also have members with substantial expertise in areas relating to equity and sexual violence who have expressed concern about the proposal to handle sexual harassment in a manner that is distinct from other forms of sexual violence.

Next steps

We were provided with clear assurances by the administration – and these were repeated at Senate and the Board of Governors meeting – and on this basis were prepared to provide support for the policy itself.

The sexual violence response coordinator position created in the policy will be independent of other units of campus, report directly to the provost and be housed in Health Services. Investigations will be conducted by people external to the university.

We are working to get the protocols/procedures ready for approval by the Board of Governors in early December. A complete review of both the policy and procedures will begin January 1, 2017, so that the issues that we (and others) have raised can be addressed. At this time there will be an opportunity to ensure close coordination with the Policy 33 revision committee and likely FAUW will have to consider some changes to existing disciplinary procedures in the MoA. All of these proposals are positive and we look forward to reporting more on them as things progress.

Putting a Face on Contract Faculty Members: A Recent Study

Guest post by Kate Lawson for CAUT’s Fair Employment Week

Most of us would agree that academic jobs should be good jobs. But many of us have little knowledge of the real working conditions and academic background of contract faculty members, colleagues who are also known as “sessionals” or “part-timers.”

A recently published study by C.C. Field and G.A. Jones from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) provides much-needed data about who contract faculty are at Ontario universities.

If you think that “sessionals” teach “part-time” by choice, that they lack a terminal degree, do not engage in research, or teach “on the side” because they have a full-time job elsewhere, then you are thinking of what Field and Jones call classic sessionals. In their study, classics sessionals comprise 24.8% of those surveyed.

By contrast, 61.3% of contract faculty are what they term precarious sessionals who rely on their income from instructional work.

Field and Jones state that they use “the term ‘precarious’ for two reasons: first, many are working full-time equivalent workloads (when courses are available) on a semester-by semester basis, with little or no job security; and second, these sessionals are likely to be either hopeful or disillusioned with the idea of having a full-time permanent career in the academy.”

So who are the “precarious sessionals,” according to Field and Jones?

  • They are likely to be female (60.2%); 
  • They are likely to hold a PhD (70.94%); 
  • They are likely to work on short-term contracts of less than 6 months (53.9%); 
  • They are likely to aspire to a full-time position with benefits in the academy. 

Do “precarious sessionals” work part-time?

  • many are working full-time equivalent hours and course loads; 
  • 63.1% teach an average at least two or more courses per semester in the winter/fall.

Is the “precarious sessional” pool a transient one?

  • Field and Jones report: “One of the most surprising findings is that sessional faculty are not as transient a group as one might have anticipated. In fact, over 15% of our sample have been working for more than 15 years as a sessional instructor. Only 12.6% of respondents reported that they had worked one year or less, with 26.12% having between 2 and 4 years of experience, and 26.8% having between 5 and 8 years of experience. Those with 9 to 14 years of experience make up the final 17.8%. Roughly one-third of all respondents had 9 or more years of experience as a sessional instructor.” 

Do “precarious sessionals” engage in research?

  • 37% are pursuing an active program of research, even though research is typically unremunerated. 

What are the effects on individuals of short-term contract work?

  • 89% find short-term contractual employment to be a source of considerable personal strain (compared with only 29% of classic sessional faculty). 

What do contract faculty earn through teaching on a sessional, part-time, or contract basis?

  • roughly 45% of sessional faculty earn less than $19,930 (the Low-income measure after tax);
  • 25.6% earn between $19,930 and $39,999; 
  • 17.3% report a middle-class income of between $40,000 and $79,999; 
  • 2.6% of respondents earn more than $80,000
Field and Jones’ study also provides a lot of useful suggestions for department chairs at places such as UW. For example, in order to help improve the working conditions for contract faculty, chairs can try to ensure that they have:

  • Contracts issued well in advance of the teaching term; 
  • Timely access to learning management systems, photocopiers, the library, and professional development opportunities; 
  • Private office space so that contract faculty can meet students; 
  • A stable email address; 
  • Invitations to department meetings; and 
  • Supplies such as whiteboard markers, paper, and letterhead. 
If you care about the quality of higher education in Ontario, you should care about the working conditions of contract faculty members. I urge you to read the study in its entirety.

Field, C. C. & Jones, G.A. (2016). A Survey of Sessional Faculty in Ontario Publicly-Funded Universities. Toronto: Centre for the Study of Canadian and International Higher Education, OISE-University of Toronto.

City of Waterloo Neighbourhood Strategy Consultations

The City of Waterloo is developing a neighbourhood strategy and is looking for faculty to participate.


What do you love about Waterloo neighbourhoods? What are your great ideas for making Waterloo neighbourhoods even better? 

The city is looking for 12 faculty members to join a discussion and share their vision for even stronger, more connected neighbourhoods in Waterloo! 
October 17, 12:00 p.m. to 1:20 p.m. in Needles Hall, room 3043. 
The City of Waterloo will welcome the first 12 people to RSVP to Janet at neighbourhoods@waterloo.ca.
Please bring a bag lunch, coffee and cookies will be provided. 

Faculty Performance Evaluations To Get an Overhaul

The University of Waterloo is presently considering amending the Memorandum of Agreement to change the way in which faculty members are evaluated. While discussion of student evaluation of teaching abounds in the academic community, faculty performance evaluation has so far received little attention in comparison.
In this context, UW brings a substantive but positive proposal to cut performance evaluations for tenured and continuing faculty back to only every other year, and increases the transparency of the review process. Pre-tenure and definite term faculty members will still submit activity reports and receive feedback every year.
Evaluating each Faculty member is a very time-consuming exercise; spacing it out to every two years will free up time for both administrators and faculty members to address other pressing issues.
The full text of the proposed changes and answers to questions you might have are provided on FAUW’s website. The FAUW board of directors endorses these changes and believes that they are in the best interests of our members.
If you’d like to learn more or discuss the proposal with board members, we invite you to a town hall meeting on October 5, so you can make an informed decision before voting. The poll will be open from October 3 to October 14.
Learn more about the changes, the town hall, and how to vote.
–Élise Lepage

CAUT Discussion List on the Copyright Act Review

In anticipation of the upcoming parliamentary review of the Copyright Act, the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) has created and is hosting a listerv called copy2017a.

The purpose of the list is to facilitate communication among individuals in the education community about the 2017 review.

If you would like to join the list, please contact Paul Jones (jones@caut.ca), CAUT’s Education officer.

By way of background, the purpose of copy2017a is to facilitate discussion of topics of interest to individuals in the education community about the 2017 Review of the Canadian Copyright Act. List members share information about what is happening at the local, provincial, national and international level, and participate in developing advocacy strategies to ensure copyright law respects and furthers the interests of the education community.

copy2017a is a bilingual discussion group and correspondence is encouraged in French or English. copy2017a is not to be used for the posting of job advertisements.

Postings to the list should be addressed to copy2017a@lists.caut.ca

All postings must include the identification of the sender (name, institution and email address).

Participation in this list is open to individuals. The list is not moderated. Any messages inappropriate for general distribution should not be posted. Participants should be aware that any messages posted or replies to messages posted are automatically distributed to all those on the list. Anyone wishing to communicate to individuals on the list is encouraged to send a private message, rather than utilizing copy2017a. Any participants who post material found to be defamatory or who violate any list rules will be removed from the list.

New Report on Sessional Faculty in Ontario

Researchers at OISE have prepared a report on sessional faculty for the Ontario Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development. Sessional faculty are defined in this report as faculty members who are either hired course by course or on short-term contracts. The report studies sessional faculty at 12 Ontario universities.

The report is available on the Centre for the Study of Canadian and International Higher Education (CIHE) blog.

Salary Anomaly Working Group Results Released

By now you will have received notification of the Salary Anomaly Working Group final report. FAUW has posted highlights from the report and a Frequently Asked Questions page on our website, which we will be adding to as more questions come in.

On behalf of the FAUW Board, I would like to thank the Working Group for the extraordinary amount of work they put into this task. It is my understanding from talking to those on the committee that this group represented the very best of processes at UW. While they came from diverse parts of campus and constituencies, they were committed to the twin tasks of both identifying anomalies and designing processes for now and the future and they did so in a very collegial and effective manner.

I would like to thank Lynne Taylor in particular, who co-chaired the group with Jean Andrey. Lynne has continued her work on this project into a well-earned sabbatical. I also thank our other two FAUW representatives, Cecilia Cotton and Benoit Charbonneau. Cecilia in particular continued to respond to questions and address issues despite being on parental leave since May. As well, I thank all other members of the group for their hard work: Jean Andrey (co-chair and Dean of Environment), Christiane Lemieux and Bill Power. The degree of cooperation and goodwill on the Working Group is to be commended. Finally, it is my understanding that staff assistance (Human Resources’ in particular) on this project was always gracious and highly effective, without which this review could not have happened.

My final comment relates to our relationship with the university administration on this issue. These processes don’t always run smoothly at any institution. Most gratifyingly, when the Working Group submitted its report to the University administration and FAUW, the Provost in particular accepted the findings immediately. It was seen by all parties as quite simply the right and necessary thing to do. It is a real pleasure to be able to report this.

—Sally Gunz, FAUW President

Read the report (PDF)
Read the highlights
Read the F.A.Q.