Motion for Transparency Passes at FAS Faculty Board

On Friday March 22nd, members of the Faculty of Arts and Science Faculty Board voted overwhelmingly in favour of a motion from the floor that called for greater transparency, meaningful consultation with staff, faculty, and students, and a longer timeline for the development and implementation of plans for restructuring. The motion also called for any restructuring plans that would affect the academic mission of FAS to be brought before Faculty Board for approval. Because this motion was introduced from the floor, Members will need to vote on it a second time to confirm the outcome. A second vote will take place at the Faculty Board meeting on Friday April 19th.

When the motion was introduced at last week’s meeting, the Chair of Faculty Board informed Members that in the opinion of the University Secretariat and Legal Counsel the motion does not fall within the jurisdiction of Faculty Board. Members of Faculty Board decided to entertain the motion nevertheless. QUFA, QCAA and a number of concerned faculty are looking into the question of jurisdiction. Whatever the resolution of that particular issue, the support for the motion represents the deep frustration of students, staff, and faculty in FAS and their desire for a more transparent and collegial process.

---

A. Preamble

Recognizing that the Faculty of Arts and Science must take measures to address the budget deficit at Queen’s, this motion is concerned with process. Although Faculty leadership has undertaken extensive work to address the deficit over the past months, involvement of those who can most effectively assess the risk of restructuring to the academic mission has been minimal: faculty who are expected to maintain the quality of education; and departmental and other frontline staff who support the effectiveness and efficiency of teaching and research. Furthermore, pleas to slow down the process and allow for careful collegial consultation so as to minimize risks to the academic mission have been consistently ignored, and questions at meetings with Faculty leadership have consistently gone unanswered. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this motion is to: (a) slow down restructuring; and (b) assert Faculty Board’s authority to approve any plans affecting the academic mission of FAS and thus commit Faculty leadership to a formal process of meaningful consultation.

---

B. Motion

Whereas, the Executive Director of Finance and Operations for the Faculty of Arts and Science (FAS) has been working on a plan to address the structural deficit in FAS that includes restructuring of the Faculty and numerous staff layoffs that will compromise the ability of academic units to deliver their programs;

Whereas, the hiring freeze, a 13% cut in course offerings, adjunct layoffs, and TA budget reductions have already been undertaken in the absence of formal discussion and approval at Faculty Board and thus without due consideration of their current and future impact on the quality of academic programs;

Whereas, unit heads have been presented with a succession of ideas related to restructuring without being permitted to engage in any formal process of consultation and approval through Faculty Board, and with a prohibition on sharing information with their units;

Whereas, the failure to seek approval at Faculty Board means that experts in unit operations (department managers/administrators), those on the frontlines of academic program delivery (other support staff and faculty), and those whose educations are at stake (students) have been excluded from formal decision-making processes;

Whereas, direct questions at department meetings, Committee of Departments, Faculty Board, and Town Hall meetings about the details, academic justification for, and impact of the restructuring plan, and about the speed and depth of ongoing and forthcoming cuts, have gone unanswered;

Whereas, Faculty Board is required to know, discuss, and approve such a plan under the principles of transparency and consultation that constitute collegial governance, and in accordance with bylaw 1.2.G, “To make such recommendations to the Senate as the Faculty may deem expedient for promoting the efficiency of the University”;

Whereas, the process that FAS has adopted contravenes the legal grounds outlined in the 2012 Iacobucci opinion , the historical grounds also outlined in the Iacobucci opinion, and described in the Lederman/Watts document, 1991 Principal’s Discussion Paper titled The Governance of Queen’s University;

Whereas, legally, it is the responsibility and entitlement of Faculty Board, as delegated by the Senate, to be consulted, and to approve any decisions that may affect the academic mission of the Faculty;

Be it resolved that:

1. Restructuring that directly impacts the academic mission be postponed for one year until the savings from the Voluntary Retirement Program, announced on March 20, 2024, are accounted for, and until the amount of available subsidization from the University Fund and cross-subsidization from other faculties is known.
2. All restructuring plans and budgetary plans addressing the structural deficit in the Faculty that have the potential to impact the academic mission must be presented to Faculty Board for deliberation and a vote. And:
   1. Any such plans presented to Faculty Board must include a full accounting of the risks, damages, and losses they entail to the research, teaching, and service functions of FAS.
   2. Any such plans presented to Faculty Board must include consideration of alternative pathways and options so they can be formally discussed and the most appropriate pathway be approved by Faculty Board. Members of Faculty Board may also table alternatives for consideration by the assembly.
   3. Any such plans must be presented to all members of the faculty in writing, at least two weeks before discussion at Faculty Board.
   4. Any motion can only be called when a majority of those in attendance agree that useful debate has concluded. This may require considering such motions over multiple meetings.