My curiosity stems from that that very question: why is it that, after all that prisoners have given up through their loss of agency and bodily sovereignty in the federal prison system, they cannot donate their organs when they die, whether by lethal injection or of natural causes. Furthermore, why does it matter where an organ comes from, or from whom, so long as it is healthy? Whether you agree with capital punishment or not (which I don’t) – and despite the fact that Canada outlawed the use of the death penalty in 1962 – this is a human question, one with greater implications for how we view the already limited rights of prisoners in corrections systems.

A primary concern in this whole debate is the effect the lethal injection drug cocktail (used in 34 of the 36 states that have not outlawed capital punishment) has on the body. The three drugs, “Sodium Pentothal (induces sleep), Pancuronium Bromide (stops breathing), Potassium Chloride (stops heart)” – sourced from the Oregon Department of Corrections – may cause lasting damage to heart tissue and the tissue of other organs that would render them useless for donation. Two states – Ohio and Washington – currently use just the first drug in a higher dosage, and have found that it achieves the same effect while doing less damage.

Barring that apparently easy-to-overcome obstacle, and assuming capital punishment is not going to be universally banned any time soon, the question remains: why can’t a prisoner choose to donate their organs when they are executed? Accusations that Longo and his fellow inmates are seeking forgiveness for their crimes, or that this is merely a publicity stunt to push them back into the public eye have been thrown around as a result of his editorial. First, regardless of either of those points, these individuals are not going to be taken off death row. They are prisoners for life, with no possibility of parole. Second, who are we to judge their motivations? Why do people donate kidneys to estranged family members? Why do we sign up to be organ donors in the first place? We do not ask these questions. No – our concern about their motives is prompted, at its core, by our disgust with these people who have committed ‘unpardonable’ crimes. This disgust motivates us to enforce the deprivation of the rights of prisoners on death row as retribution for their crimes.

You can speculate all you want about Longo’s motivations, but the pure and simple fact is that neither we nor the prison system really have any right to tell him or anyone else sitting on death row what they can or cannot do with their bodies once they die. One, it should ultimately be the choice of them and their families. Two, when there are over 4,000 Canadians and 100,000 Americans on waiting lists for organ transplants, it is extremely backward to refuse healthy, viable, and willfully-given organs on such vacuous and irrational terms.

Organs are most often meant to be given anonymously. As such, there is no need to know the identity of the person who gave their heart, or kidney, or lung, so long as they are a healthy match for the recipient. This moral desire to know where an organ came from is based on an archaic belief that our organs contain some sort of code that comes from the person who donated this part of their body. Ultimately, such arguments are used to refuse organs from people who are, for example, “criminals,” people of a different race, people who have experienced trauma – the list goes on. Even common popular culture tropes exist surrounding this conception of organ donation. David Duchovny stars in a film about a woman who gets his wife’s heart when she dies. They somehow meet and fall in love because it’s “really her inside.” We’re constantly told that these pieces of tissue, which are really just muscle and blood and cells, have some sort of magical, soulful property through which we can “live on” in someone else.

None of these arguments satisfy me. Each person has a natural right to his or her own body that does not, and should not, be violated, even after death. Prisoners are already disenfranchised and deprived of many civil liberties as part and parcel of their punishment – how many more rights do we wish to deprive them of? Motivations or irrational fears of “impurity” should not be concerns – period – in the decision to allow prisoners on death row to donate their organs when they die.  Thousands of people across North America could benefit from the change in policy, and it is unacceptable to continue to deny this fact.

—

Courtney Graham is a U3 Political Science and IDS (Joint Honours) student, and The Daily’s Commentary editor. The views expressed here are her own. She can be reached at courtney.graham@mail.mcgill.ca.

The post Prisoners should be able to donate organs appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Sentiments like Matthew Kassel’s (“My Café, my memories,” Commentary, October 14) are a perfect example of the way in which most of us are blindly complicit in perpetuating inequality in university education as a whole, and at McGill more specifically. This is true whether you pay your own tuition or your parents pay it, whether you are from a working-class family or your parents make over six figures.

We tell ourselves: it’s not my hardship, it’s not my problem, it’s not my reality – quod erat demonstrandum, I don’t have to care about it.

By perpetuating our own deliberate ignorance, we are not absolved of our role in a system that consistently disadvantages people who will never enjoy as much privilege as we do. Continuing to be blithely unaware of our role in the system can only make us look foolish.

Self-awareness is one of the most important lessons we take away from our university education. Ignorance regarding our place in the broader system is complicity.

And apathy is collusion. If we enjoy a privilege, we have an obligation to serve others in the pursuit of the same opportunities – whether they choose to do so through “appropriate” channels (education) or not. Ultimately, we have a responsibility to put forward the idea that self-worth is not and should not be contingent upon a university education – even if we have one.

By simply choosing to participate in our education as bystanders, rather than taking a more active role (by engaging in debates such as this one, or by participating in student politics) we are disadvantaging ourselves, and those outside of the system.

Failing to recognize that the broader systemic issues facing our university are part and parcel of our education is failing to become truly educated.

Education is more than the name “McGill” on our degrees, which are ultimately just pieces of paper that signal potential employers to the fact that we played the education game and won. It is the development of self-awareness and civic responsibility – of collective consciousness.

We should stop pretending. We should care and we should fight. When tuition goes up for our fellow students, for example, we should all be up in arms, because education should be regarded as a right, and not as a commodity. Our collective voice cannot be ignored. But before we can speak collectively, we need to realize our role in the system as a whole, and agree on a strategy to begin dismantling it, one issue at a time.

The post I confess: I bought my degree appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The email is ostensibly a response to Bill 100, the budget bill passed in June of this year by Quebec’s National Assembly, which is meant to balance the province’s budget by 2013-14.

If Munroe-Blum were attempting to redefine the bill’s prescriptions (namely, by choosing not to cut administrative salaries and reduce expenses) to protect, say, academic support staff or the unionized non-academic staff on campus, I would understand. In fact, I would even find it laudable that the admin would finally be taking a stand for the employees on campus who maintain the huge support network at McGill. This is not even remotely the case.

I’ve known since my first town hall with Munroe-Blum that McGill is a research-oriented university that prioritizes the employment of high-talent and high-profile (and highly-paid) faculty over the success and experience of undergraduate students – many of whom go through quite a bit of financial stress to be here. Accordingly, it should not be a surprise that the single aspect of the bill the administration does support is tuition increases in 2012. A thirty-cent commitment to financial aid for every additional tuition dollar brought back to McGill is not a catch-all solution to the problems a constantly-growing tuition bill is going to create, however. International students in the Arts faculty – the largest – have already seen a three to five per cent tuition increase in 2010-11, and may see up to five per cent more after 2011. My tuition as an Arts student was upward of $8,700 this term alone – imagine the situation next fall, when prospective high-talent, academically diverse undergraduates are forced to make the choice to forgo McGill because of the rising cost of attendance.

With rhetoric that’s hard to disagree with at first, she writes, “We are convinced that across-the-board governmental measures that are intended to cover a large range of publicly funded institutions with a one-size-fits-all approach will undermine our mission, our quality, [and] our reputation.” The alternative policies she seeks would instead be developed under the auspices of “a performance-driven model of funding.” The key words here are “performance-driven,” meaning that we get more money as an institution if we do better than others. Follow this to its logical conclusion and you find the institutionalization of the administration’s favourite thing: prestige is paramount to all else. Ask yourself where that will lead us – given current trends – and it’s easy to see why this is problematic.

The implications of this attitude, one we have become all too familiar with this year, should be, and are, very concerning. McGill has a richly diverse and incredibly academically successful student community; neither of these things, however, are administration priorities, and their policies both make this clear and show that in the future, McGill will not be a place for activism and progressive education policy, but rigid, neoliberal, conservative, and exclusive “academia.”

We are systematically being closed out of a structure that depends on our support for its very existence. For whatever reason, most of the student body seems to find this completely acceptable. This is a grave misjudgement on all of our parts, and one we would do well to correct.

Munroe-Blum’s email concludes by noting that suggestions and feedback are welcome. I strongly encourage you to write to her, to copy her friends in the administration while you’re at it, and to give her what she asked for: an inbox full of emails and a campus full of students who are no longer willing to put up with this blatant disregard for the wishes of the very people she and the admin work for.

Courtney Graham is a U3 Political Science and International Development Studies (Joint Honours) student and The Daily’s copy editor. You can reach her at courtney.graham@mail.mcgill.ca.

The post Hey you! Pay attention appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The unions affected by McGill’s budgetary rollback are the Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM), the McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA), the McGill University Non-Academic Staff Association (MUNASA), and the McGill Association of University Teachers (MAUT).

Most recently, union representatives from MAUT, MUNACA, and MUNASA have been in a process of recommendation and discussion with the administration, through the Staff Benefits Advisory Committee (SBAC), regarding the $1 million in cuts that needed to be made to the employee health benefit plan as a part of the new University budget released last May.

This comes after the May 2009 delay of staff pay raises to MUNACA, MUNASA, AGSEM, and MAUT, and the finalization of the $1 million cut to the benefits plan. These raises were meant to come in January of 2010 and last until June of 2010 – with no retroactive compensation.

After nearly six months of discussion, the unions on campus have arrived at a stand still, of sorts. The decision has already been handed down that salary increases will be delayed until June of 2010, and MUNACA had in fact already integrated that provision into their collective agreement last spring.

According to Associate Vice-Principal of Human Resources Lynne Gervais, the $1 million in benefit cuts announced in the University Budget Book 2009-2010 last May have also been made, as of October 20, when it was decided that the monies would come from employer premium contributions.

Gervais characterized the resolution of these discussions as positive, saying that while it was difficult to reach a unanimous agreement, the cuts had to be made.

She also explained that the final decision and official recommendations were not made by SBAC but by the administration and the Task Force on Economic Uncertainty – a body created last spring to make cuts in the University’s budget in hopes of shrinking its $17-million deficit.

Speaking with Kevin Whittaker, the president of MUNACA, I got a different picture.

According to Whittaker, the unions intended to go into the SBAC discussion with recommendations to modify their coverage to “make their plan more healthy” and sustainable, not to cut employer contributions and premiums – which was the ultimate result.

The unions unanimously decided that they would not compromise on several issues, including the increase of out-of-pocket expenses for medical coverage, and any renegotiation or redefinition of their dental plan.

In the end, however, the University disregarded the wishes of the union members, and proposed a plan that will significantly increase costs for its employees.

First, prescription drug coverage thresholds went from $150 for a single individual to $500, and from $300 for a family to $1,000. This means that in any fiscal year, the unions’ health insurance policies will only cover costs in excess of those amounts.

This is especially damaging, Whittaker said, to single mothers who are union members. He said that he has received many calls from families, asking him how employees are expected to cover an extra $700 in expenses every year for something that, for many, is a necessary service. The plan has also seen a reduction in paramedical benefits, which include services such as massage therapy, physiotherapy, and acupuncture.

Whittaker is not happy with the changes.

“[They are] totally unacceptable. It’s penalizing the low-income and those that require a lot of mediation. There were other ways that we could have achieved savings perfectly equal to what they’ve already proposed,” he said.

With regard to the dental plan, it was determined that after 2011 all retirees will no longer receive post-employment dental insurance, a service which Whittaker said many older and long-term employees rely on, especially when their income is reduced.

“It’s outrageous,” Whittaker said. “They’re screaming they have no money and we all know that can’t be true with the wages that are going out to the upper management.”

MUNACA has been in a constant game of touch-and-go with the University since 2002, when their collective agreement with McGill from 2001 was set to expire.

Throughout 2003, during negotiations, and again in 2008, when the next collective agreement expired, McGill developed a habit of delaying these negotiations, pushing MUNACA to demonstrate against the University at least seven times since 2002 – with the majority of these demonstrations being held in the past year alone.

The demonstrations were and remain a tactic used by MUNACA to resist the University’s reluctance to come into agreements with MUNACA, instead handing down decisions that do not meet the union’s requests. Changes to the union’s collective agreement, which were only reached after the union compromised on its demands, included salary increases that were still lower than those of all workers throughout Quebec, equitable provision of vacation days – especially during holidays – and receipt of missing retroactive pay.

In that finalized collective agreement, which was voted in last March, was also the currently contested delay in salary increase, a provision that many MUNACA members, according to Whittaker, did not understand the implications of.

McGill’s attempts to downsize these benefits plans have left an especially bitter taste in the mouths of union members following last year’s revelation that McGill has a policy of paying its senior administrators hefty severance packages when they leave the University. That year, McGill also created eight new administrator positions that pay over $100,000 each.

While creating these new high-profile, high-paying positions and theoretically creating a desirable work environment, McGill is simultaneously not only reducing employee benefits across the board, but cutting employment back in some areas.

“I don’t see how they expect the few members that are still working in the student area to maintain the same level of service. There’s no relief in sight,” said Whittaker.

And he’s right: our library services are stretched too thin T one of the busiest times of the year, an already notorious McGill bureaucracy is more sloth than ever, and student services are put under pressure as H1N1 diminishes an already-dwindling staff capacity.

Something, clearly, needs to change.

On a micro level, there can be reform to the mechanisms by which McGill relates to its employees. Whittaker suggested that the SBAC lose the “A” and become a real committee, where decisions are made by the people that they affect most.

Lerona Lewis, the AGSEM president, wrote in an email to The Daily, “As a labour organization, we believe that a University in which the Administration respects the rights of student workers is critical to the life of the university. A university where negotiations are conducted fairly, where management is willing to work honestly to ensure that all student workers are adequately compensated for their role as teaching assistants, research assistants, invigilators or grade-makers is the university that we would like to have.”

“We would like to see a little more transparency from the University,” Whittaker later added. “We used to be more of a collegial community, and now we just seem to be a corporate community, where all the decisions are made, and we are left to deal with it. Unilateral decisions erode the trust we have for [the administration].”

The post Unions fight for benefits appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Young politicians, however, are not a widespread provincial trend. According to Quebec’s municipal affairs and regional elections web site, only 9.4 per cent of councillors elected in the province in 2005 were between the ages of 18 and 34.

Cutler is running in District 2 of Westmount, which has three candidates, the other two of which are senior members of the community.

“It’s the first real opportunity that I’ve had as an adult to get involved in municipal politics,” Cutler said. “I want to take advantage of that.”

“Our generation has been disengaged from political matters, without the involvement of youth. At any age, it’s important that people become aware of what is going on around them, the decisions that affect them,” said Cutler.

Smith is running in District 4 against incumbent councillor Kathleen Warner Duncan, who has only served one term in Westmount. He said the majority of a councillor’s responsibilities involve tackling small projects, such as installing speed bumps and keeping Westmount’s bike lanes open to traffic during the winter.

“I have a lot of interesting goals. We’ll see how naive and idealistic I am, [and] if I’m able to accomplish everything I said,” Smith said.

Though they were still uncertain how their youth might affect their work as potential councillors, Cutler and Smith felt they could offer a fresh perspective to residents who have lived in uncontested districts for longer periods of time.

“There’s a huge demographic that feels a disconnect in politics and I think that having one [young] councillor, and maybe two, would reflect the demographic weight of the age bracket that has tended not to care in the past,” said Smith.

“Once that has started, people will realize that it’s not just a closed-off, elderly branch that nobody knows about. Young people can actually get involved and do something for the better,” said Smith.

Youth involvement is important, Smith said, because municipal politics have the greatest effect on residents’ daily lives, and smaller, local problems are often easier to fix. More importantly, the youth living in Westmount today are the ones who will feel the effects of municipal decisions, such as the construction of a superhospital on the area’s borders.

A part of their strategy is also to highlight their youth as beneficial to the aging population of the community.

“[The older residents are] looking to the younger generations who are much more competent at developing the next level and taking it to the top in technology,” Cutler said.

Cutler added, however, that some residents took his age as a reason to not take him seriously as a politician.

“People are waiting for you to slip up. You can tell that they’re not going to [say], ‘I want to make decisions with a 21-year-old,’” Cutler said.

“They want wisdom, they want someone who supposedly is an expert, but that doesn’t mean that they’re necessarily the best.”

Neither Cutler nor Smith seems to be deterred by the lack of precedent for young councillors in Westmount, however.

“The only reason I am running is to win; that’s why people get involved in politics. I’m not running a campaign as just a joke. I’m using everything possible to put myself in the best position,” Cutler said.

Westmount residents can vote in Victoria Hall on Sunday, October 25 from 12-8 p.m.; or on Sunday, November 1 from 10 a.m.-8 p.m.

The post Youth run for office in Westmount appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The first motion, pertaining to student employment, was drafted by SSMU VP External Affairs Sebastian Ronderos-Morgan, During the question period, Ronderos-Morgan stated that the motion was intended to institutionalize an existing – though not formal – policy of encouraging businesses in the Shatner building to employ students. Nobody opposed the motion during the debating period, and when voted upon, it was passed unanimously.

More contentious was the motion proposed by VP Clubs and Services Sarah Olle which called for a professional energy audit and a 40 per cent reduction in the building’s energy consumption by 2015. Olle said that it provided a “reasonable goal which can be achieved” by the deadline, and noted that the target is based on the national average for energy consumption in student-run buildings.

Arts student David Lipsitz expressed concern that there was no mention in the motion or in Olle’s discussion of it of the financial implications of such an undertaking.

“Even though the GA body may not be qualified to pass financial motions, I think it’s absurd that [VP Olle] is withholding information from us simply because she feels we won’t know how to make use of it, or that we are not able to make use of it,” Lipsitz said.

This motion also passed, but with a clear opposition present.

Olle was also the author of the following motion which proposed amending an article in the SSMU by-laws that bans the “marketing or distribution of sexist publications.”

VP University Affairs Rebecca Dooley attempted to explain what was meant by non-oppressive pornographic material, citing “non-normative queer porn, anti-racist porn…not the kind of porn that pops up in your email box by accident.”

After a member of the audience spoke out against the motion, saying that “all porn is inherently degrading,” VP Internal Affairs Alex Brown responded that anti-racist and queer-friendly porn can offer an opportunity for young people to explore their sexuality.

“It’s alienating to some of our members to say what they do or what they like is wrong,” said Brown. Despite a more vocal opposition, this motion passed.

The final motion debated before quorum was lost demanded that SSMU install reading tables in Shatner’s washroom stalls.

This motion failed, and subsequently many supporters of the motion chose to leave the GA, which led the already-dwindling audience to lose quorum, just before several other motions were slated for discussion.

The remaining motions – regarding Styrofoam in the Shatner, the SSMU lease in Shatner, seafood on campus, and McGill’s use of the self-funded tuition model – were tabled until the next GA.

During SSMU President Ivan Neilson’s executive report, those still present learned that in the coming weeks, McGill will be presenting its Revised Research Policy, which will include the information on military research addressed in the Winter 2009 GA, and which will be released and made public before the next Senate meeting on November 4.

The post General Assembly loses quorum appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Departments across campus were unsure how many TAs they would be able to employ this semester, and whether that number would meet student needs, adding to the usual uncertainty surrounding class enrolment numbers following the add-drop deadline.

According to the 2009-2010 University Budget, departments were required to reduce spending by at least 1.5 per cent. Despite the need to tighten spending, departments will not be significantly decreasing the number of TAs.

“The last thing we want to cut are teaching budgets,” said Provost Anthony Masi, explaining that while the University made suggestions, they would not give a set list of cuts that had to be made, and that major decisions would be at the discretion of the specific departments.

The University has suggested that departments cut travel and hospitality expenses, which can include anything from food purchases for departmental events to staff conference trips.

Masi added that departments should “make a choice that saves you the money,” but not a choice that sacrifices intellectual integrity, or causes the University to deviate from its basic principles.

It follows that potential reductions in TA numbers would be the result of departmental – not University – decisions. However, departments continue to face tough choices when dealing with cuts, which is especially true for programs that already experience regular shortfalls in their yearly budgets.

Professor Sebastian Sobecki, TA coordinator for the Department of English, said that departments are forced to use their own resources to fill these gaps.

According to Sobecki, no one has necessarily mapped out what the best ratio of TAs to undergraduate students would be in each discipline; however, the faculty of arts does set a general ratio at the beginning of each academic year.

Sobecki added that while faculty members in the English Department have met the proscribed ratio this year, the number of students to TAs could still be lower, a result that many fear will impair undergraduate learning.

Professor Scott Bohle, Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Chemistry, stating that cutting TA budgets would also do a disservice to graduate students who learn much by teaching and earn a salary for their teaching hours.

The budget cuts will further affect graduate students employed at the University if the administration’s proposed $1-million reduction in employee health benefits is passed this year.

The Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM), which negotiates TA contracts, is in consultation with the University regarding the proposed cuts.

Masi commented that tough decisions are needed if the University is to meet its mandated deficit limit of $5 million, while simultaneously fulfilling its obligations to give students the intellectually rich community promised at McGill.

Masi added that targeted cuts and reassessments are carried out with quality of education in mind, in order to maintain the “self-fulfilling prophecy of excellence” for which the University is known.

The post McGill faculties deal with budget cuts appeared first on The McGill Daily.

MUNACA, which represents over 1,700 workers across the two McGill campuses, voted 667 to 127 in their General Assembly (GA) held last Thursday to accept the University’s final proposal – a roughly 83 per cent approval rate.

The final settlement, submitted to both parties on March 25 by the government-appointed conciliator Robert Dupuis, represented a compromise between the two parties.

“We’re pleased that the negotiations have come to an end,” said Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal of Human Resources. “The workers of MUNACA are a vital part of the University community.”

MUNACA, however, was less enthusiastic.

“It [was] an arduous fight. I would have liked more for our members, but unfortunately there were a lot of other factors in play,” said MUNACA president Maria Ruocco.

Since the GA vote approving the proposal, Ruocco has also said several times, “It is without enthusiasm that we accept this offer.”

As it stands, the collective bargaining agreement will provide MUNACA members with a nine per cent pay increase over three years, and will honour the promise of night and weekend premiums, among other things. This contract will be valid until November 30, 2010.

Professor Anthony Masi, Provost of the University, saw the MUNACA agreement as a significant step toward McGill’s efforts to cut $12- to $15-million from its budget while minimizing the impact on staff.

“We will do everything in our power to prevent layoffs, and all the suggestions we have received [from the town halls] will help. But it is possible that as positions become available, replacement will be on a case-by-case basis. Where possible, we will also have to cut back on casual and temporary employment,” Masi wrote in an email to The Daily.

Masi maintained that administrative management of hiring in the economic downturn will have little to no impact on students.

“Now is the time to reassess the things we do and how we do them with the objective of providing long-term savings without sacrificing quality of McGill’s educational offerings, extra-curricular activities, and research programs,” he wrote.

According to Robert Comeau, the University’s negotiations spokesperson, because MUNACA has already missed two of the pay-upgrade deadlines, the changes will be applied retroactively using December 2007 and 2008 salary figures. The final adjustment will be made in June 2010.

These terms are a significant downgrade from what MUNACA originally asked for. In September 2008, MUNACA wanted a 13 per cent pay increase over four years and premiums for members who work nights and weekends.

At that time, the University rejected the proposal, and negotiations came to halt for several months in the fall after a second suggestion of a ten percent increase over three years was denied by the University.

The next counter-offer came in December 2008, when the University proposed an 8.5 per cent pay increase over three years – nearly the proposal offered on March 25, which MUNACA accepted.

With contracts settled for the next 15 months, Ruocco said MUNACA is looking to the future.

“With elections coming up [for MUNACA], hopefully the members will vote in a team that is strong, a team with a plan for the future,” Ruocco said.

The post MUNACA compromises on settlement appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The vacated Caférama space has been emptied of tables, chairs, and appliances, and awaits renovations set to commence in June. Café Supreme will be fully operational in July if all goes as planned, according to Café Supreme’s Marketing Manager Aisha Khabyyr.

The details of the negotiations between SSMU and Café Supreme, however, are still confidential, in part because not all aspects of the deal have been finalized, Khabyyr added in an email.

Previous commitments will still be honoured, however, including a provision of up to $5,000 in products at student events – such as Frosh – and a donation to improve the adjoining student lounge with their start-up costs. The café has also committed itself to hiring students, provided there is enough interest.

Khabyyr noted that Café Supreme intends to offer a wide variety of affordable products, including grab-n-go lunches and specialty coffees. The company is also committed to socially responsible practices – including the use of recyclable cups, unbleached napkins, and discounts for students who bring their own mugs.

Last April, Café Supreme won the lease to Shatner 103 in a controversial SSMU council decision – 13 to 12 – over a student-run space.

The student initiative didn’t have as detailed and clear a proposal as the corporate entity, according to José Diaz, next year’s VP Finance & Operations.

Last October SSMU President Kay Turner said that there weren’t adequate resources on campus to give interested students information on operations of student-run food services.

Noting this, Turner said in October that a research group would be started to investigate situations at other universities, and compile a report with their recommendations to the McGill community.

Now, five months later, Turner said the process is just getting started.

“It will be a long-term and ongoing project that could be taken up by future executives. This is more of a planning year,” Turner wrote. “Should a student-run food service be a feasible option, we would more likely be looking at the spaces which will be coming available in the building on the second floor in the coming years, or evaluating other non-occupied spaces in the building.”

The post Caférama makes way for Café Supreme appeared first on The McGill Daily.

McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA), President Maria Ruocco’s first question was about university salaries, and why, if they come from public funds, there has been an apparent lack of transparency about accounting details.

Ruocco’s question was particularly relevant, given the recent revelation of the hefty severance package received by one of McGill’s vice principals following an early departure – which caught the attention of mainstream media, who also attended the Town Hall.

“We are completely transparent in our relations with the government of Quebec,” said Munroe-Blum. “We did not hesitate to respond to the requests from the press.”

Ruocco was not the only person concerned with the apparent inequality in staff salary. A member of the Faculty of Medicine’s support staff brought up the issue of discrepancies in pay raises.

He made note of the recent creation of eight administrative positions that pay over $100,000, while there has been no change in the pay of the support staff.

Munroe-Blum reiterated that she did “not apologize” for the financial tactics McGill uses to attract high-level talent, and that she is “proud of our administrative and support staff.”

She also added that “this is not a negotiating table,” and that McGill benchmarks differently for different groups on a local level, without national consideration.

Another prominent concern was the issue of course and seminar evaluations by students each semester at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.

After a PhD student in Islamic Studies expressed his distress over conflicts of interest with graduate supervisors and a lack of positive feedback, Adrian Kaats, a PhD in Biomedical Engineering and VP External of the Post-Graduate Students’ Society, approached the microphone with his own suggestions.

For a graduate student, he explained, a positive relationship with a supervisor is key to completing one’s studies on time, and avoiding high dropout and distress rates.

He also pointed to the lack of a feedback mechanism for graduate students, following a removal of formal professor evaluations after the dissolution of the Faculty of Graduate Studies.

This is a symptom, according to Kaats, of a “general decentralization at McGill.”

“Every department and unit has its own way of doing things,” Kaats said. “The difficulty is figuring out how to implement it, given the nature of politics and policies at McGill.”

Kaats suggested that students be allowed to sit on the tenure review board, especially for younger faculty members who have different attitudes toward their own research and the importance of facilitating a graduate student’s research.

Lawrence Mysak, a professor in the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, echoed Kaats in his call for professor evaluations that are anonymously handed to the professor immediately, at all levels of study, with results being publicly available.

And while the handful of students who showed up appreciated the concept of Town Halls at which they can interact with the administration, more needs to be done to make students feel a part of the university community, according to Andreas Birkbak, an Arts Exchange student.

“It’s easy to use the community rhetoric. [But] the administration needs to prove that they are receptive.”

The post Staff concerns brought to forefront at Town Hall appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Hillel Montreal, a Jewish students’ association that promotes cultural learning, has cut Ghetto Shul’s rent from its budget.

Jeff Bicher, the Interim Managing Director for Hillel Montreal, explained that the Shul cuts were part of a $185,000 scale-down in the face of the economic crisis.

“In an analysis of expenditures, if we don’t change our spending habits, we’re looking at spending $1.4-million, and we’re only bringing in $1.2-million.”

Ghetto Shul, a student-run and largely student-funded grassroots synagogue, launched a fundraising campaign to make the rent at its location on Clark in the Plateau. According to Erin Kizell, students initiated a phone-a-thon that draws from their home communities for pledges.

With activities now split between the Clark Street Shul and Hillel House, Josh Tal, Public Relations Representative for Ghetto Shul and U3 Cultural Studies, said that Ghetto Shul has suffered drops in attendance, especially since the weather has gotten harsh and cold.

“It’s not just a synagogue, it’s more of an environment and a certain type of community and warmth. We lose that spark that attracts people without our own space,” said Tal.

Jeff Bicher echoed Tal’s sentiments. “Its main group of students are out-of-towners who are living in the McGill Ghetto,” said Bicher describing them as those who don’t have their own home community to fall back on, which makes having a space specifically in the Plateau even more important.

Full access to an independent space is crucial to the services the Shul provides, explained Emily Foxen-Craft, VP Internal, in a written statement to the board.

“Though it may seem materialistic to value a building so much, it really ties together so many elements of the grassroots organization of Ghetto Shul, unifying its members, new and old, to a specific place which they can associate with their private and communal exploration of Judaism,” wrote Foxen-Craft.

The Shul’s latest residential predicament comes after a long struggle to secure its own space. Two years ago, a zoning issue forced the Shul out of a building on Lorne Avenue in the Ghetto, where it had been running its operations since it was founded in 2000. In the following year, it continued its activities out of Hillel House, which hosts Jewish holiday programming year-round on Stanley.

Last August, Ghetto Shul finally got a home of its own when a new five-year lease was initiated at a location on Parc, near Milton. According to Erin Kizell, VP External at the Shul and U1 Arts, the space was acquired with “the generous support of Hillel Montreal.”

After three months on Parc, the group was forced to relocate again after the building next door to theirs was torn down, exposing pipes that froze, broke, and flooded the space. Bicher remained optimistic that Hillel Montreal would soon recover financially.

“We are still looking, connecting with potential donors,” said Bicher. “We aren’t giving up.”

Kizell was sympathetic to Hillel Montreal’s financial situation.

“Funding was never guaranteed by Hillel Montreal; there was no assurance we would be able to maintain the needed or same amount of donor funding.”

Hillel Montreal facilitated the donor funding that was given to Ghetto Shul for their leases and Rabbi salaries. The Shul’s other sources of funding include Central Address for Jewish Philanthropy and Community Service, a Montreal-based organization that works to support grassroots Jewish communities throughout the world.

Tal hoped the Shul would find a new space with a lower rent somewhere in the Ghetto.

The post Ghetto Shul out of space appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by Air Canada, its regional carrier Jazz, and WestJet to overturn a Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) ruling requiring implementation of the policy by January 10.

The ruling only affects domestic flights, and only applies to the three carriers, but many believe cases against other airlines will easily succeed if a nation-wide policy is not instituted.

Air Canada and WestJet both said they would comply with the ruling.

Difficulty in drafting a policy stems from the fact that some of those individuals who are requesting an extra free seat are considered to be obese, and there has been controversy over what constitutes clinically-defined obesity.

Yoni Freedhoff, Director of the Bariatric Medical Institute and an expert consultant for the Canadian Obesity Network, explained that categorizations for obesity vary.

“Class III obesity would be a BMI over 40, class I is over 30. [But] in India [for example], it’s classified as a BMI over 25,” he said, adding that countries have varying standards because they have different definitions of health.

Problems also arise when one considers that not all people who are considered to be obese are disabled because they are mobile and can function without aid.

“There are people who are at a certain weight who are functioning and have no disability,” said Freedhoff.

Regardless of whether or not they are functioning or require assistance, many people do not consider obesity a disability. The justification is that a person’s obesity was most likely caused by a behaviour, unlike someone who is disabled who cannot perceptibly help their situation.

Freedhoff was frustrated by this attitude.

“Causality is not the issue at hand. They should certainly qualify for the same benefits that another disabled person will have,” he said. “People seem to have this belief that causality matters. I don’t think people would ask the spinal cord patient whether or not they were driving drunk.”

Complication also arises in deciding who sets the standard for obese customers receiving extra seats on planes.

“At what point and how will you decide who will be the arbiter of whether or not a person’s obesity qualifies as disabled?” asked Freedhoff.

This uncertainty is reflected in the difficulty airlines have had with defining standards for disabled persons to receive their extra free seat.

“We are trying to develop some sort of criteria. I will admit that is challenging, [because] it’s up to the airlines to develop this criteria,” said Robert Palmer, Manager of Public Relations at WestJet.

Because WestJet executives are not obesity experts, the airline has sought consultation from outside professionals and group

s on how to implement the policy, including the CTA and the disability advocacy group Easter Seals.

Reflected in the difficulty of finding an acceptable definition of disability is evidence of a deep-seated social bias against individuals who are considered to be obese, said Freedhoff.

“[It’s an] incredible example of the last form of socially-acceptable stereotypes.”

Stereotypes are constantly perpetuated by the media and social discourse surrounding the issue, according to Freedhoff, .

It is uncertain as of now what conclusion the airlines will come to, but Palmer made it clear that the customer is very important to his company, and care will be made to accommodate all individuals.

The post Disabled airline passengers get a second seat appeared first on The McGill Daily.

These results from the most recent McGill study on Montreal black community demographics – researched through McGill’s Consortium for Ethnicity and Strategic Social Planning – will be published sometime within the next year.

Jim Torczyner, McGill Professor of Social Work and director of the study, estimated their findings would reveal trends similar to those found in their first project, released in 2001. Then, it was clear that across age, education, occupation, gender, and unemployment brackets, blacks were at a disadvantage.

According to the previous study, it was found that among 15 to 24-year-olds, blacks were unemployed at 37.1 per cent, as opposed to only 17.2 per cent of non-blacks. And for average full-time income, blacks earned only $26,181, whereas non-blacks earned $36,839.

Consortium members hope the new report – which tracks a decade of employment trends – will be more detailed and provide a more accurate and holistic picture than the last.

“We have researchers looking at particular parts of the black experience: religious organizations, migration, language, etc.,” said Torczyner.

David Austin, a community organizer in the Consortium, gathered information on employment equity by surveying the concerns and observations of Montreal groups, adding a qualitative aspect to the census data.

“[Qualitative] data is important… [but] it’s not someone saying, ‘this is what I think, this is how I feel,’” explained Austin.

The members of the black community Austin interviewed pointed to inconsistencies in the hiring practices of employers throughout Montreal, and across Canada.

“[Studies such as this] provide data that reinforce and affirm what many members of the black community already know,” Austin said.

Montreal needs to recognize the realities facing the black community, argued Austin.

“It will inform our understanding of where we are as a community as a whole, regardless of whether it reflects positively or negatively. If there are issues or questions, it’s because these are already there in society,” Austin explained.

Torczyner was reluctant to label discriminatory employment practices racist.

“We can’t say the word ‘racism’ can be applied, [because] there’s a natural inclination to feel more comfortable with what’s more familiar. We inherit certain attitudes. Maybe we’ve not had the occasion to be involved with the ‘other,’” said Torczyner of employers.

According to Torczyner, because prejudices develop in childhood, early multicultural education is crucial to eradicating discrimination among employers.

“Achieving equality in society, while we wish it to happen instantly, takes a long, long time. It’s a process that’s fuzzier than just saying this or that. [And] it seems like we aren’t heading in the right direction,” he said.

Iris Unger, Executive Director at Youth Employment Services Montreal, questioned whether federal legislation would solve employment inconsistencies.

“At the end of the day, people who are going to be prejudiced in their hiring practices are going to find ways around [anti-discrimination laws],” said Unger.

Canada’s Employment Equity Act requires employers to engage in proactive measures to improve the employment opportunities and works in tandem with the Canadian Human Rights Act to curtail discrimination. Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms also protects against economic and social rights.

Torczyner recognized the impact the report could have on public policy and opinion.

“That doesn’t mean things will change without being challenged.”

The post Black Montrealers are unequally employed appeared first on The McGill Daily.

According to Jim Nicell, Associate Vice-Principal (University Services), the current state of the campus does not accurately meet the needs of the community.

“We’re a parking lot surrounded by a lot of green space, in my opinion,” said Nicell, adding that many from the University community – including the Board of Governors, the administration, and the community at large – have been advocating for a car-free campus for years.

“Some things we have done to the campus we may regret, so we’re trying to pull back a little bit,” he said.

According to the Planning Base Working Paper, part of the University Master Plan drafted in 2005, approximately nine per cent of the entire McGill community – including faculty, students, and staff – commute to campus by private vehicle on a daily basis, with a third of that demographic estimated to be living within access of public transportation.

“A very small percentage of students do drive to school, and those who do will want to consider carpooling,” said Nadya Wilkinson, SSMU VP University Affairs, adding that those members of the University community who are disabled will have no problem procuring a parking space on campus.

Jonathan Glencross, head of the Sustainable McGill project – a student-led group working toward a more environmentally sustainable campus community – said a car-free zone would be more considerate to all traffic on campus.

“It’s wonderful. I can’t imagine a better way to improve the shared space on campus than to concede that cars are no longer a priority,” said Glencross, who cited the annual car-free day as a good example.

Nicell explained that among the effects of this transition are the potential for improved bike parking facilities upon the removal of parking spaces, and a better general atmosphere, something Wilkinson agreed with.

“I think it’ll mean they have not only a safer campus environment, but a more welcoming one. Students will feel more at home on our campus,” Wilkinson said.

As over 200 parking spaces on lower campus will vanish along with an annual revenue of roughly $600,000, the University will offset the monetary and space loss by reclaiming the SSMU parking garage on McTavish.

As SSMU’s expiring parking garage lease is turned over to the University, Wilkinson explained that SSMU’s operating budget will be affected; there will be less funding available for clubs, services, and events.

“But we’ve known for a really long time that this was coming,” said Wilkinson.

She added that as the parking garage below the SSMU building allows permit holders direct access to the facilities, security will need to be stepped up as SSMU will no longer be able to control who receives parking permits.

Sustainable McGill’s funding is likely to decrease as well, although Glencross also noted that the group has been budgeting for this and remains optimistic for the future of campus.

“I only see this as a move in the right direction,” said Glencross. “I don’t see any opportunity cost.”

Sustainable McGill’s hope is that students will get behind the initiative, and do their part to contribute to a better shared space.

“I’m looking forward to seeing what role the community can play in the transition afterward…[and] what the campus becomes,” said Glencross. “In the end, it’s showing intent. It’s going to reinforce people who have been working hard to make this University a more sustainable one.”

Wilkinson was also pleased and optimistic about the cooperation between the University and the student body.

“We all have different priorities,” said Wilkinson. “This will require a longstanding, continued discussion on what our priorities are.

“It’s a signal that the University does prioritize sustainability in some way.”

The post Car-free campus coming soon appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Laws in all but two states – Maine and Vermont – prevent inmates from voting, and only 15 states allow felons on parole to participate in the democratic process.

Ryan King, a policy analyst at The Sentencing Project, an organization promoting justice reform, said that many Americans believe criminals should lose the right to vote.

“For a lot of people, this is a way to further punish individuals, by essentially saying you aren’t a real citizen,” said King. “If you broke the law, you don’t deserve to make the law.”

According to the organization, roughly 13 per cent of African-American men – 1.4-million – do not have the right to vote. Felony laws also exclude 2-million white Americans – including Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites – from voting.

King noted that many of these laws stem from the disenfranchisement of slaves after abolition.

“There was clearly an effort in southern states to try to quiet the voice of newly emancipated slaves,” King said.

Rachel Bloom, an advocacy coordinator at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), agreed that black people were more likely to be disenfranchised in the voting process.

“In Mississippi, [they listed ten specific crimes, which] black men were more likely to be convicted of than white men,” said Bloom. “That’s still the law today.

“They’re essentially the only Jim Crow laws that are still in effect today,” she added.

Aaron Lindh, a law graduate student and member of McGill Students for Obama, noted that Americans idealize a tough stance on crime. American prisoners and felons do not receive much political protection and their rights are not frequently advocated for, he added.

As of 2002, prisoners gained the right to vote in Canada, as is the case in many other democratic nations. The only Canadian citizens in the country who cannot vote in federal elections are the Chief Electoral Officer and his or her assistant.

There is uncertainty about how the absence of the felon vote will affect the presidential election.

“Historically, it’s the part of the population that votes Democratic…. Is this going to affect the race in some states that are particularly close?” asked Lindh. “We don’t know.”

King echoed Lindh, adding that such a large number of voters could make a difference in tight battleground states.

“You’ve got 5-million people who can’t vote,” King said. “It’s going to vary state-to-state, [but] I think that in certain states with razor thin margins it will affect the outcome.”

In general, however, it is unlikely that polls are conducted among this group of disenfranchised voters, whether in or out of prison. Current polls, therefore, do not misconstrue the numbers by including felon voters.

“If the polls are to be believed, it’s not going to be affecting the presidential race…but it’s not the only election going on. There are local elections, too,” said Lindh.

Because many decisions in the U.S. are made at the state and local level, people are arguably much more affected by those races than the presidential one.

Inequality is especially apparent in communities where districts are more populated by a certain minority demographic; having a large chunk of that group missing can have devastating effects on results, explained Lindh.

Even in states where released felons can register to vote, ex-convicts often consider the process difficult and do not complete it.

“[When] you’re out registering voters in the community, time after time you hear people saying they can’t vote because they were locked up,” said Bloom. The ACLU found in a telephone survey that many election officials were unaware of their state’s law on voting by felons.

“In Colorado…50 per cent of elections officials did not know individuals on probation had the right to vote,” said Bloom. “People are legally allowed to vote, but are being told by election officials that they can’t. It ends up being so confusing.”

The Democracy Restoration Act (2008) was proposed to congress on September 26. If passed, it will restore the voting rights of the estimated 4-million Americans who have already been released from prison, and are still disenfranchised.

The post U.S. presidential election excludes felons appeared first on The McGill Daily.