Faculty Association Vote

There are clearly issues but I think they have been overstated and we need a President to deal with campus wide issues like this.

We need a new President who can lead the discussions forward.

Although I do not agree that the current situation has anything whatsoever to do with UBC's transition from a medieval institutional model, it is imperative to continue the work of the presidential search committee. Perhaps once this work has been completed the University can go on to consider the effects and possible amelioration of the conditions of massification, bureaucratization and the insularity of its governing bodies from both Faculty and students.

UBC Philosophy

We sent a strong message initially. Now, it's time to move on and welcome a new president.

Now is a time for constructive criticism, with the emphasis on constructive. I don't feel that a simple vote of "no confidence" does any good, especially in the absence of some sort of proactive suggestion. I feel that the Faculty Association should continue to advocate for change in the way the Board of Governors operates, but should do so in a constructive way.

It is not appropriate to derail the process now and am confident that the Board members and Chair will address governance in a timely fashion.

Thank you for the opportunity to sign my name in support of this kind of approach to helping the university we all (on all sides) care about so much. This is an approach that resonates with me.

The BoG has responded to our concerns with turnover and an invitation to meet with them -- I do not think this is the time to withdraw our confidence.

Dept of Psychology I appreciate very much what the Faculty Association does on our behalf, but I disagree with their handling of this particular issue. And I appreciate that some faculty are organizing to present another perspective.

UBC Philosophy

I would like to put forward a motion of no confidence in the faculty association executive.

Sociology UBC

UBC needs to select a new president, and start normalizing the operation as soon as possible.

We should not forget that this year is our 100th year as a institution that prides itself on research, teaching and service to community. The collective efforts of many have over this time have given us the fine reputation we have today. I do not like the idea of being without a President, or having an interim president, at a time when we should all be celebrating the growth of UBC in this, our 100th year. I hope that we do not have any situation that would distract from this proud moment. The statement attached expresses my feelings on the risk of having "negative .consequences" to the UBC community if a vote of non-confidence to the Board goes through.

Confrontational politics will not get us anywhere. We need to rally behind the search for an excellent President and address the evolution of our governance in due course. Let's stop arguing and start talking.

School of Nursing, UBC

The purpose of this petition is to express an opinion contrary to the non-stop barrage of propaganda emanating from the FA leadership calling for a vote of no confidence in and censure of the UBC Board of Governors. The FA leadership appears still to be roiling in its anger over the "departure" of Gupta, and they give no voice to any opinions from the FA soapbox that are unsympathetic to their own--as if the entire faculty should merely toe the line that they have foreordained. It's time to stop being held hostage to this ongoing tantrum. UBC urgently needs to choose a new president for the sake of the university. The selection procedure is, to all appearances, fairly open, and everyone is being allowed input in this matter.

It is clear that the faction who control the Faculty Association have no understanding of board governance. They are condemning the BoG for having in-camera meetings, when this is common, and often necessary, for the legal functions of the organization. I have served and continue to serve on several boards, non-profit and corporate, and there are often matters which not only have no legitimate reason to be publicly discussed but may have legal ramifications if they are discussed in a public forum; for instance, recently a non-profit arts organization where I serve discussed the details of a contract offer to our artistic director, and did so in-camera. This was necessary since discussing them publicly may have violated his privacy. To me, this motion of the FA against the BoG represents yet another witch hunt by people with an agenda without considering the legality of their demands nor the logic. The FA continues to try to bully people into agreeing with them, which frankly does not represent democratic discourse.

The point of this petition is unclear. If you disagree with the Faculty Association motion, you can simply vote against it. Why this parallel process?