GFC passes motion opposing elimination of EDI from draft recruitment policy

At the January 26 meeting of the University of Alberta’s General Faculties Council (GFC), a motion to oppose the elimination of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) from the draft recruitment policy passed.

Carrie Smith, vice-provost (access, community and belonging) (ACB), spoke to the draft recruitment policy. According to Smith, the draft policy is underpinned by principles of equity and access.

Smith said the current policy suite is “difficult to follow, leading to a potential lack of procedural justice.”

“The current policy is aspirational. It asks committees to give preference to diverse candidates, but we don’t have the data mechanism or the requirement to support self-disclosure.”

According to Smith, this approach disadvantages who don’t self-disclose for reasons such as safety concerns.

“We can’t have hiring committees making guesses on their own or setting up a different process, and we sure don’t want committees to profile candidates.”

Lise Gotell, faculty of arts representative, moved the oppositional motion. The instance of some candidates not self-identifying “is not a reason to abandon equity entirely,” but rather “a reason to fix the process,” Gotell said.

For Gotell, a fix to this issue is to require applicants to complete a voluntary self-identification form.

Gotell also outlined the university’s history of implementing equity in requirement, mentioning that GFC approved a recruitment policy that integrated EDI with merit in 2020.

“The draft policy before us reverses that approach. It removes all explicit commitments to EDI in hiring, despite the president’s assurance to this council a year ago that this would not occur.”

GFC members debate use of EDI in policy language

U of A Students’ Union (UASU) President Pedro Almeida spoke in support of the draft policy. Citing the Mintz report, he emphasized the argument that using EDI language jeopardizes the university’s ability to gain public support and provincial funding.

“While we acknowledge that the province itself faces fiscal pressures, we should also be honest about another possibility: that the U of A is being deliberately targeted for the current iteration of EDI language it has implemented.”

“We need the footing to protect the university’s ability to do meaningful equity work without jeopardizing the resources and public confidence required to sustain it,” Almeida said.

According to Almeida, the language in the draft policy “helps us maintain an influential stance for equity at a time when how the public perceives our university is … very much at issue.”

For Kyle Foster, non-academic staff representative, however, this approach focuses on “a short-term gain, monetary gain, over the long term.”

“We’re supposed to be leaders at the university here, and this does not seem like we’re leading,” Foster said.

Additionally, Gordon Swaters, Association of Academic Staff of the U of A (AASUA) president, supported Gotell’s motion. Swaters highlighted that AASUA’s collective agreement with the U of A’s Board of Governors includes an article explicitly addressing EDI.

He also challenged Almeida’s argument that moving away from EDI langauge will improve the university’s chances of receiving provincial funding.

“This implicitly assumes that somehow the $230 million cut that we took a few years ago is somehow related to the fact that we’re committed to creating a more equitable workplace. So far as I know, there has never been any study which actually proves this point. This is pure conjecture.”

In her final remarks, Smith expressed her excitement for GFC being “all in agreement” and emphasized the importance of ensuring employment equity.

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many people reference sacrificing our institutional autonomy and our respect for human rights for short-term partisan consideration, and to me that’s deeply troubling,” Gotell said during her final remarks.