Students react ahead of vote to remove EDI from U of A recruitment policy

On March 12, University of Alberta Students’ Union (UASU) President Pedro Almeida and Board of Governors (BoG) Representative Karina Banerji co-hosted a discussion with Vice-Provost (access, community, and belonging) (ACB) Carrie Smith and Chief Human Resources Officer Marcie Chisholm.

At the meeting, student groups expressed their concerns regarding the university’s proposed elimination of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) from its draft recruitment policy.

At the start of the discussion, Smith said the intention behind removing EDI is “to amalgamate two policies into one for all types of hiring … [and] to shift to purposeful language that aligns with Changing the Story.”

At the discussion, Smith followed by saying that the consultation process began in the early phases of the draft. This “included [consultations with] ACB staff and faculty, subject matter experts, university leaders, union partners, and General Faculties Council (GFC) [members],” Smith said.

One student emphasized that this discussion should not be considered a consultation.

“It was initiated by student groups because of our reaction to this policy, right? It wasn’t proactive. It was reactive, and as such, is not a consultation.”

Students question weaknesses of current hiring policy

After being questioned by a student on how the current EDI policy is failing to ensure diversity across campus, Smith stated that “the policy is not failing. There are distinct gaps that are the problem.”

“The main one is the transparency gap in all hiring procedures,” Smith said.

“If you have the 30 odd policies and procedure documents, and if you cannot actually follow those, who benefits? Not those who aren’t here, but the status quo. So, if you do not know how to follow these many policies and procedures, it is not supportive of diversity.”

Smith also noted that the university does not and cannot collect data surrounding equity-seeking candidates at the time of application.

“We can’t require candidates to disclose an aspect of their personality or their person that is not required as part of the job, so that’s also something that’s very important to consider,” Chisholm added.

A student challenged the statements regarding data collection.

“How will you prevent discrimination? You can see that someone is Black. That is not a difficulty of data collection there,” they said.

In response, Chisholm stated that the university will create an hiring process free of barriers and bias, to the extent possible, “so that [they] are not inadvertently excluding diverse candidates.”

Smith and Chisholm are questioned by students about how the new policy will prevent discrimination

A student emphasized that current EDI hiring policies protect those who are part of a minority group, as an attempt to reduce discrimination in the hiring processes.

Chisholm responded that policies such as the discrimination and harassment policy ensure the university has an enhanced and diverse community. Additionally, she stated that preventing discriminatory hiring is a cultural change.

As a follow-up, the student said that “culture changes are great, but they are not enforceable.”

Another student questioned Smith as to why EDI could not exist with the discrimination and harassment policy.

“It’s alarming that we are under national scrutiny at the moment from every single province outside of the Bible belt of Canada,” the student added.

Smith acknowledged the student’s concerns, saying “that language no longer being there has an impact to folks. The discourse has an impact to folks. The reverberation has an impact to folks.”

Smith stated that she is hopeful that as the U of A moves “towards purposeful language,” they will not “just lean on the three letters” but instead “actually make change.”

“Equitable hiring practices are here,” Smith says

A Two-Spirit student stated that the removal of EDI will make people feel unsafe and unwelcome on campus.

“I came here because I knew that I would be protected. So, now that you’re removing [EDI] and it coincides with the Conservative Party and what they’re doing,” the student said.

In response, Smith stated that “we are in a very volatile environment. The world is really hard and it’s hard on a lot of us.”

“How we act as a university and how we uphold our values is essential. Nothing has changed in that regard. The recruitment policy may be one piece of how we recruit, but the procedures will enact equitable approaches. Equitable hiring practices are here,” Smith added.

Diversity in Engineering president emphasizes that the proposed EDI removal will harm the university’s culture

In an interview with The Gateway, Diversity in Engineering (DivE) President Miles Taylor said the university’s decision “shows a lack of willingness on the university’s behalf to support its marginalized students whatsoever.”

DivE released a statement calling for “explicit, equitable, diverse, and inclusive hiring practices” at the U of A.

Taylor expressed concern with the university’s “move towards a cultural shift instead of a policy-based one.”

“By removing a need to follow these policies, they don’t really enforce that culture through anything except for training that many people don’t pay attention to.”

Taylor emphasized that this decision will harm the university’s culture.

“Not only does it make marginalized students feel uncomfortable being here, making it less likely for them to feel like they’re going to be hired, it’s also damaging to the university’s reputation as a whole.”

Taylor also said he doesn’t believe that students’ opinions have been prioritized in this decision.

Changes signal shift in institutional priorities, Kucher says

Benjamin Kucher, the President of the Indigenous Graduate Student Association (IGSA), stated in an interview that the removal of EDI hiring policies “is a structural regression.”

“When explicit equity language is removed from policies, it signals that addressing systemic disparities … is no longer a visible institutional priority,” Kucher said.

According to him, Indigenous graduate students are trained within systems structured by hiring policies. “They are the supervisors who mentor us, the departments who evaluate us, and the overall intellectual culture that we work in.”

This shift will change the environment in which Indigenous students are educated, supported, and assessed, he said.

Additionally, Kucher highlighted that Indigenous rights, sovereignty, and self-determination are not contingent on EDI frameworks. “[Their] presence within the institution is grounded in [their] inherent rights and the university’s stated commitments to reconciliation.”

However, these EDI policies are one of the few mechanisms within the university that address persistent disparities in hiring, promotion, and representation.

“For Indigenous researchers and communities, this conversation … can[not] be reduced to research metrics or grant eligibility … when equity language is removed from hiring policies, it raises [an important] question for Indigenous students: Will these commitments hold when they’re politically contested, or are they just conditional?” Kucher said.

The IGSA released a statement criticizing the university’s proposal.

“This is not a symbolic disagreement. It is an institutional governance failure with real legal, reputational, and human consequences,” the IGSA said.

Multiple letters of concern sent to BoG ahead of approval vote

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association sent a letter to the chair and members of the Board of Governors urging them to vote against the proposal to eliminate EDI from the requirement policy.

“Removing explicit references to addressing underrepresentation and employment disadvantage risks weakening the university’s ability to fulfill its obligations under both provincial human rights law and the Charter’s equality guarantees,” the letter reads.

Additionally, Association of Academic Staff at the U of A (AASUA) President Gordon Swaters sent a letter to Provost and Vice-president (academic) Verna Yiu asking for clarity on how the university will remain compliant for research funding considering the proposed removal of EDI from its draft requirement policy.

According to an email sent by U of A representatives to The Gateway, the “shift to ACB continues to incorporate EDI frameworks while adding other approaches, such as anti-ableism, human rights, and intersectionality, to address specific challenges for sustainable change.”