The Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS) has threatened to sue the Education Undergraduate Society (EdUS) following a dispute over the terms of EdUS participation in Arts Frosh.
In the past, students from the faculty of Education have typically participated in Arts Frosh activities and EdUS paid a nominal fee of $2,000 each year for its students to do so. Early this summer, after carefully reviewing costs, AUS President Jade Calver and AUS VP Finance Marlene Benevides decided that fee was too low and raised it to $8,000.
Kady Paterson, representative to SSMU for EdUS, had previously met with Arts Frosh coordinators about Education’s involvement in AUS Frosh. According to Calver, Paterson said she was present at Arts planning committee meetings “on behalf of EdUS” and “claimed to be the EdUS Frosh rep.”
Calver claimed that when confronted with the new fee, Paterson agreed. “She said this wasn’t a problem … [EdUS] was willing to pay up to $10,000 to participate,” Calver said. Paterson continued to attend weekly planning meetings.
According to Calver, Paterson attended one of the final planning meetings in August and announced that EdUS would in fact not be paying the $8,000. “I was definitely taken aback by this,” Calver said. “It was legally binding, it was a verbal agreement.”
Paterson, however, alleged that she is not the hired Frosh coordinator for EdUS and never was. “As Representative to SSMU for the EdUS, I have no authority to guarantee money,” Patterson said.
“[The] AUS was told that the $8,000 could not be [guaranteed] without passing a motion through EdUS council,” Paterson said. “I was clear [about this] throughout the summer.”
Towards the middle of August, Paterson said she informed the AUS that the motion to increase the EdUS frosh budget by 400 per cent had been defeated. Paterson claimed that upon hearing this, Calver threatened legal action, citing breach of a verbal contract.
“[The EdUS and I] were completely unaware of entering such a contract,” said Paterson. “I do not have the authority to enter a contract regardless.”
On the second-to-last day of Frosh registration, EdUS announced they would no longer be using AUS Frosh services and would be sending students to Science Frosh.
“The choice […] was not made lightly, and was only made after the AUS threatened to deregister Education froshies from Arts if a payment was not made,” said Paterson. The EdUS was also looking to avoid Education students “showing up at [Arts Frosh] registration tents and being unable to register.”
Calver believed that the EdUS paid the Science Undergraduate Society to participate in their Frosh. However, the SUS agreed to take all Education leaders and participants for free. “Had EdUS donated $8,000 to Science Frosh,” said Paterson, “Education would have been the title sponsor of Science Frosh, something unrecognized by [the] AUS.”
For any faculty council, $8,000 is a lot of money to lose. However, for a faculty who operates on a yearly budget of approximately $30,000, “[It] would be a significant loss,” according to Paterson.
For Calver, the matter is not a question of gaining or losing money. “From the beginning, it was never about needing the money,” Calver said. “It was about what was fair… [the raised fee] was a calculated price.”
The AUS’s recalculation of the Frosh fees may have stemmed from its financial woes of last year.
“The financial situation that AUS found itself in last year was the result of years of financial mismanagement and a legacy of bad financial practices,” Todd Plummer, SSMU VP Internal and former AUS VP External, said via email. “To our surprise, the AUS corporation owed the government thousands of dollars in back-taxes. Moreover, AUS Frosh 2010 lost a lot of money.”
However, Plummer indicated that the AUS’s finances were in order and would no longer be an issue.
“At the end of my term as an AUS executive last year, it was my impression that the AUS’ financial situation had been solidified and normalized after a turbulent year of financial reform,” Plummer said.
Monetary disputes aside, there are concerns that the students’ interests were not being represented. Many Education students were split up during Frosh, “which isn’t the point of orientation,” Calver said. Some students were switched into Science Frosh, but others remained in Arts Frosh without any support from Education.
“This decision [to switch] on behalf of the EdUS ended up hurting their students the most, which I think is the worst part,” Calver said.
When discussing the possibility of legal action, Paterson was uncertain. “We are unsure at this point, but [the] EdUS hopes we will be able to resolve this misunderstanding without resorting to legal action.”
Calver would not comment on whether any legal action would be pursued.
Despite the terrible miscommunications that occurred, both faculties are keen to reach an amicable solution. “[It was] poor business practice on their behalf,” said Calver. “[However], we wouldn’t want to cause the [EdUS] any harm.”
“[The EdUS] apologizes for the way events have transpired,” Paterson said. “Regardless of the outcome of any actions taken […] we will look to solidify a positive working relationship with [the] AUS.”
