The Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) Board of Directors (BoD) met on Jan. 11 to discuss the Executive Committee Report and Nominating Committee Report—tasked with evaluating candidates for the International Student Representative position—as well as a confidential session.
Chair Jonathan Dong conducted the meeting, bringing attendants through the agenda points, beginning with the Executive Committee Report. SSMU President Alexandre Ashkir introduced the report, explaining that the committee last met on Jan. 9 and approved motions both by email and in-person. Ashkir singled out two motions from the report as being particularly notable, the motion to change the committee’s meeting time to Tuesdays during the day and the motion to add SSMU’s signature to the University of British Columbia’s (UBC) Trans Coalition’s letter to StudentCare. This letter requests better services for trans people covered by StudentCare’s insurance services.
The other approved motions include the hiring of a food counter attendant, a Gerts barista, three coat check attendants for Gerts, a front desk receptionist, two menstrual hygiene product coordinators, and the contract extensions of the services finance coordinator and the funding commissioner.
After the board ratified the Executive Committee Report, Dong moved the meeting into a confidential session for a period.
Following the confidential session, the meeting turned to the Nominating Committee Report, which was introduced by Dong and read through by Parliamentarian Lisa Pennel. She began by going over the purpose of the Nominating Committee Report, which is tasked with the selection of members appointed to both the BoD and the Judicial Board. This process includes receiving applications, conducting interviews, and presenting recommendations, but the committee does not have final hiring power, which lies with the board.
The committee report looked at the last application cycle, which was focused on hiring an International Student Representative to the BoD—a non-voting position that is responsible for representing the interests of the international student body to the board. The committee received three applications to the position, all of which were reviewed remotely to come to a recommendation. Pennel recounted a mistake in the application process in which an applicant was initially interviewed for a board member at-large position for which they were ineligible. On Jan. 8, the committee voted on a recommendation through majority preference, although all members came to consensus upon discussion. The committee recommended candidate two and suggested that candidate four be interviewed for a judicial board position.
Following the run-through of the report, Council Representative Jacob Shannon enquired into the Nominating Committee’s plan for keeping both the BoD and the judicial board staffed.
Shannon expressed his hesitancy “to send someone to [the judicial board] when [he feels] like [the BoD] really is integral to the function of the SSMU. Whereas, for example, the Policy Against Genocide in Palestine is not even passing by the [judicial board] because they have the appeal.”
In response, Pennel emphasized that the committee remains focused on hiring for the board.
Pennel affirmed that “we also really want to see people [on the BoD],” and that they “are still prioritizing the board member at-large position.”
General Manager Maya Marcus-Sells also spoke to the importance of the International Student Representative role before asking a follow-up question about the consideration of candidate four for the judicial board.
“Before I get to my question, I would like to respond to Director Shannon, as well, which is to say that while the International Student Representative position is of course an important one, for them to have a position as an officer of the board and to look over the board.” Marcus-Sells said. “It is a non-voting position as only Canadian citizens or permanent residents are eligible to vote on the board of directors.”
The BoD then ratified the report and approved its three motions. Candidate two was nominated to the SSMU BoD as International Student Representative, effective immediately, until Nov. 14, 2024; candidate four was rejected for the position and instead recommended to be considered for judicial board member; and candidates one and three were rejected.
Given that there were no more matters for public discussion, the meeting then entered into a confidential session.
Moment of the meeting:
The meeting ran through both committee reports, effectively ratifying their findings as well as approving the recommended motions. This will facilitate the hiring of several positions as well as allow the committees to move forward in their mandates.
Soundbite:
“The Nominating Committee is a committee tasked with the selection of members to the board of directors and Judicial Board whenever it’s necessary. So we get applications. From this membership, we interview and present recommendations for each position.” — Pennel explaining the role of the nominating committee
*Liliana Mason is an employee of SSMU, but this did not affect her reporting and she is not involved with any of the SSMU activities discussed in this article.
