Amid the many varied accounts of Nov. 10 offered by occupiers and administrators over the past two weeks, many have forgotten past successful, peaceful occupations. The events of April 2, 1997 juxtapose this month’s occupation, and offer a shining example of a peaceful student protest done correctly.

Beginning on a Wednesday morning, and through the next two days and two nights, 18 McGill students successfully and peacefully occupied the office of then-Principal Bernard Shapiro. The 1997 occupation, much like its more recent counterpart, aimed to address tuition increases (a new administrative fee had just been instituted), as well as to improve student representation in decision-making.

The Tribune sat down with Mike Toye, Claude Theoret, and Sam McGavin, three former student activists and organizers of the 1997 demonstration, to hear their views on the contrast between the Nov. 10 occupation and their own.

Toye spoke about the approach his group used to enter the James Administration Building.

“We didn’t want to give the administration an excuse to act badly, so we were all … respectful, play-by-the rules … a bit over the top,” Toye said. “When we went in, we already had forms printed up, which were waivers basically, explaining the situation, asking the staff that were there to leave and asking them to sign this form saying they chose to stay.”

Prior to the demonstration, occupiers had undergone training in passive resistance.

“We had trained a [number] of people to be our occupiers,” Theoret said. “We had a lot of education to do before we had people who could actually function in those kinds of situations.”

“I think there was a certain level of bewilderment,” Toye said of the administration’s reaction.  “One is that they weren’t prepared and didn’t know how to react. I don’t know if security or the administration has a plan for occupations … but that might have influenced how quickly security was called this time on Nov. 10. We were pretty calm—a larger group—and no one had any face covers. We weren’t confrontational at all and tried to focus on the reasons we were there rather than giving the staff any concern about their personal safety.”

The occupiers spent well over 48 hours inside Shapiro’s office. Their occupation was one of almost 10 across Canada that year, and received considerable media attention. By the following Friday morning, the last of the occupiers planned to leave according to a preset schedule, exiting in small groups to conceal how many were left inside. Their list of demands, including an open meeting between SSMU and PGSS representatives and senior administrators, had not been met, but they felt that the media attention surrounding their occupation adequately spread their message.

The underfunding of universities was equally an issue back then, especially as it came after the Martin-era transfer cuts to the provinces.

“The university was on the record quite publicly as advocating for deregulation of tuition fees and significant increases, and they were trying to find all sorts of loopholes for charging students more,” Toye said. “Our position was that they should be advocating just as hard for appropriate public policy and taxation and other mechanisms for government to provide the required funding.”

“We saw really the beginning of a trend which seems to have only worsened … at the time it was trying to maintain the status quo,” McGavin said. “Since then there’s just been this massive rollback in terms of accessibility.”

“The student representation issue was seen as a way to influence decision making and the positions of McGill on a longer term basis,” Toye added.

“[Today], the Charest government points to other provinces and says ‘look how high the fees are there,'” McGavin said. “I think [student activism] is really the determining factor in Quebec as to whether or not education [remains] as accessible as it currently is.”

Toye also spoke on the validity of occupation as a form of student protest.

“An occupation is a tactic that people resort to when they feel they aren’t being heard. If we felt that the positions … student groups were putting forward were just being ignored, then we’re going to find other ways to make ourselves heard,” Toye said. “If the administration wants to avoid things like occupations and other actions that go beyond dialogue in the future, they need to make sure they are actually having a meaningful and constructive dialogue with students first.”

“The occupation was the most educational experience I had in my years at McGill … it had been 10 years since the previous occupation—and now it’s been 14, and I feel it’s a bit of a shame that the occupation course only gets run once a decade,” he said. “Because [you learn] everything from politics and negotiation, public policy, consensus decision making, [to] ordering pizzas from a fifth floor. It’s a really intense and very valuable educational experience.” 

 

When the McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA) began striking on Sept. 1, many members of the community were unsure of how the strike would affect them.  Almost three months later, after numerous staff shortages and contingency plans, community members have felt the effects of the 1,700 support staff’s strike every day. Here, the Tribune takes a closer look at some of the areas that were affected this semester by the strike.  

Academic woes

Lab technicians make up a significant portion of MUNACA’s ranks. As a result, labs across the university have been severely compromised this semester. According to Akshay Rajaram, president of the Science Undergraduate Society, the lab component of many science classes was amended or removed entirely this semester, particularly in biology and chemistry. The lack of technicians caused delays in ordering supplies, and labs were scaled back in their complexity because of shortages of technicians preparing chemicals or making sure labs comply with protocols. 

“I believe that some of the labs being shortened definitely have an impact on the practical and tactile learning that students would normally get,” Rajaram said. 

Josh Redel, president of the Engineering Undergraduate Society, said that although no engineering classes were cancelled, lab work has been replaced with video demonstrations and virtual labs. He described a year-long mechanical engineering class that typically consists of designing and building a product and involves complex equipment. This year, the course is purely theoretical. 

“It’s disappointing for engineers,” he said. “We really would like to have the experience with the labs because then again, that’s why some people come [to McGill] over other schools. I can learn how to operate a machine on the internet, but it’s the hands-on experience that makes a difference.”

SSMU President Maggie Knight noted that students in the faculty of arts have also found their school work compromised by the delays in book re-shelving in the library, and the cancellation of inter-library loans.

Scaled down services

Another major effect of the MUNACA strike is the decreased access to McGill Student Services. Last Wednesday, SSMU hosted a Town Hall with the directors of several student services to inform students on how services have been affected. Due to severe staff shortages, many services have decreased their hours of operation and are working under contingency plans.  

McGill Health Services have been among the most affected. According to Jacqueline Courtney, clinic manager for Student Health and Mental Health Services, there are only 30 drop-in spots per day, compared to 75 or more last year. Students who arrive early enough to receive a spot often need to wait 45 minutes before they are seen at the counter and given an appointment with a doctor. Doctors are so busy that they often see students at 10 minute intervals. Health Services are also unable to provide flu shots or perform blood tests, and need to refer students to other clinics. 

“We’ve been hit quite drastically by the strike. Nurses, which do about 40 per cent of the work daily, are all on strike,” Courtney said during the Town Hall.

The reduced hours and staff shortages have caused much anxiety among students. Erica Anderson, U1 chemical engineering, had issues with her study permit but could not renew it until her student loans were processed by the Scholarship and Student Aid office. Since the strike, the office has not been answering phone calls but instead maintains contact through emails. The limited hours and long line-ups made the process very difficult, Anderson said.  

“My permit had expired and I had 90 days until I could get it renewed or I would have to leave [the country],” she said. “It was getting to the point where I was afraid I wasn’t coming back [next semester].” 

Alexandra Tighe, U1 psychology, who uses the services of the Office for Students with Disabilities, said that students with disabilities now have to make arrangements with professors on their own for final exams or assignments.

“It seems really funny that they would [make] students with disabilities, who probably have other stresses going on—seeing as they have disabilities—make arrangements on their own, such as with their finals, which other students don’t have to do anything for,” she said. 

Leaked letter preoccupies community

The effects of the strike on students reached local media on Nov. 11, when the Montreal Gazette acquired a letter from Associate Dean of Postgraduate Medical Education Sarkis Meterissian intended for Interim Dean of Medicine Samuel Benaroya. The letter, dated Oct. 17, raised concerns that the strike would “seriously disrupt our ability to track the academic programs of our trainees thereby not only compromising their education but also jeopardizing the successful completion of this academic year.”

Esli Osmanlliu, president of the Medical Students’ Society, echoed one of the main challenges brought by the strike noted in the letter: the difficulty of meeting the deadlines of the Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS), which begins Dec. 1. The CaRMS is the process by which medical students apply to have residency positions in hospitals across Canada. The process is twofold: first, the university needs to mail dean’s letters to correct universities and programs so McGill students can be placed. After Dec. 1, the university has to review applications from students all over Canada applying for residency at McGill. According to the leaked letter, a minimum of 10 administrators are needed to oversee the program.

“The ongoing strike has a clear and measurable impact on our ability to attract and train top-quality candidates,” the letter states.

Although Osmanlliu described the letter as “shocking,” he noted that it had been “taken out of context” and that the content was outdated by the time it was leaked. He expressed confidence that the concerns have been addressed by the faculty and that all the letters were mailed in time for the deadlines.

“The Med-4 students haven’t demonstrated any signs of concern, particularly any particular anxiety towards this,” he said. “We can’t really tell whether the process will be as well done as in past years, because results will only be known at the beginning of next year.”

Diana Colby
, communications manager for the faculty of medicine, explained that the faculty prepared a contingency plan mid-October and that managerial staff will work on the review and preparation of CaRMS files. 

Effects on community

An unexpected result of the strike has been increased solidarity among other administrative staff and students, who are well aware of the challenges that the strike is causing.

“When I was talking to my staff about messages to present [at the Town Hall], they wanted to say that by-and-large, students have been acknowledging that we’re experiencing staff shortages and challenges, and they really express their appreciation for the efforts,” Cara Pipperni, associate director of Scholarships and Student Aid office, said. “That has really boosted the morale of the folks left back at the office, dealing with these issues. We thank the student body for their support.” 

“I need to emphasize how hard [the administrators] are working because on our side, students really appreciate the support the staff has been showing,” Osmanlliu said. “[The adeministrators] are really putting a lot of effort into ensuring the quality of those programs.” 

The tense university situation has also had an impact on first year students, who do not know what McGill is like under normal circumstances, when all its employees are at work.

“I’ve had a lot of sad first years ask me if [the university functions] like this normally,” Knight said. “There’s a lot of sadness and frustration.” 

The strike has also caused some students to appreciate the role of MUNACA workers in the university. 

“The first thing you notice when you walk into [the OSD] is there’s a posterboard that greets you at the desk [instead of a person]. I thought that took the entire sense of community [out of the system],” Tighe said.

Looking ahead

There is concern that the remaining administrators, notably overstretched this semester, won’t be able to continue working at current rates, especially as work becomes more strenuous during the winter semester.

“It’s going to be incredibly challenging, because we’ll have the same line-ups as [in] September and we’ll be dealing with the admission cycle and applications for scholarships,” Pipperni said. 

“I’m a little bit concerned about next term. In January, [the fast pace] starts off right away. After Christmas break people are already dreary and worried, it’s a difficult semester for students and therefore for us,” Ted Baker, director of Counselling Services, said. “I’m a bit concerned of keeping up … there’s hours of work we haven’t been able to do.”

Every individual interviewed for this article noted that although the university continues to run without MUNACA workers, it’s doing so at a very high cost to both students and administrators. 

“We had a question in Senate back in September about how the managers who are taking over the work would be able to maintain [current] levels of craziness,” Knight said. “I get emails from [them] at 9 p.m., 10 p.m. We are really concerned that they are going to burn out.”

 In the first week of November, two students created Exposing MUNACA, a blog aiming to denounce many of MUNACA’s claims and positions in the recent labour dispute. As stated on the blog, which has received over 40,000 hits to date, the students’ mission is to “reveal [the] truth behind MUNACA and the MUNACA strike,” as well as to create a discussion and allow people to think critically before pledging their support for the union’s strike. They state that all information used on their blog is taken from official, public sources such as the MUNACA website, as well as McGill University’s website and emails to students.

Until recently, the blog remained entirely anonymous, working under the name Pienonymous. Following an interview with the Montreal Gazette on Nov. 21, Kayla Herbert, U1 English literature and Peter Guo, U2 physics, revealed their identities to the community, putting to rest the rumours that the McGill administration was behind the creation of the blog. 

“Initially the … anonymous identity would give us no prejudice—people [could] just look at the blog objectively without saying, ‘okay, these are students, we’re not going to listen to this,'” Guo said. 

“There’s something comforting about an anonymous blog,” Herbert added. Comments can be made anonymously as well, which Herbert says encourages comments from visitors. 

 “[Now] we also wanted to reveal our identities … because we’re hoping that other people will come forward and feel comfortable [doing so, too],” she said.

When asked what inspired their creation of the blog, Guo and Herbert explained that they wanted to address the many assumptions held regarding the labour dispute. 

“At some point you’ve got to ask yourself, why are they on strike? What are the reasons?” Guo explained.

“You go in with an unbiased view. But I think as you look more into it and discover more things, you realize you start to [take] one side. And for us, we [took] the more unpopular stance, to go against MUNACA in their strike,” he said.

“I think the Gazette worded it well,” Herbert said. “It started as a whisper, everyone’s scared to say anything against the union … this is a university, we’re supposed to be encouraging dialogue and discourse, that’s what it’s all about.” 

“A lot of the demands they’re asking for are just fiscally impossible,” Herbert said, explaining her stance. Both Herbert and Guo recognize that negotiation tactics require parties to aim high in their demands, but noted that demands have to be rooted in practicality. MUNACA employees are losing money every day that they are on strike. 

“You have to look at MUNACA [which] has 1,700 employees. If the union tries to get an offer that’s just impossible, they’re wasting everyone’s time,” Guo argued.

They emphasized that their blog is not opposed to MUNACA workers themselves. 

“We are against this strike, we are against the union leaders [and] executives … we are against the bias and lies in which the union leaders presented these blanket terms,” they wrote in an email to the Tribune. 

The numerous comments on blog posts by MUNACA members suggest that others share the two students’ sentiments, and that the blog is providing a forum for these views.

One anonymous comment reads: “I’m unfortunately a MUNACA member. Thanks for giving a voice to those of us whose voice has been silenced through intimidation and coercion. I’m living proof that we aren’t all on the union’s side.”

“As an ‘M’ with a spouse on the picket lines, I see both sides daily and unfortunately MUNACA is completely misrepresenting the information to their own members,” another comment reads. 

“Misleading the public is never a good thing, especially when you’re trying to look for the public’s support,” Guo said. “As you can see … MUNACA members are speaking up that they did not sign up for this strike.” In an effort to inform the union members, an unknown individual printed copies of the Exposing MUNACA blog and distributed them to the picketers the week of Nov. 21. 

These allegations of misinformation point to a tangled web being unravelled by Pienonymous. “We’re definitely seeing that there’s this kind of divide between the union leaders and the members,” Herbert said. In a blog post dated Nov. 22, Pienonymous discussed the Aug. 24 vote which led to the strike. Of the 1,700 MUNACA members, approximately 700 attended the meeting to vote for a strike mandate. Of those 700 attendees, 88 per cent voted for the mandate. This represents approximately 616 members, or 36 per cent of all MUNACA members. 

Herbert and Guo are currently investigating these allegations brought to them via anonymous comments. They address the larger issue of representation within MUNACA, and Herbet and Guo are working with a source who has emailed them with information regarding this specific issue.

Not everyone, however, has agreed with Pienonymous’ blog. While Herbert and Guo have seen support from many MUNACA workers, teaching assistants, and professors following the release of their names, they have also received hate letters and personal attacks from MUNACA to their personal McGill email addresses. 

On Nov. 25, somone else created a blog titled ‘Defending MUNACA,’ replicating Exposing MUNACA’s format. It’s an anonymous blog, but the author does identify him- or herself as a student. On the blog the author explains his or her reason for its creation: “I feel a broader contextualization of the strike and the highlighting of some key facts might offer a different perspective,” he or she wrote.

Kevin Whittaker, president of MUNACA, spoke to the Gazette in response to the Exposing MUNACA blog. 

“I don’t think they’re well aware of what our demands are,” he told the Gazette. According to Pienonymous, their blog was only recognized by Whittaker after he was approached by the Gazette on Nov. 21. Guo maintains he sent him the link to the blog earlier this month. 

Joël Pedneault, SSMU’s Vice-president External Affairs, also voiced his criticism of the blog. 

“A lot of the information that’s presented there is presented in a bit of a sensationalistic way and with very little context,” Pedneault said. “In some respect I think it’s fine that people are formulating criticisms, but at the same time, this format doesn’t seem to be very convincing or very respectful.” 

In response to the Exposing MUNACA blog, SSMU Council expressed interest in the SSMU executives sending a listserv to students with information regarding the strike.

“I think it’s difficult for students who don’t feel they have enough information. Most of what’s been put out there is clearly partisan,” Maggie Knight, SSMU President, said.

“People are obviously welcome to dissent and criticise … [but] there’s a difference between doing th
at with the aim of arriving at a more equitable situation for every party, and doing that to the aim of specifically attacking one group of people,” Pedneault said.

“You really need to think critically,” Guo said. “We’re not really trying to just pull people to one side or the other, what we want to do is to create that dialogue.”

Last Wednesday, the Newman Centre and McGill Chaplaincy hosted a forum titled “The Strike and the Academy: A Forum on the Ethics of Conflict and Collegiality,” to discuss concerns regarding the ongoing MUNACA strike. The panel emphasized the strike’s effects on the university community, and the necessity of holding an open and unbiased discussion of these disputes. The discussion consisted of MUNACA member Christina Tremblay, associate professor in the department of pharmacology, Terence Hébert, management professor, Robert Hebdon, and student representative Eric Mauser. 

According to Dan Cere, professor of religious studies, a reason that the Newman Centre hosted the event is that it’s “a Catholic organization, and this community has a long tradition of interest in labour issues and the rights of labour, going back to the first social encyclical on labour in 1891.”  

“I’m not going to make profound judgments of who’s right or wrong or who did what to whom during this particular conflict,” Hebdon, who specializes in labour relations, said. “It’s a difficult time for employers to bargain and to address real injustices … There’s a legitimacy on both sides.” 

Hébert said that neither the McGill administration nor MUNACA have shown the degree of mutual respect and value for independent thought that is generally assumed to exist at a university. 

“Collegiality is something we all pay lip service to, but none of us really act collegially unless it suits us,” Hébert said. “I should be able to tell the principal that I disagree with her in strongest terms [and] not [worry] about her firing me.” 

Panelists also addressed the way that the diminished sense of collegial spirit has caused confusion, tensions, and negativity. Hebdon said that professors are strained by their differing loyalties to McGill, their coworkers on strike, and their students.

“The strike brings some of those loyalties into conflict,” Hebdon said. “And we have to reconcile them.” 

Mauser added that the negative atmosphere of these conflicts is intensified by the confusing information that students receive from both sides of the negotiations.

“The vast majority of students … know the reasons [behind the strike],” Mauser said. “But we can’t understand why an agreement isn’t being reached.” 

Panelists also discussed the possibility that the communication between students, strikers and the administration has been challenging because the university lacks a cohesive set of principles with which to address the situation. The administration, they said, views students very differently compared to how students and professors view the administration.

“[The administration] sees [students] as clients, and they see us as employees,” Hébert said. “They run it like a business.” 

“To think [a student is] a client, for me, that’s insulting,” Tremblay said. “It’s hard to become a community or say that we are a community when we are being told to serve clients.” 

Mauser added that many McGill students agree that the wages of MUNACA workers should be increased, but are concerned about how they will be affected by such a change. 

“We’re worried that the strike may increase our tuition fees ultimately,” he said. “Ultimately, the money’s got to come from somewhere, and it’s going to come from us.”  

Looking forward, panelists were hopeful for chances of reconciliation, but also saw potential sources of conflict. Most MUNACA workers look forward to returning to work at a place where they are supported by their coworkers and students, Tremblay noted. Some, however, will face new challenges as they reintegrate into the workforce. 

“There are [other MUNACA members] who are terrified, because they do work directly with the higher admin at McGill,” Tremblay said. “They are afraid of the way they are going to be treated [when they return].” 

Regarding the future of university relations, Hébert expressed hopes that the limitations of the negotiation process will raise awareness for the necessity of change. 

“It tells us who we are, and it strips away the pretence that universities are collegial places of free inquiry,” Hébert said. “[But it’s] still something worth fighting for at McGill.” 

The beginning of Wednesday’s Senate meeting focused heavily on the events of Nov. 10. In a departure from Senate’s tradition of a closed-door assembly, the first hour was streamed live over the Internet to the McGill community.

In her opening remarks, Senate Chair and Principal Heather Munroe-Blum apologized for the events that took place on Nov. 10. It was one of the first public apologies from the administration on the way that night’s events unfolded.

“We’re all dismayed by what happened on our campus,” Munroe-Blum said. “People across the board were hurt, intimidated, and threatened. As principal of McGill, I’m deeply sorry that events so at odds with the culture and values of our university, and so hurtful to so many, have happened here at McGill.”

She went on to express her thanks for student groups who mobilized quickly in response to those who were physically and emotionally hurt.

Dean of Law, Daniel Jutras, who will be heading an independent investigation into the events, reminded senators that his inquiry will purely engage in fact finding, and that he could not assign blame or compel testimony.

As Jutras spoke, a number of spectators turned their backs to the committee, expressing their reservations with having a faculty and administration member carry out an investigation that deals with his own administration.

In an interview with the Tribune, the McGill Daily, and Le Délit last week, Munroe-Blum emphasized that Jutras would act independently.

“I wanted someone who has deep loyalty and concern for the university and the wellbeing of everyone in it, and yet who is known for impartiality [and] independence,” she said of her decision to appoint Jutras. “He’s got complete autonomy, he doesn’t report to me in the course of doing this investigation … and I have confidence that he will serve the university, not any one individual.”

A number of senators, including Senator and Professor of Communication Studies, Darin Barney, noted their own concerns with having a dean and faculty member carry out the investigation. Barney suggested that Jutras be accompanied by one student and one faculty member in his investigation. The terms of the investigation, however, had already  been set.

As part of the discussion, Management Senator Tom Acker recounted his experience on the evening of Nov. 10.

“I watched close friends in pain as they tried to wash pepper spray out of their eyes. I’ve seen students on the verge of tears when describing what has happened to them,” he said. “I know that for many students, Thursday marks the day that they stopped seeing their campus as a safe space for self-expression and support. For me, that transition has happened much earlier.”

SSMU President Maggie Knight raised concerns as to why the administration had not responded with more urgency to support students, and took a number of days to inform students of where they could seek help.  She noted that, following the earthquake in Japan last spring, a notice of where students could seek help was distributed within hours.

Towards the end of the committee discussion, Provost Anthony Masi presented what he had witnessed that night. Referring to the occupiers’ entry as an ‘attack,’ he described the occupation of the fifth floor as one marked by violence and intimidation.

“You may turn your backs on the truth, but the truth is important,” he said to the spectators who had turned away from him.

“The women who were in the offices [at] the time, and there only were several women in at the time, were pushed and shoved,” he continued. “They were frightened and they were crying. Social media [was] being used to portray events inside that do not correspond to what most of those women were living through at the moment.”

During Masi’s account, spectators, some of whom were identified as occupiers, jeered and yelled “lies.” Matt Crawford, Arts Senator, who had earlier revealed himself to senate as a fifth floor occupier, walked out in response to Masi’s statement. Other spectators followed.

Dean Jutras’ investigation will be released on Dec. 15. In the weeks to come, he will be consulting with students, faculty, and community members to hear their experiences.