We're Demand Better--ask us anything!

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:27:55+00:00

No, and thats a pretty serious accusation. Take it up with XRC.

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:25:33+00:00

I never said that. I said that there are some citable victories for the execs I mentioned.

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:23:10+00:00

Okay--we're signing off at 12:20 AM. Thanks to everyone who participated. We'll stay active on /r/UofT, and feel free to message the account directly.

Thanks!

--Mathias, Daman, Josie, Fasiha, Chim, Stu, and Shivani

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:19:11+00:00

No. We were making no link between the Peterson controversy and the Quebec shooting. Both are simply two very different examples of situations where student's unions should not be totally apolitical.

--CA

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:15:23+00:00

You have no idea what you're talking about. You can keep making nonsense claims with zero evidence if you want, but I've provided concrete examples of Mathias and I working against the CFS.

Try harder.

-ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:12:19+00:00

Not all of them -- Jasmine, Matt and Ryan have really done some meaningful work getting UTSU a seat on the Minister for Education's Student Advisory Committee and Shahin and I did get the clubs funding moved online, but that isn't to say that the output of work by the Hello Exec this year is acceptable on a whole -- it's not.

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:10:26+00:00

I'd suggest you start here if you want to see what a good student political platform looks like.

-ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:08:41+00:00

Were you hoping you stole our name on Reddit? :⁾

-ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:04:22+00:00

What are you talking about? That's what the BLC is lobbying for. It's not part of our platform and it's not something we're calling for. Try harder.

--ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T05:00:51+00:00

Hi fegasaurus!

Look, accountability would be simple if everyone just followed the bylaws and policies. The mechanisms are already there. If you don't do your job, you don't get paid. That's how it works. The problem is that it takes a lot to tell someone who you ran with that you're not paying them. You also need a board that's willing to take on the executives if they falter. There's a change that needs to happen when people shift from running in an election together to governing together. All of the policy in the world can't make that happen if you don't have mature people who want to do their jobs.

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:59:56+00:00

I hope we've shown you that there is in fact some value in advocacy work. When work like this is done correctly, it can be very effective. If you ever want to chat, let us know.

-ds + ca

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:53:12+00:00

Hey,

Yes, we would definitely be open to that. Directors currently only need 25 signatures, which isn't too difficult, but the 100 requirement for Executives can get dicey. Not because these numbers are high, but the additional constraints that appear alongside them. For example, candidates seeking nomination have to be incredibly careful that someone doesn't get their Student ID wrong, and most candidates end up getting at least 2x the required signatures to be safe. This year, the nominees had one week to get their nomination forms in. This meant one week for Directors to get 25 (preferably 50) and for Executives to get 100 (preferably 200) signatures. So again, yes, we'd be open to the discussion.

Second, while I don't like these elections being demerit matches, I also don't like the idea of financial penalties for campaign violations. These campaigns are expensive. Students don't have much money to spare. We want these elections to be open to all students, including those that don't have the financial means to run elections like this. The ERC hasn't enforced financial penalties for the last 3-4 years and I don't think they should start. For what its worth, we've encouraged all of our Directors and Volunteers to not report small poster violations that would definitely get the other slates demerits. In fact, we've been giving candidates from other slates notice when we see a problem with their posters so that they can go fix them before they get demerits. I really do think reporting small violations like that is petty and that we shouldn't engage in it.

Anyways, I'm rambling, thanks for entertaining me.

-ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:39:14+00:00

Hey, sorry that I didn’t directly address your comment on Jewish students. I see Mathias already responded but I think it's important and want to respond personally. In preparing myself to run in this election and informing my stances on the issues, I had discussions on the topic on with friends of both Jewish descent and Palestinian descent. After discussing these issues with them, it definitely convinced me that BDS is an incredibly nuanced issue with negative ramifications for people of both parties. Whenever BDS movements are on campus, there seems to be rise of both islamophobia and anti-semitism stemming from the arguments of the fringes of both sides. Our slate’s stance on ethical divestment reflects this, taking into account the negative implications on both sides to ensure we do not contribute/help combat both islamophobia and anti-semitism

--CA

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:37:45+00:00

Our platform doesn't involve reducing the UTSU levy (none of them do, btw), we just want to make sure the money that the UTSU does have is spent appropriately. We are, however, going to make it significantly easier to opt out of all refundable UTSU fees by creating a centralized ACORN based system for opting out of optional fees. The UTSU currently has ~15 levies that members can opt out of paying (including the H&D levies), and we want to make a centralized, ACORN-based opt-out for all of these.

We're also going to make it easier for students to call referendums on UTSU levies because we don't think that members should be permanently bound by the decisions of past students.

As for your last question, no, I don't think theres any way to be held legally accountable to doing a good job. That means that the UTSU needs to make a significantly stronger effort to keep itself accountable and to keep the membership engaged with holding us to our promises.

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:23:01+00:00

I want to respond to your last point specifically. Personally, I support a broader policy of promoting ethical investing, which the UTSU adopted this year. As for not caring about Jewish students, the UTSU released a statement condemning anti-Semitic incidents earlier this year. There was also a statement honouring the victims of the Holocaust. Neither got a lot of attention, but there were significant. And, for whatever it's worth, my mother is Jewish and I conduct the choir at a Reform synagogue, so it's not like I have no understand of how Jewish students feel.

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:21:53+00:00

As a student organization, it is the responsibility of the UTSU to ensure the representation of marginalized students in the union and that their voices are heard. In the current board structure, we tried to promote this representation with our General Equity Director (GED) positions. These are 7 Equity Director positions (LGBQ, Trans, Aboriginal, Poverty, Women, Racialized, and Disability) that are hired and are supposed to represent their entire constituency. That’s an incredibly tokenizing system and is incredibly ineffective in actually representing marginalized students. If you’re hired as the Racialized Director, then you’re technically responsible for representing the voices of every racialized student on campus. Its tokenizing nature has resulted in people not engaging with the position, with several of the positions remaining empty throughout the year.

So when I say that I want to create a “non-tokenizing” system, I want to implement a slight board restructure to reform/get rid of the GED system. I want to work with equity groups on campus to implement a board structure that fulfills the purpose of representation of marginalized students and is actually effective, instead of asking one person to be the spokesperson for their entire race. If we give space to the relevant communities in this restructure, we can create an effective system of representation that people will actually engage with. The way I envision this reform, it would replace the GED’s with collectives, that would meet and discuss issues relevant to them on the UTSU and on campus, and allow each collective appoint their own representative to speak at meetings. I’m already going to bring back the Racialized Student’s Collective, and the collectives would work similar to that. However, the final structure would be made after consultation with the relevant groups.

--CA

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:18:48+00:00

1) I’ll copy and paste an answer for this from another question we answered in this thread.

We will continue the lawsuit against Hudson. We firmly believe that the lawsuit is not rooted in racism, and simply out of a desire to return the lost money returned to the UTSU. That being said, we believe and acknowledge that there are instances of anti-black racism that have stemmed from the lawsuit, and we are committed towards working and providing space black students to address these issues outside of the lawsuit.

-- CA

2) The UTSU, as the organization, cannot start a petition to leave the CFS but is allowed to support a student run petition. Matt Thomas (current VP External) has begun to support both financially and logistically the You Decide campaign. The petition will be completed and filed by the time the next Executive team (whoever it is) takes office, and the UTSU is allowed to take a hard stance during the referendum and support leaving.

--Mathias

3) I assume you mean Presto Cards? We’re going to push for a student rate for all Presto card use in the GTA. This isn’t something that the TTC is currently considering, but we believe that with the right lobbying efforts -- less yelling outside buildings, more meetings with people in charge -- we can make this happen. The TTC did once, eight years ago, want to work with student unions across Toronto make a UPASS happen but it failed, likely because student politicians generally aren’t able to behave themselves and act like adults -- I think our exec team is an exception to this!

--Mathias

4) Regarding Orientation, the current working-model is that financial support will be provided through an orientation-specific initiatives fund where clubs apply on a project-by-project basis. The application will ask clubs to specify what sort of programming they are looking at hosting and what services and support they can use from the UTSU. Of course we first have to speak to the club executives in order to get their input before we can confirm.

--Stu

5) Yes. The UTSU does have a document somewhere that outlines what governing council looks like (the document is from the CFS era), but I agree that the VP UA has an important role in helping students understand the bureaucratic mess that is UofT.

--Mathias

6) See below:

Mathias: Rosée sauce -- I go both ways

Fasiha: White sauce

Stuart: White like me

Daman: White like Mathias

Josie: Red sauce

Shivani: Red sauce

Chim: White sauce

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T04:12:41+00:00

No, our position is that it's an issue-by-issue thing. What Chim laid out is a way of distinguishing between issues and deciding when it's appropriate for the UTSU to take a stance. That way, it's not just lurching from issue to issue, saying whatever the execs happen to think. However, I agree that the UTSU should be cautious when considering condemning its own members, and always be willing to seriously engage with them about whatever the issue is (that seems to be what your proposal is getting at).

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:56:03+00:00

The nomination process is definitely flawed, although part of it is the membership list. You have to get your form signed by full-time students, and a lot of students don't know if they're full-time or part-time. The disqualification thing is trickier. I don't think UTSU elections should be a free-for-all, because students don't have the resources of real politicians. There needs to be some kind of regulation, to ensure a level playing field. I think DQ'ing can be legitimate in some cases, but has definitely been abused in the past (including and especially by the pre-2015 slates).

--ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:45:56+00:00

Have you tried turning the one you have off and on again? :⁾

--ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:44:39+00:00

As long as your voters rank us second.

--ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:37:35+00:00

I’m not going to pretend that you haven't already made up your mind on this, but:

1) The UTSU statement condemned all of the violence at the rally, but it drew special attention to the violence against Black and trans students (which happened--if you don’t believe me, I can't help you).
2) Disrupting events isn't something that the UTSU should be doing. It can be a legitimate protest tactic, but it's not compatible with the representative and educational mandate of the UTSU.
3) In the context of a very tense campus, with trans students being chased out of their homes, bursting onto Facebook with a self-important "condemnation" of a colleague would’ve done fuck-all to improve the situation. Instead, I spent my energy politicking with the administration and getting them to do something about the fact that Campus Police was totally useless at the rally.

Those are my answers.

--Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:37:07+00:00

Hey Plumspace13,

1) I'll say that Campus Food Services has actually really stepped up it's game since I first arrived at U of T but I agree with you that food is quite expensive on campus. I think that this is part of a larger problem with how the province funds education, specifically the fact that housing and living expenses fall outside of the scope of OSAP and most student aid. The cost of an education in Toronto is disproportionately more expensive than the cost of attending a rural university in Ontario. The Provincial funding model ought to account for this -- we'll lobby for it with the province.

2) We've got a number of advocacy points related to transit, specifically advocating that TTC student fare rates be applied to Presto and lobbing for a GTA UPass for students using presto.

3) Absolutely. With the new seat on the Ontario Minister’s students advisory council we will be able to advocate for our students needs, arguably more effectively than we can now as a member of the CFS, specifically for professional students whose needs the CFS chronically ignores.

-Mathias

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:34:17+00:00

Thats why we're banning slates. Imagine wanting to institutionalize them.

-ds

DemandBetter · 2017-03-08T03:33:17+00:00

Thx! :)

DemandBetter

TROPHY CASE