News

SU President Jayna Gilchrist censured

Publication YearIssue Date 

Students' Union President Jayna Gilchrist was censured by student leaders due to her conduct and lack of leadership in a unanimous vote.

External Commissioner Jim Bailey brought the motion forward at the Tue., Mar. 30 Students' Legislative Council meeting. Gilchrist was not at the meeting as she was helping at the SU's screening of Discordia, a film about the riots at Concordia University when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to speak.

"It's saying we're not happy with her conduct as of late," said Bailey. "She's missed too many meetings and is not fulfilling her duty."

While there is no formal procedure for censure, it is one step below removal. Gilchrist believes the censure is a slap on her wrist.

"It's at the point where it doesn't matter," said Gilchrist, adding conduct of other SLC members is rarely discussed. "They're not pleased with me."

Many members pointed out discussions related to organizational goals with Gilchrist changed nothing. Also of contention was her absence when the SU was organizing the tuition fight and presentation because she attended the Liberal leadership convention in Ottawa.

SU Vice-President Operations and Finance Gavin Preston believed the lack of direction from the president led to unnecessary conflict and a lack of direction in the SU.

"A lack of leadership of style is not a leadership style," said Preston, who added many people ran in the election because they thought they could perform better.

External Commissioner Bryan West agreed with the resolution but believed the others' comments were "attacks on her style."

"The job done is reflective of who she is, I'm not sure censure is in order," said West. "But to go off on her entire conduct of the whole year, then I don't support it. It's an attack on her character."

Gilchrist was also criticized for attending the movie, but she believed it was important for her to see how another SU handled the situation in light of the Muslim Students' Association debates and Dr. Norman Finkelstein's upcoming visit.

"I've done the best job I could this year," said Gilchrist. "I honestly believe I couldn't try any harder.

"Some people refused to be led."

Tags: 

Section: 

Issue: 

Comments

To do this without giving the defendant the ability to respond to the charges is bad, bad governance.

This SLC is all about bad, bad governance. I pity Jayna for having to go to ANY SLC meetings.

Bad, bad governance...........


Yeah, and 59th was so much better. How many rifts did exec bring to the table over office allocation, hours, and petty bull like that. This took about 30 min in council after all the other business was done for the night and was about overall performance. Not petty things like how many hours a particular exec spent in the office a week. But then again Oliver, how many times did you go to couselling with Barb to try to work over your problems?

I believe the main point of the censure was the fact that she believed that attending Discordia was a better use of her time then being at an SLC meeting where policy formation for governing the SU was taking place. According to section 12 of the governance bylaws, she is very close to an violation of our rules, and was censured because of it.

Basically, I think council was a little pissed that SLC meetings inconvience our president to the point that she will make any excuse not to attend and that such inconsiderate, selfish behaviors have been demonstrated throughout the year. This was simply the final straw that allowed council members to express their dissatisfaction with the absense of the president. She could have been there to explain why she thought a showing of a movie was more important than the main governing body of the Students' Union (as she is the Chief Elected Official) but such rationale would be useless and ineffectual as the rest of her time in the SU has been.

Gavin Preston said:
"Yeah, and 59th was so much better. How many rifts did exec bring to the table over office allocation, hours, and petty bull like that. This took about 30 min in council after all the other business was done for the night and was about overall performance. Not petty things like how many hours a particular exec spent in the office a week. But then again Oliver, how many times did you go to couselling with Barb to try to work over your problems?"

Preston - to attack someone personally because you disagree with their opinion is uncouth.

I would say that the 59th was -MUCH- better. I still get along with my fellow executive members, and as much as I disagreed with Barb, I wasn't petty enough to sanction her without her being present.

In fact, I would say the biggest problem with the 59th SLC wer the immature, petty motions made by Mr. Counsell, Mr. Rassin, and yourself.

Focus on my argument, not on me.

I'm just going to describe a 'Jayna moment' for all of you out there who may have no clue what working with her is like. During SAA this year, a few weeks ago actually, Jayna stood up in the middle of a discussion that we were having, she grabbed her stuff, pushed back her chair - with all her might, and stormed out without a word, like an angry child. This action was totally unwarranted, came out of the blue, and people were left looking at eachother and asking "what happened, did we miss something?!" We were all stunned and confused.

She did not come back and she never told us why she left in such a huff.

That's just one of many ways that she has shown her commitment to this organization and to students this year.

Now onto the censure...

She bloody well knew what was going on at SLC, but she didn't care. She's at the point now where she honestly doesn't give a shit. The place would burn down and her response would be "meh". My feeling is that she'd rather be impeached than have to resign. After all, a resignation would take some coordinated effort on her part.

The thing that pissed councillors off the most (anyone feel free to correct me if i'm wrong) was that she skipped out on SLC (yet again) to watch a movie that less than 20 people showed up for. There were already 5 SU folks there from the events commission and they had no problem handling the event. It was a decision that basically shouted out to us "hey I don't give a crap about you guys, your commitment to this organization, my role or the students that i'm supposed to be accountable to!". It couldn't have been louder.

I don't believe that our censuring her was bad governance at all. She has had it coming for a long time and I guarantee that if she had been present she would have fled from the scene like a guilty party. She just doesn't care anymore and she's just biding her time until it's all over.

I wouldn't even say that her problems lie in her leadership abilities.

I'd say that her problems are centred around her motivations and her willingness to work. There's nothing more to it, there's no depth, so don't try looking. You'll come up shorthanded and disappointed.

"Yeah, and 59th was so much better."

How does that justify the lack of leadership and professionalism the 61st has shown? So it's alright that this year's exec has done a shoddy job because previous execs have also been less than stellar? Should we measure the SU's performance based on how they didn't suck as much as last year's?

No joke, I think Jayna Gilchrist did more work trying to make sure Barski's Cabinet didn't win then she has done all year. She will go down in history as the most inefficient leader in the SU's history.

1. There's no "defendant" in a legislative censure.

2. Mark Counsell and I reinvented the SU's governance procedures back in the days of the historic 59th SLC. Unfortunately, our recommendations were all rejected. It's interesting to see how all our predictions have come to pass (save for one, but it's coming...). It's further interesting to see the SU adopt our recommendations reactively, in reponse to crisis and scandal, rather than prophylactically, as we suggested.

Oliver, I have never used the word uncouth. I hardly know what it means. Please try to get my quotes right when you are lying about I say.

Gavin:

Calm down and learn how to read. Isn't that a requirement to be an SU VP?

Oliver said: "Preston - to attack someone personally because you disagree with their opinion is uncouth."

He described your actions as uncouth. He never suggested that you said, or even that you knew, such a word.

By the way (paying special attention to the first definition):

uncouth
adj.
1. Crude; unrefined.
2. Awkward or clumsy; ungraceful.
3. Archaic. Foreign; unfamiliar.

I didn't see calmness or literacy beside the qualifications to do the job. I'm pretty sure all you need is votes. Job descriptions seriously lack in the SU. Why do you think Jayna has so many problems?

Maturity, people. Please focus your attacks on issues, and not other people posting here.

"[Executive] is a useless tool because s/he doesn't understand governance" is true/false, without the "you are a tool because you think [Executive] is a useless tool because s/he doesn't understand governance"

Gavin have you forgot about your SU paid for anger management sessions? Trust me, you have WAY more problems than Jayna.

Ohhhhhh, Gavin has some anger issues. Let's all run and hide. Big deal. Does Gavin get stuff done in the SU? I believe so. Has he completed almost everyone, if not everyone of his campaign promises? I believe so again.

Give me three good things that Jayna has done for the organization this year. I beg of someone.

Jim was that a typo? I sure hope so. I don't blame you for having to type with only 6 digits.

that was pretty low missy... Only a person on council or exec would know about Gavin's anger management classes... and jim baileys physical features...hmmm who would that be? perhaps a certain member of SLC that has recently been censured by him?

I'm a little shocked that someone would feel the need to bring the fact that I am missing some fingers into this discussion, and actually find it quite offensive to be honest.

First off it's not 6 fingers, but more around 9.3 if we add them all up together. Second of all, why do my fingers have to be an issue about what I typed? I stand by what I said, and I still have yet to find anyone to give me 3 good things that Jayna has done this year that have been a serious benefit.

Next time if you're going to critic someone, do it on what they write and not a physical disability as that is absolutely disgusting of you to do. And maybe you'd prefer to discuss this is person, so I can put a face to whomever you are.

Yes, that's it, the SU paid for anger management. If you believe that, good for you.

Yeah.... and you say that I'm the one with problems.

jbbailey - Give me three good things that Jayna has done for the organization this year. I beg of someone

1. She's done a super job of getting her name in the Herald.