Written by Corbett Gildersleve, Alumnus
The last two SFSS elections saw few candidates run, with most executive positions running uncontested. This is not a sign of a healthy student society. If only one person out of approximately 24,000 undergrad students are interested in running for an executive position, then how can we say the board has any real legitimacy or mandate?
Some people like to blame student apathy on this. I blame the lack of a formal recruitment and training system. We have hundreds of students taking on leadership roles in their clubs and student unions within the SFSS. Some take on board leadership positions in external groups like The Peak, Embark, Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group, and Residence Hall Association (RHA). Only the SFSS and RHA board positions are paid.
So you can’t say people aren’t interested in taking on responsibility, or that nobody wants to improve things for students. A recruitment and training system for potential/incoming SFSS leaders would help level the playing field, result in more knowledgeable members, and let the new board get up and running faster, instead of having to spend the first four months or more learning their roles. What would this look like?
You could have a search committee that takes recommendations from board, staff, council, and the general membership for people who they think would make good board members. The committee would contact them and invite those that are interested to attend a series of events/workshops/meet-ups to learn more about being a board member in the SFSS. Or, to keep it simple, the SFSS could just do a series of call-outs and have those interested go through some information sessions.
Another option would be to hold an SFSS leadership conference, like UBC’s annual Student Leadership Conference. However, on top of all regular training workshops on event planning, fundraising, etc. there would be be sessions specifically designed to encourage and educate students on being an SFSS board member.
Some options are cheaper than others, some are more structured, and some could net you a lot of recruits all at once. The goal should be find and attract a wide variety of students from all over SFU. Once you have people interested, then you need to educate them on SFSS governance, finances, short and long term projects, and more as well as how to run for the elections.
Each year, some subject matter, like the finer details on some projects and operations work, is sensitive enough that it can’t be discussed until after the new board has taken power. However, there’s a lot of stuff that can be covered beforehand. The goal should be to reduce the amount of time it takes the new board to be knowledgeable and functional so they can actually do their job. Those that don’t win will still be more knowledgeable and might run again in the future, or become involved in other ways like joining SFSS Council or the different committees.
Running for a position effectively blind just leads to frustration, burnout, and a cycle of “washing your hands of it,” and that needs to stop because it helps no one. The board and staff have the opportunity to break this cycle starting in May.
A recruitment and training system is important to the health of the student society as a whole. That being said, while board members are instrumental to the process, they should not be in charge of it.
In my experience, every board member wants to make things better for students. However, some board members are also ambitious and want to use their current and future positions for employment options. This is pretty normal, as not all degrees lead to great jobs, and being a board member for a $5 million non-profit corporation looks good on a resume. Those people will not be too interested in effective recruitment and training. After all, it’s not to their benefit to find and train competent competition.
Staff and administration also can’t take a lead in this system due to an inherent conflict of interest. They can’t be involved in selecting who their next bosses might be beyond facilitating recruiting and training events or meetings.
Because this is about finding the next set of people to run the SFSS, the membership is the biggest stakeholder in all of this and needs to be in charge of the process. A membership group like Council should be the ones to run this as they’re the most student representative body currently.
Ideally, Council would have a standing committee that has a mixture of Council, at-large, staff, and board as members. They would then plan out and run whatever recruitment and training system was developed, and regularly report to Council and the board as to their progress and results. They would work toward having each election be competitive, with at least two candidates running per board position. They would ensure that at least two-thirds of candidates have gone through the training workshops before the election.
It is important to the society as a whole to have knowledgeable and competent leaders, and those leaders cannot simply be the same recycled candidates year after year. Until a proper recruitment and training system can be implemented, though, I advise candidates to invest their own time into recruiting potential allies and slate members. You need a minimum of nine board members to hold a majority, but the more seats the better.
Historically, many board members came from Council, committees, student unions, and clubs. So, you’ll want people from those areas. Seek out large and/or active groups on campus. Some examples could be SFU Athletics, RHA, Canadianized Asian Club, Pakistan Students Association, SFU Choir, Hiking Club, Business Administration Student Society, Science Undergraduate Society, etc.
There are around 300 clubs on campus and 30 or more active student unions. There are capable student leaders everywhere; you just need to do some searching.
If the next election is a repeat of the last, don’t abstain. Instead vote ‘no’ to as many candidates as you can. Not because they are bad people, but because you shouldn’t tolerate a sick and broken system anymore. If successful, this would cause an immediate by-election, and hopefully, cause more people to run.
