It’s been a few weeks since the ‘double-payment’ controversy.
Those standing by President Chakma, and those clamoring for his resignation, have made their positions well-known. Professors have expressed their opinions; alumni have weighed in. However, one of Chakma’s main constituents has remained relatively silent – students, on the whole, have been relatively mute.
Some grad students have expressed their opinions on the pay inequity issue since many grad students are left to live on minimal TA money, whereas the president made nearly a million dollars in 2014. But what about undergrads?
As this whole episode unfolded, the timing could not have been worse for student engagement. Most students had more important things to deal with such as final essays, studying for important final exams and completing projects, than coming to conclusions about an issue that, frankly, isn’t proximate to the ‘here and now’ for most students.
My general sense of the student stance on this issue was one of shoulder shrugging. Yeah, it’s a university issue, but, really, what can students do to change this situation anyways?
See, President Chakma is not a regular presence on campus. He’s admitted as much. My only encounter with the president was when he provided introductory remarks to my Convocation ceremony. Other than that, for the ordinary student, the president is out of sight and out of mind.
So, while some might think a lack of student engagement with an issue of such magnitude may be sad, I would turn that sentiment around. It’s sad the president has such a meager presence on campus that issues regarding his pay seem inaccessible to the ordinary student.
I know I had opinions about the president’s pay, but when you feel like the issue is from another world, the question of how to engage with the issue becomes a daunting one.
It has disheartened me that students seemed disinterested, disengaged and, generally, ambivalent to the president’s double dip. Yet, students are the life-blood of this university. Always has been. Always will be.
As students, all we ask are transparency and responsible decisions from the leaders at Western. In this situation, smart people green-lit this contract and a very irresponsible decision. This type of a contractual option was not going to be well-received. At the least, the president could have pre-empted the university population about this option in his contract, and stated the reasons why he was going to exercise this option.
So, with four more years on his contract, will the next few years resemble an awkward spousal relationship in which neither spouse really likes each other anymore but are ‘staying in it for the kids’? Or, will things change and the president will engage more in internal issues.
In the aftermath of this whole episode, the president has organized town halls. What else will the president do to ensure that he engages student’s at the institution that employs him? How will the ordinary student’s experience be changed by the president taking a more active role in the internal affairs?
President Chakma, the ball is in your court.
John Petrella
JD candidate, Western Law
BA’13, MA’14