National Union of Students (NUS) Canada - History of Student Unionism - 1972

8/2/2019 National Union of Students (NUS) Canada - History of Student Unionism - 1972

1/5

' ;' :,,,'.'.,n'

'" .," - , " : ' '.',' , !, ," J ~ ' ; .... ...;:,',"1 ;1" .1 ' ;,.:!; he S(: : '

, ' o r ' " ' , ' "L:-:.:',: ' , 2 ~ : ~ ; : ' ; j'(

HISTORY 'OF ST.U13ENT UNIONISM

i. : ''; .'. : ' : ::; " i, . "j .d,''',: 1':,

!.~ ,t ; \.

..;.l.' r, '

Overview'

, Iildee'd,' one dla tUrbihgly cona tarit patterltj,13 t h E l f i ~ ~ . a n dfaU ofmembers ' interest arid a'ctua1'membe'rship. ' At t h r e ~ ' t i i n e ' s i n ,the past 49 years"most student governments have watched Se:riousprbb1ems develop in ' the ' riat iona1 organ! zatipn. . Ea'ch,.tirrie 'the. , r f J , G ~ } . o r f .of many. was to withdraw un'td.T' the :organi"zati0n' il1)proVed.Or: tt). .c'on-,cLude that any na tiona l organ iza tion was nat worth t.he ef fo r t : u n i t y w a s r e ~ t b r l , : l ' aand with a new enthusiasm the o r g a n i Z a t i o ! 1 " . P r b s p e ' J ; ' ~ d . : I n , ; L ' ~ ' 6 . s ' i ~ 9 , . : . ; 0 , ; : \ " . ,. , l ' ',- , ,,:, ' ,1 ' ; " .'. '" , ..... '.

Although Canadian students had a nat ional organization frOm,1926. the i r organization has proven unable; so rar , to achieve thestrength and s tabi l i ty shown b . other nat.iona]"sttldent .Qrgapizapons.manyofthemybunger;" 'Certainprob1ems and, t rend.shaye been .. e ' y ~ d e p tover the past;49 years ... ' These': lnclude'diff ' i 'culty of' admiri:L'str'iit:ton.regional r i valr1es. f'llictliat1ng membeiship :and a:-basic'enthusii=isnf .f'or- .co-operat ion.' . ' .: .... . ' . .." .' The ve'ry 'size o f Cahada hinders thecommunicahons"anci : i q t e ~ ins t i tu t ional re la t ions tha t are necessary to build ' the stroni?;.seriseof'commonaction thatmany' l66k for in a nat iopalQtganizat lon . 'It 'often. seems that the only two'al ternatives'arera'- 'h'igh1y cen,tral:j.zed,, . '. .. . . ' '. . . . . ', " . , .' . ' . .v : ' .... ..... ', . 'i (' J: :',' .. ' . '. --" ' . : , ". '-' , ',.-. ,operation"whichis remote from' i t s members ;or on'e which is sodegentral izedtha t e f . f ~ C i e r i t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .and' decis:l,'on';'lllaking.:isi m i ? o s s i b l ~ . r . . ' ..\> ,: ",;,. """" '. ", ,.:' _. ,

'; . sln'ceHtneml'd1"950's regional d i f t e r e n b e E ! ' a n d " ~ i v a l r : ! ' & ~ ' h e \ 1 . r ~been a noticeable source of f'ri ct fori . St'udents h.avesom'e'tirries be'enunwilling to recognize a,nd allow. forregionalclifJeJ:'e;ncEls Ln ' tacticsanda t t i tudes/ 'even When' there: waaa,g;r:eeplent o \ ' l , p ' q . l i c ~ ; a n 8 , g Q ? - l s . ,Differences oVer policy"have be'erirobs cured. by th'e 'preQcGL\pa,ti'dn withregionalism.' '111,' addii t i b r i ~ h e ' r e h , i s b e e n t h e ':sentiment ''that',a. naticm-',,' ' , :" '. ' . .. -' . .- . ', : " ' , " ..", ;< .,.,: . . . . . . . : .. , : ..'" i : . , ." .. ( : ,"a l organizatiohmuErt'di!rectly represer i ta l a r g e m ~ , j o r i t y O':C,P'9,st-secondarty students 0relsehave' l lo credib;l.1i ty . This sentiment ...goes: beyon'd' the' p r a : h t i c a F i p r o b ~ e m s of low. : r : e y e n u e ~ h a t . .a , c ' c o m p ~ n . ~ ..a"smaller memberShip.' . Theinsistence . upon a cons'tantly1a:r:,ge. membership led to vir tualPani icwhen. , in;anyone l ' ~ f ~ ' ~ ' V e r a l m e r r i b E t t ~ ; : lef tthe natioha'1' organization' .: regardless of' .the,ir .reaspns fo;rp,c5:ing;so. ." .... , . : , ~ : , ...;. ,." "' . ," ' ,

f' , . ' Th i s i paper.':l:8 a b r i e f " rev iewof studerWorgan:i iJt:iciri in . .,Canada; It contains an oirerview of 'cer ta in trendS and pat terns (thathave' emerged. ' then. t r a c e s t h e h i s t o r y o f t n e ~ s uc ces af, V ~ ' . o r g e m i z a ' t i o n sand. ends by "leading into ,.the "NUS/UNE .orit!inti;ttion'paper: .'1'i1;!(perspect i veof ' thepaper,;isalrrios t e;cclusi vely;na t ional >"as' Oppose c:l..t6" " 'prov1.ncial. because the majo r source of ' mater ia l was .theCUS .. '.'archives. andb.ecause 'unti l tne 1960' spravinCial" organizationS' we:r.e.unknown. i " " " , , ' ,.' . ;' ... ~ . '" -, :":,,


2/5

2,ffort came tl)o la te , and i t faced the new element of

~ ~ g e of the diff icul t ies . No cure. for fluctuating",'been sugges tied , and i f it continues Canada' s national: ~ a t i o n may i;tlways be vel?,tiyelYWeal


3/5

History of Student Unionism ,.l evel .

During World War I I most NFCUS ac t i 'liit;,' ceased, and it wasthe task of 1944 and 1945 conferences to renew consciousness of the'Federation. A cross-co:untry tour .by the 1946'47 Pre 'sident greatly,helped the re'bui'lding. He. botti 'convinced most s tudent unions tor es umei.act.Lve membership arrd iLad.d the foundation 'for NFCUS's f i r s tserious involvement with the in te rna t ional student movement ; For ""the most par t the c r-gand.za.t.Lon was content to continue in its,pre'" 'warpa th ,a l though there was scme. agi t a t ion fo!r' reduct ion 'of the ' f inan-' : c i a lbar r i e rs to pos t.-ue condar-y educat ion. . ..

A permanent office in Ottawa wasestabUshed in 1951; andth is served toincreas 'e the in te rna l continuity,ofiNFCUS., However,them6re act ive role and increasedpol1l.iee.l involvement causeds t ra ins among ithevmemoe-r-a vthaf had not -pre.vd.ousLy e xf.s tie.d , 'As theveterans graduated enrolment decreased, causing a decrease in NFCY-Sincome. I t was impossible to meet a l l of -he demands upon the organi za t ion , and SOme ,:of the' members, began to . jo inand leav e w ith aj.armingregular i ty . Thed i vis ion was most 0 ften. between l a rge r andsmaller memners, although there were' also d iffe ren ces o ver p olicy(eg .scholarsh ips vs , loans as the, form of' 'government ass is tance tostudents) , T h e l owpo i n t was 1956; whenNFCUS.leadersconsidered.dissolving the Federation because 'it no long;errepresented a t least .ha l f o f ' the universi ty s tudents . '

The respOnse to the f luc tuat ing membership was a moreambitiousNFCUS programme., s t ress ing nat ional unity and the need fo ran adequat-e nat ional student aid .p lan . NFCUSpa rt ic ip at ed in' t heCanadian Educat.Lon Donf'e re'nces , and intere13 t in ' the Fede.ration' in;.:.; "creased wi th thegene ra lg ; rowthof concern about educat ion. The ',period from 1958 to 1962 was untroubled and. fa i r ly product ive;!'lFCUS direct ly represented up to 80% of the:'Universii:;y. s tudents .I ts 'members were pleased with the work of ,the ' executive and s t a f f .The public was re cep tiv e to s tudents ' desire .for' bet t e r as s Ls cance.,Canadian UnionofStudents /Unioncanadienne de'S 'etudiants (CUS/UCE)

New problems, arose j,n 1963 when NFCUS' fa i led to . f i ndas t ructure and pol i t i ca l s t ance tha t ,sat i 'sfied, all .members, ','Somewi,shed ,NFCUSto continue as large,ly a ' s e rv i -ceorganizat ion ' that 'lobbied for students but did not become! -LnvoLve d in the wideris s ue s or socia l anaLy sas Others , ' espe da.11Y the Quebecois, saw: students as members, of the working class who 'Should be paid fOr '!,etheir contrib 'Utionand who should take par t ' , in .workingc lass 13truggles a t home' and abroad. ' All members agreed t ha t th e d iffe re nc esbetween the Engl'ish and French speakf.ng nat ions 'of Canada should be.r-e cognazed when NFCUSdeal twi theducat ional ' i s sues 'and elec ted i t soff icers , plus in amending i t s const i tu t ion . Another poin t of con-sensus was. changing the name! to Canadian Union 'o f Students in recognit ion .o r NFCUS's e l i t i s t b a s e a l 1d t he expected growth of non-university, 'post-secondary education. ,The break came when in executiveelections the ae rvt.ce.: or'iented English 'speaking 'members prevai ledover t h e po l i tlcized.members (mostly French .speaking, but LncLudf.ngacs';Egnificant 'English speaking gr-oup . ) '}

i' i '

"

-"


4/5

That decision and the growing sense of independence i n Q u e ~bee led quickly to the establishment in 1964 of l 'Un ion gener ale desetUdiants dUQuebec (.UGEQ). By 1966 both the French an d EnglishGUS/UGE 'members .rr-om Quebec had j oine dUGEQ..Howeve'r , . 'the f'ede r'a l , :government's fa i lure 'to .begdri making large grants to educat ion meanttha t both 'organizat ions took ' the poLfrt.LcaL path frdm'196.4. GUS/UGEconc.entratedalmost :exclusive:ly on education ,camp:aigning,for lowerf inancia l and soc ia l barri .ers to p o s t ~ s e c o n d a r y educa ti on , un iv er sa lacces f3 ib i l i ty to education,and 9pen d e c i s i o n ~ m a k i n g within the edu..,cat.ic;mal ins : t i tu t ions . Education was seen as par t of the economicand social s t ruc ture , a par t which should be. conscioUsly .LnvoLve d inchanging t ha t s tructure and which should rea l ize tha t it re f lec t sthe la rger s t ruc t ur-e ts values"GUS/UCE-. in i t ia ted 'and adminis tereda compr-ehansLvs :Means, sur-vey .whi,ch provided much of "the data rregar-ding bar-r-Ler-svbo pos t-ss e condary ' education. GUS/UCEalso 'worked inassocia ted i areas of dire,ct ef fec t upon students: such "as housing andt rave l .

':):n 1966 and, 1967 ,opposition :.within CUS/UdE: grew, as a re su l tof the policy:regardingJ and foster ing of .orr-campus debatie..about ,nationa,l and in te rna t iona l i ssues which had no di rec t 'o r obviouS ' ,ef fec t upon s t ude ntis, SimultaneouslyCUS/UCE emphasized mcr-e.vt.han:ever the need for,10.cal 'work around . the issues .andpolic ies withwh:ttlh i t was Lnvo.L ved .' The regional ,conferences,ofCUS/UCEwerea ~ . < l i s h e d and the role of CUS/UCE s t a f f was expanded to include"f ie ld work (advis ing and ass i s t ing the member unions during one weekvis i s t s ) 'as ,well as t he reat abLf.ehe dwor-k in research , commUnicationslobbying and, t r ave l . ' In most predominantly, Engli sh speak ing provinces the :student unions formed, independent associat ions to discussprovincial . is.sueso'r .tihe pnovf.ncLa.L aspect .o f i ssues and to de cLde :pol ic ies . .Unlike CUS/UCE ,t-hese or-gana za t ions nacno per capi ta , feeand s ta f f . ,There was ' apprehension:that theY would appear- to some -asa sUbst i tu te forCUSAliCE, or as a ' f i r s t l ev el o fe xt er na l ac t iv i ty ,ra ther than a means of co,-ordinating LccaL. work on the issues and 'pol ic ies i .mpor tant to .Canaddan s tudents .

, ' In 1968 'GUS/UGE conb tnue d to,de:velop policy on,-education, 'Canadian socie ty and in te rna t iona l a f fa i r s based upon a rad ica lanalys is . iIt .a lsoendorsed confrontatiOn a s a po: l i t ic iz ing techni-que J,.including' confrontat ion between CUS/UCE land :i .ts members. Thefieldworking .sys t em-waa vstneng thene d, but .p oor' communfcat.Lonsvwf.uhs tudent unions land individual students was s t i l l ,a problem. Themass media portrayed GUS/UCE as a violent .or-gant.aat ton ,.. and GUS/UCEleaders tJ:'ied to .convf.nce s tudents of the value ofc 'onfronta t ion andinvolvement i n " n o n ~ s t u d e n t n issues ra ther , than ' sel l , the, organizat ioas a source o f se rv ic es, (whi,ch .Lt still was ) , a nda vehicle for theexchange of"ideasamong st.uderrusv. The result . was that ' 30 campusreferenda on CtJS/UCE membership were held , with'T8 deciding aga ins t .

By the s ummen 'o f 1969 a rebuilding ef for t had begun, f o u n d ~ed on r e je c ti on o f '. un re a li s ti c rhe tor ic- and will ingness to ac como-,date most s tudent viewpoints, in . deCiding CUS/UCEpolicy. Beforethe change could have much ef fec t the 1968 image .r-esul.bed in severa l more referenda .Loases , cut t ing, the membership to ','13 studentunions with about 35, 000 members ina l l ,CUS/UCEcea . s ed operations

History of Student Unionishm 4 ., . , . ~ . .-, \ '


5/5

History of Student Unionism 5in November, 1969. UGEQ had wound up in 1968 when faced with s imi l -ar problems and such fragmentation of the pol i t icized students t ha teven many local student. unions were rejected and wound up. Only thet ravel departments of the two organiza tions survived , and they havecontinued as separa te o rgan izat ions a lthough without the la rgerorganizat ion's support they are weak and have l i t t l e impact a t thecampus level .National Union of Students/Union nat ionale des etudiants (NUS/UNE)

From 1969 to 1971 several student conferences found tha t theCUS/UCE problems had so frightened student leaders tha t very fewwere will ing to s t a r t building a replacement. Provincial and regiona l organizations - usually l i t t l e more than voluntary organizat ions- roSe and fe l l . Sometimes they met with success, but few had morethan one sat isfactory year while several las ted for only a fewmonths.The atmosphere began to change in 1972. Various provinceswere reviewing post-secondary educa ti on ; t he FiscaJ. Arrangements Actnegotiations raised the poss ibi l i ty o f g reatly increased tu i t ion;most stUdents real ized for the f i r s t time the problems of graduatingwith a large debt already incurred. An ef for t was made to renew theprovincial organizat ions, with success in Bri t ish Columbia and Ontar io . Once again most stUdent governments expressed approval fo rthe concept of a na ti ona l o rgani za ti on .

National Union of Students (NUS) Canada - History of Student Unionism - 1972

Documents

Transcript of National Union of Students (NUS) Canada - History of Student Unionism - 1972