Early in 2021, AUFA’s Executive prioritized making meaningful progress toward building a more inclusive union. As an initial step, AUFA President David Powell reported to the May 2021 General Membership Meeting in this way:
AUFA has begun an Indigenous Audit by hiring Dr. La Royce Batchelor who is examining AUFA’s documents and culture to create a series of recommendations towards a more inclusive and decolonized construct by shifts in language, inclusion, equity, diversity, and community. What that has meant is to look at what is written and what is said, and what that means. To question what power relationships are enforced through how our contract and other documents are written, and to whose advantage.
Since then, Dr. Batchelor has provided AUFA with several reports and recommendations. As an example, in a recent email to the AUFA Executive, Dr. Batchelor explained the link between union practices and the broader culture at AU:
It is a common misperception that it is the employer that determines corporate culture. However, repeated studies have demonstrated that it is the largest mass of participants that shapes corporate culture, or functional operations. If members of AUFA decide to function or operate in a different way the administration must shift.
In November, the Executive struck a committee to examine and respond to Dr. Batchelor’s observations. At present, the committee includes Myra Tait, Gail Leicht, Rhiannon Rutherford, and David Powell. Following both the letter and the spirit of Dr. Batchelor’s suggestion that the ‘largest mass of participants shapes corporate culture,’ however, many others will be needed in different capacities at different points throughout the process. The work is complex and requires us to examine biases, assumptions, structures, and long-standing practices. It’s also essential, especially if we, as a collective of over 400 individuals, are serious about addressing inequities and promoting inclusion both within our union and within the university.
To that end, while this project was initially conceived of as an Indigenous Audit, we think a better way to conceptualize it is as an Equity Audit. This more expansive and inclusive process title, we think, better reflects the audit’s broad scope and many different perspectives on power structures and relationships within AUFA and AU.
As an AUFA member, you are encouraged to review AUFA’s Equity Statement, and to consider adding your name as a signatory or offering feedback.
The Equity Committee appreciates all member feedback on the Equity Statement. We are an active committee, meeting on a monthly basis to consider a wide range of equity issues at AU. As we consider your comments, our hope is to revise the Statement on an annual basis, for presentation at the AUFA Annual General Meeting.
For the initial stages of the audit, Dr. Batchelor conducted detailed analyses of AUFA’s foundational documents, including our constitution, bylaws, and collective agreements, in addition to the Post-Secondary Learning Act, as well as the more dynamic content on the AUFA blog and website. Current and future stages will see Dr. Batchelor conduct a series of surveys designed to probe organizational culture.
Getting Started: Language Matters
Dr. Batchelor is especially attentive to how language is used – both in foundational documents as well as in our daily work and interactions. Language, of course, is powerful, and it can either reinforce inequitable power relations or promote an inclusive and welcoming organizational culture.
In the first report, Dr. Batchelor wrote,
It is difficult to focus on a dramatic organizational shift at the same time society is struggling with health and welfare as well as AUFA fighting for the jobs of its constituents. However, it is highly recommended that AUFA 1) establish a clear list of goals both current and aspirational, 2) examine definitions both connotative and denotative to ensure future clarity, and 3) question ALL language but especially language of an obvious power distance or punitive nature.
This emphasis on language is the focus of the first survey tool. The “Concepts and Definitions” survey invites participants to identify different definitions of key terms. For example, a particular term may have a different operational function than does its dictionary definition. It may also have other meanings and connotations within our organizational culture. These different definitions can sometimes stand in stark conflict with one another, and potentially contribute to inequitable power relations. Dr. Batchelor further explains:
The goal is to determine if the definitional and functional differences in words commonly used in AUFA foundational documents are also used in functional operations. If the words do not appear to have the same definitional drift in functional operations then the redress can be focused on the documents themselves. However, I am already finding that the definitions drift further in functional operations. This means that not only are there profound differences in the definitions across foundational documents, the definitions are also different in functional operations. We cannot conduct any meaningful shift in Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility if everyone is using a different functional definition.
The differences in definitions doesn't only exist in documents. Research reveals that less than 17% of employees actually read foundational documents. They rely instead on the functional operations definitions. Therefore it is necessary to understand not only the differences in document language, but also the understanding of those that rely on those documents for their livelihood. We can have amazing policies, but if the functional operation understanding does not match then we still have exclusion, homogeneity, favoritism, and inaccessible systems.
Next Steps
Some of the AUFA Executive piloted this first survey tool. For the next pilot group, we will draw from a representative sample of approximately 30 AUFA members. Responses are, of course, entirely voluntary, and will be sent to Dr. Batchelor directly, kept confidential, and analyzed for content only.
A request for participation will be sent to a random and representative sample of members, but any interested members are also welcome to submit responses. Download this file and send it to Dr. Batchelor.
