Five new directors have been elected or acclaimed for 2022–2024: Marios Ioannidis, Shannon Majowicz, Nomair Naeem, Paul Wehr, and Nancy Worth.
We did not receive any nominations from members in the Faculty of Science during the nomination period, and the Nominating and Elections Committee is working with the Board to determine how best to proceed with filling that seat.
Meet the directors-elect
The Nominating and Elections Committee offered all candidates the opportunity to submit a candidate statement describing:
- their priority for their time on the Board,
- how they will collaborate with colleagues to represent all faculty members, and
- the skills or experience they have that would make them a good Board member.
Candidates' statements have not been altered in any way, except to correct obvious typographical errors.
I am an Associate Professor in the School of Public Health Sciences (Faculty of Health). My research focuses on preventing food- and waterborne infections in Canada and globally, by improving the use of evidence in decision making, including when there are multiple competing perspectives. Before joining Waterloo, I spent a decade working in public health (Government of Canada) as an infectious disease epidemiologist.
Since joining Waterloo in 2012, I have enjoyed collaborating across faculties on several research efforts, and I developed a strong appreciation for Waterloo’s diverse strengths and interests including during my service to the Water Institute (Strategic Planning Committee, 2012-2016; Collaborative Water Program, 2017-2020) and FAUW (Council of Representatives, 2016-2018). I have also participated in collegial governance of the School, as an elected member of the School Executive Committee (2017-2020; 2022-2025).
I am eager to support FAUW with my infectious disease and public health expertise as we begin to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic, and to ensure that the lessons we’ve learned as faculty are used to improve equity and shared governance here at Waterloo.
I have had the honour to serve on the FAUW Board and the Council of Representatives for two years. The time has been an eye-opening experience as I began to understand how FAUW works and in particular FAUW’s relationship with the Administration. I wished to write about the great things we achieved during these last two years but the lack of progress on P76/77 overshadows it all. Lecturers are a diverse and growing group and it is important that policies governing their employment be updated to accurately represent their rights and responsibilities. This will continue to be a priority for me if I am reelected to the Board.
P76/77 has been a FAUW focus for so long. There are however many other pressing issues that FAUW needs to attend to. A growing priority is a governance review of how FAUW operates. FAUW has already taken positive steps which include creating the Nominating and Elections Committee, of which I was a member, to cast a wider net to fill positions, and a volunteer Parliamentarian to ensure FAUW meetings are conducted according to procedure and allow equitable member participation. A thorough review of FAUW’s internal policies will ensure transparency within the Board and in fulfilling its duties to the membership.
Another concern/priority is the relationship between FAUW and the University. A collegial governance model, where faculty and administration consult to make decisions, is very desirable. However, recently, and especially during the pandemic, the general sense has been that the administration has taken a heavy-handed and unilateral approach to making decisions that affect employees without including Faculty and Staff in meaningful consultation. Additionally, the way Policy Drafting Committees (PDC) operate and the confidentiality conditions surrounding meetings (e.g., FRC, PDC) indicate that collegial governance might not be working as well as we hope. In my opinion, FAUW and the University need to come together to tackle this growing discord.
I am asked to speak regarding collaborating with colleagues to represent all faculty members. I am a lecturer and of course matters affecting lecturers will continue to be important to me. However, if elected, I would be representing all faculty and I take this responsibility seriously. As current Board members would attest, I come prepared to Board meetings and actively take part on all agenda items. I work well with others in a collegial yet goal-oriented manner. When working in a team, I try to have good faith and honest discussions and to ensure that everyone’s opinions are heard and discussed in an equitable manner. I believe that it is important to listen and understand both sides to make informed decisions and come to viable resolutions. I think of myself as an approachable person and am happy to advocate on behalf of my colleagues. In my last two years on the Board, I have learned a lot, and contributed where I could. Given the opportunity, I am now in an even better place to work towards a better working environment for all faculty.
A previous board-member from 2015 to 2019 and a founding member of the Lecturer’s Committee (Chair from 2017 – 2019). At the time, I was a fresh-faced new hire from British Columbia eager to learn about my new colleagues and to devote my efforts for their benefit. I feel like I achieved much over those four years including meaningful contributions to the ongoing Policy 76 revisions and to the new merit thresholds set for lecturers. I believe that my collaborative nature, fair-mindedness, and curiosity were assets to the board then, and will be again.
- Academic freedom is critical to the proper functioning of the university and board members are tasked with safeguarding this precious gift for the benefit of everyone in the community. Maintaining academic freedom is obviously a high priority.
- As a scholar trained in psychometrics, I’m concerned with the continued use of student perceptions to evaluate course instructors. In addition to be being biased, they tend to demotivate innovation in teaching. I am able to facilitate the implementation of alternative evaluative methods. More generally, I’m sensitive to any issue that impacts teaching at the university.
- As an admitted skinflint, I pay close attention to FAUW’s expenditures. This is not something every board member needs to do, but there should be at least one person thinking about how the membership’s money is spent.
- Finally, although I am not opposed to unionizing in principle, I would note that FAUW already has the right to bargain collectively and to grievance processes. I would need to hear compelling reasons to convince me that tearing up the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) – and more than doubling our dues – is a good idea.
I work well with others and enjoy collaboration. I remain open minded with those that I disagree with, and I speak up when I witness bad ideas gaining traction. I’m not afraid to be wrong on an issue and I’m willing to admit to it when that inevitably happens. I also have an overdeveloped sense of fairness, often to the detriment of my own interests. Most importantly, I believe that the best solution to a given problem is found by putting personal politics aside and evaluating the arguments and evidence instead. Hopefully, you’ll find my case for election compelling enough to send me (back) to the FAUW board.
As a researcher interested in labour and worker agency, I would like to contribute to building a more equitable workplace. I’m interested in working on member concerns related to employment conditions, broadly defined. Also, not discounting the real risks around institutional equity data, I believe there is an opportunity for us to use this initiative to both advocate and negotiate for faculty. I’d like to be part of the group that develops our priorities in this area.
I have been a member of FAUW’s Equity Committee, the Indigenous Priorities Action Committee and I am the FAUW rep on the Equity Data Advisory Committee. I am completing a term as a faculty-at-large rep on Senate, with experience on Senate’s finance committee and as Senate faculty rep on a VP nominating committee. Currently I’m part of the Dean of Environment nominating committee. I am also the Environment rep on Arts Faculty Council.
In general, boards of directors for any association are focused on the overall mission, long-term viability, stakeholder trust and confidence, and financial stewardship. Directors are essentially the caretakers of the organization itself, with a duty to act in the best interests of the organization.
At FAUW, the Board oversees FAUW governance and strategic direction, including in relation to the budget, policy development, salary negotiations, and the protection of member rights. Directors are expected to stay current on issues before the Board, and to prepare for and participate in biweekly Board meetings (Thursdays at 2:30, September through June).
Often, a Board member will also assume a leadership role on a particular matter within the Board mandate that is of personal interest. Some Board members may represent FAUW on University committees that require a Board member. Four Board members, in addition to the president, serve on the Faculty Relations Committee and meet with university administrators every two weeks to negotiate faculty working conditions.
- See our "Being a Board Member" page for more about the responsibilities of directors.
- For official explanations of Board governance and responsibilities, please see the FAUW Constitution and our Memorandum of Agreement with the University.
- Read "The FAUW Board: A great way to get started in collegial governance" on our blog and our Faculty Guide page on collegial governance for an explanation of how governance works at Waterloo and FAUW's role in it.