RE: AMS Executive elections—experience should be an asset, not a burden
Dear Editors,
Running for student office at Queen’s University is no small feat, but for internal candidates—those who’ve already dedicated themselves to these organizations—it’s even harder. Even though running as an internal candidate may seem easier, everything isn’t as it seems.
Cumulatively, we have spent over 5,000 hours working at the AMS. For Jana, 2,000 of these hours have been spent working as the Social Issues Commissioner (Internal) since May 2024. For Elena, 3,000 of these hours have been split between three AMS positions—Tricolour Service Staff, Common Ground Assistant Manager, and Common Ground Head Manager.
To put it simply, we live and breathe the AMS. We’ve spent countless hours ensuring the success of our respective teams, building relationships, and improving student life. Yet, when we stand up and ask for an opportunity to lead, our experience isn’t seen as a strength—it’s treated as a liability. Our prior experience in the AMS was made to feel like a source of shame.
The AMS elections endorsement policy didn’t just create barriers—it erased our time with the organization. Those who witnessed our work firsthand, those who understood what it takes to lead within this organization, weren’t allowed to voice their . Meanwhile, candidates with no institutional knowledge could receive endorsements from organizations without any understanding of AMS operations.
But these restrictions go beyond endorsements. We weren’t even allowed to be seen doing the work that has defined our time at Queen’s. No media could show us actively leading in the spaces we fought to improve. Any footage of us working within AMS spaces had to be censored as if the organization itself had to disown the very people who have helped build it. Years of service were reduced to nothing.
If experience is a liability, what does that say about the system we’ve built? Just because the AMS claims no experience is necessary doesn’t mean experience should be unwelcome. But that’s exactly what it felt like.
The purpose of this letter isn’t to abolish the election policy but to recognize its contradictions. We’re not asking for an unfair advantage. We’re simply asking for a fair opportunity to present ourselves honestly, as candidates who have put in the work, who have shaped this organization, and who are ready to lead it forward.
The AMS shouldn’t be an institution that stifles its own leaders—it should be a place that uplifts them. This is exactly what we intend to do.
All our best,
Jana Amer, HealthSci ’26, Incoming AMS President
Elena Nurzynski, ArtSci ’25, Incoming AMS Vice President (Operations)
Tags
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].