As students pack up their bedrooms, anticipating their return to campus, staff clear their offices.
On June 25, 16 staff in the Faculty of Arts and Science (FAS) were laid off, the University confirmed in a statement to The Journal. They’re working with the employees to identify opportunities of re-employment within other departments.
The layoffs were made to address the $35.7 million projected operating budget deficit, the University added.
A month prior, 17 FAS staff willingly vacated their roles through the Voluntary Exit Incentive (VEI) program, the University said.
READ MORE: Job Insecurity causes stress and anxiety among FAS staff
By establishing VEI, leaving vacated positions open, and moving employees into necessary roles rather than hiring external applicants, the University affirms they’ve done whatever they can to minimize impacts on staff as they navigate their financial woes.
***
When an urgent meeting invitation appeared in Lily’s* inbox Tuesday morning, she knew immediately what it meant.
An hour later, two representatives from Queen’s human resources told Lily she’d been laid off. Given little time to process the news, Lily described the meeting as traumatizing.
“I was just trying not to have a full-on panic attack,” Lily said in an interview with The Journal.
The human resource representatives prefaced the panic-inducing news by explaining the University’s operating budget deficit, Lily said. She didn’t want to hear it.
Leading up to her layoff, Lily said it was near impossible for her to decipher what was happening
with the University finances, and why. Following a bombshell townhall meeting in December 2023, where Provost Matthew Evans claimed the University could “cease to exist” if they did not solve the operating budget deficit and teased layoffs, Lily said she was prohibited from having conversations about her job security with colleagues unless they were facilitated by a manager.
What was originally a warm, welcoming work environment dissolved into a toxic and stressful atmosphere, Lily explained.
“I would say it was very autocratic, you know, the environment. And it was stifling. We would reach out to each other in secretive ways and have quiet conversations to make sense of what was happening, because we weren’t able to have those conversations more freely,” Lily said.
Compounding Lily’s stress was the lack of meaningful work. Throughout the winter term, her skills were underutilized with little explanation, making it difficult for Lily to trust her department leaders.
“I honestly think that in the wake of all of this, that’s been the most psychologically damaging part. It was very difficult to truly understand what was going on,” Lily said.
For Lily, the narrative the University has spun about the operating budget deficit is confusing. Despite claiming academic excellence is their top priority, the University has failed to protect staff who help the University sustain that mission, Lily believes.
Shared service’s budget will be cut by 1.5 per cent in the 2024-25 and 2025-26 fiscal years, according to the 2024-25 Final Operating Budget Report to the Board of Trustees.
“It just feels like, with everything going on, everything staff has been working towards achieving [in their roles] is being undermined. The fabric you’ve been a part of. The job you’ve been doing,” Lily said.
Further fueling Lily’s lack of trust in the University’s is a report from Huron Consulting Group. Separating strategic priorities from the budget model has led the University to prioritize undergraduate enrollment at the expense of other revenue sources like research and donor funding, the report concludes.
The report deems the University revenue and expense allocation as complicated, inhibiting academic units’ ability to prepare for the future. The University gives stakeholders little insight into the budgeting process, the reports added.
Susan*, another laid-off staff member, echoes the report’s conclusion that the University needs to improve its financial transparency. Avoiding messiness and gossip surrounding monetary matters is a priority for the University, leaving staff in the dark and undervalued, Susan explained.
“When I was being laid off, I felt like a burden they were shrugging off,” Susan said in an interview with The Journal.
If the University had been fully transparent about the restructuring of FAS and had clearly communicated staff layoffs were imminent, Susan said she would have actively looked for other job opportunities sooner.
“I don’t think the University has been transparent about their priorities. I don’t think that they’ve been communicating in a way that would give staff as much autonomy as they could have,” Susan said.
While Susan has the option to seek reemployment within other departments, she’s been left with a bad taste in her mouth. If given the opportunity to return to the University, she doesn’t know if she’d take it.
However, for Susan and Lily, the University is a sum of its parts. While the former employees question senior leadership’s priorities, they both described their co-workers as exceptional.
Their previous colleagues have the power to create change, Lily added.
“I think that unions are well positioned right now to pull together and make a change,” Lily said.
*Names changed to protect employment agreement
—With files from Jonathan Reilly
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].
Rick
Why do you think employees show little loyalty to their employer. It is because employers show little loyalty. Shame on Queens
PC
Institutional betrayal. Complete lack of ability- but hey, they’ve got new building.
Brooke
The cuts are becoming increasingly evident to the students. Several courses are no longer available, it’s impossible to with issues, and ultimately the students are concerned where the money even went. Queen’s is not the school it used to be.
Daniel
They cut these staff who actually contribute to the university and students, while paying their top people hundreds of thousands of dollars to be terrible at their jobs. These people so not inspire nor motivate, nor do they show appreciation to the people actually doing the work. They waste thousands of dollars each year on selfish, excessive opulence, while some of their employees are literally begging for hours/money to afford groceries. They get 4.5% raise (a year early after promising not to) and everyone else gets 1%. They don’t even deserve 1% let alone 4.5%. Students should be in an uproar. They are also shooting themselves in the foot because prospective students are now questioning if Queen’s is safe to attend knowing their programmes of choice may suddenly cease to exist. Shame on Queen’s and its “leadership”.
Affan
Sorry to know 16 employees were laid off. This happens when people at the top want to save their skin and jobs. Interestingly, university doesn’t have funds for FAS but have lot of money for facelift of existing infrastructure which apparently looks ok. At every nook and corner construction/renovations are in full swing. Top brass should understand the priorities.
Thomas Foley
Disgraceful behaviour by the University management..
As with all like institutions the heart and soul is the staff… they are the first and last s for the students and healthy work environment where staff can work efficiently to make student life AND their lives work well for ALL.
A 4.5 %. Increase for senior management vs % for others cannot do anything but widen the divide..
It seems more financial gain would come from reducing the FAT at the TOP !!!!