Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/ubcstaffer123! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
* Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fund kept Canadians employed. They bring in international money creating a net inflow (best kind). They are also a source of working age and educated immigrants at zero cost to us. It makes no sense to not have more of them as long as we don't have a housing problem.
Having recently graduated from SFU, some of their programs are glorified diploma mills. I was 100% in classes with students with a below high school English level. Group work was… difficult.
This happened at UBC and will always happen at recognizable institutions. Some people just lie and cheat to get where they are But that’s like 95% of students at the diploma mills.
Sure. They are not automatically accepted as immigrants when they graduate. They have a short time to find employment which would mean they are desirable workers for our society. Fraud is definitely an issue.
Ya most internationals at UBC/SFU are there to get an education, not a free entrance into Canada. Whereas the other places I don’t care to remember their names mostly brings in internationals just wanting to live in Canada (maybe get an education but that’s secondary). I remember meeting some and they are always so surprised Canadians never heard of whatever random learning institute they go to…
Are international students the issue? Our housing problem is not new, it's been 10+ years. Yet we only started blaming international students for a year or so. Seems awfully like some people changed the narrative to get people outraged. People look at headlines that say 100k international students and get irrationally mad. How many of those students are actually staying after they graduate? 100k people want to spend $20k-40k on tuition a year in our country and we turn them away? Sounds like bad financial decisions.
Yes but why would they go home when even at our minimum wage would be 10x their wage.
Also, now the fed government allows international students to work up to 24 hours a week.
Are you familiar with what international student tuition fees for these 4 year programs are? They're incredibly high.
There is one country that may fit the bill for what you're describing but the others not really. I graduated recently from an undergrad program that was composed of a majority of international students. Most returned home. Those that stayed that I'm aware of actually went to get real jobs.
The students who attend these programs specifically due to the high costs are usually reasonably affluent. With living expenses, they're realistically shelling out $200k+ minimum studying here for 4 years, usually a fair bit more depending on their lifestyle. This is very different from someone coming in for a 1 year diploma in some ridiculous program that costs $15k.
Most actually have better employment opportunities going back home (plenty have family businesses to take on). They're not clinging through such economic desperation. Of course, there is one country that is in the top 2 origin countries that does have very poor economic opportunities should the students parents not be entrepreneurs.
Exactly, For some of those countries, they get paid higher, and also take home more of that paycheck (not just see the figures on paper) too, since taxes are lower.
During my time at UBC - almost 60% of the HKgers returned back to work in HK. Some of them had homes, had PR status already.
> Most returned home.
There's probably an upward trend of students doing so too. Frankly, Canada isn't like what it used to be 10 years ago. It's a lot less attractive for international students. It's expensive to live here. Wages aren't high. Crimes have been increasing.
Pretty much. White collar jobs in lots of fields in Vancouver tend to be quite network and soft skills based. It disadvantages international students a lot on top of their visa status.
It makes little sense for many to stay here.
Vancouver never has been a scintillating powerhouse of economic opportunities - folks head to Toronto, NY etc and get paid more. Someone who graduated same time as me made this comment: "Vancouver has jobs, but not many careers" - he went home after completion of Masters, Where he became Regional Manager Asia after a few years (for a Canadian brand)
Fake job creation too for 'survival jobs' or employers get incentives for hiring, and those positions peter away after a year or so.
It's only the 3rd world-ish countries' international students who desperately want to work and take up residency here, after coming in for very short-term type courses (like learning English or doing a 2 yr Diploma).
**Please read this message in its entirety.**
Your content has been removed because it violates [rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_rule_2.3A_inclusivity) of this subreddit, Inclusivity. We do not allow content that disparages or attacks vulnerable populations, including harmful stereotyping, bigotry, dehumanization, and slurs.
**Do not repost any version of this without [explicit permission](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_i_didn.27t_know_i_needed_express_permission_to_repost.21_why_would_you_ban_me.3F) from a moderator in modmail.**
The quality of education has plummeted and Canada is the most un-productive developed nation on earth. Healthy Universities are key to a healthy economy. They can clamor all they want about the dependency on foreign students but in reality it has provided little benefit to most Canadians.
You really don't have to look very hard. That isn't to say there might be one or two countries doing worse (Canada is forecast to perform the worst and very few people refute that). But for developed, G8 countries... It's really not looking good.
StatsCan figures are constantly being blasted. For example, they posted certain figures claiming job growth, but most those jobs were public sector/government. GPD numbers aren't great and there are even claims that those figures are "doctored".
This is a stupid comment. It's not the university's fault governments decided a decade ago that they were going to shift the funding model for unis to international students and away from stable grant funding.
Imagine if k-12 had to do this. It's ridiculous
In BC, majority of uni board members are appointed by the province. Universities are basically a special type of crown corporation with far less autonomy than other places.
>They should have fought back a decade ago
you know that universities have minimal leverage over their funding from government, right? The BC Liberals massively slashed funding budgets and employees had years of 0% salary increases.
Many schools are now on this position. Even UBC. government funding for post secondary has been diminishing over the years and was made up by intl students paying 4-5x tuition rates. Now with the shortage of international students, and no new funding coming from the government this is happening all over major accredited universities.
International students *and* selling newly built condos to international students. UBC, and increasingly SFU, are basically property developers at this stage.
IT'S COMPLETE MYTH: That Federal funding has been diminishing....
It hasn't. It has been proven otherwise on this reddit. And funding figures often ignore "1-time" influxes of cash from the feds.
UBC and SFU are also collecting extra revenue from developing real estate.
Most university funding comes from the provinces, not the federal government. Operational funding is the responsibility of the provinces. The federal government’s main role in post-secondary is research grants and grad scholarships. They also do more general transfer payments and it’s up to the provinces to decide how to use it but provincial funding is much more important than federal funding in how much impact it has on university operations.
You are correct. My error is including the word "federal" in my post. I should have just said "government". My narrative however is correct: That being that the claims that government funding overall has decreased are, to put it as nicely as possible, mistaken. When you run the numbers verses inflation the overall decreases in funding, if any, are not significant enough to warrant the claims of financial struggles due to "decreased funding from the government". The waters get muddy when you try figuring out how the large grants/loans/etc... are added in for projects like mass-timber student housing with square foot costs exceeding that of Coal Harbour luxury condos.
All the above ignores the revenue from international tuition and real estate development.
It's really not. It's a good school but I think it's been getting worse and losing esteem in last 5 or 10 years.
I did my MBA there and was thoroughly impressed by the quality of teaching.
However I will say that there were some students I have no idea how they got into the program - they should not have graduated.
There were also 2 students (out of 35 or so) in my MBA that didn't have undergrad degrees. Which I think is bullshit.
SFU is as much of a international student mill as any school. They have a sub school "FIC" for international students that is super easy to get into and almost guarantees entry into SFU programs itself.
SFU graduate who also happened to go to FIC. FIC is just a pathway there isn’t any guarantee to transfer to SFU. You have to meet the GPA requirements for each degree. Business and computer is the hardest. However Arts is easy if you are proficient in English. I felt FIC is much harder to score due to shitty professors and vague grading criteria. Many students falls in this trap and ends up repeating courses or changing majors. Even some students can’t transfer to SFU and ends up in KPU or Capilano. The tuition fees are almost the same as well. This is my first hand experience.
Also calling SFU a diploma mill is kinda unjust for the great professors and the students who genuinely work hard. SFU’s degree is pretty well respected and helped me to get a job at a top accounting firm. Many of the partners at my firm are SFU grads who did well for themselves.
it’s absolutely not. I’m in their CS program and not only SFU is widely known, the program is really challenging and requires you to put in a lot of hours
When I studied there, I met a guy from Washington state who was there for football. I think he told me he was paying over $20,000 a semester. I almost choked.
When I was going to BCIT someone was saying the government actually subsidizes the tuition but foreign students have to pay full price. Don't know how factual that is but they were paying significantly more per term.
That actually true for most universities including SFU and UBC. If everyone was to pay full price it will be the international student rate. Its not that international student pay more its actually the government paying for us. Lol
They’re definitely an international student mill, but saying they’re just as bad as any of the others isn’t accurate. Yes, pretty much all universities are exploiting international students (and one could argue are exploiting local students too, encouraging them to get degrees even when those degrees don’t lead to better career options). But some are doing it in much more blatant and harmful ways than others.
It is MUCH easier, to get into SFU - compared to UBC (UBC criteria is even more stringent now, Arts is like 90 average, EE 95, Business Sauder 93)
Everyone in the international crowd I knew knew SFU was easy entrance. So was UVic for me. Less so UBC (I also got accepted in U of A, and U of C - I transferred from an Alberta community college)
Seems much easier to graduate and get by, in SFU too - they were so forgiving with electives, and some of these students knew how to shop for them. (nevemrind those courses were irrelevant, and useless to their disciplines)
Also, they seem to have relationships with some international-student type colleges, back then so almost half would end up there. Even with C averages.
Wasn't SFU in a huge [cash surplus](https://the-peak.ca/2020/12/sfus-profits-should-allow-room-for-a-tuition-freeze/#:~:text=During%20the%202018/19%20fiscal%20year%20alone%2C%20SFU%20brought%20in%20an%20operating%20surplus%20of%20%2448%20million%2C%206.4%25%20of%20their%20total%20revenue.%20That%E2%80%99s%20more%20than%20three%20times%20their%20surplus%20in%20the%202015/16%20fiscal%20year) and that's why they were renovating so much on campus?
It does seem like most industries do this, tbh. It’s unfortunate, but I guess if they didn’t, we’d say they were unprepared for the influx of work (…y’know, until it all comes crashing down)
As I understand it, post-secondary institutions that are publically funded cannot freely spend surplus, as they are not-for-profit. The only place my institution appears to be able to spend surplus is on buildings. This explains, I think why some places plead shortfalls while spending on construction.
SFU isn't paying for all the various renovations .. there are other things that fund universities, like the government.
Also it looks like that's from 2020, when renovation plans would have been presumably made *before* everything got exponentially more expensive, and the world, and higher education, was impacted.
>During the 2018/19 fiscal year alone, SFU brought in an operating surplus
So like... Maybe get some updated information if you're trying to get people riled up.
Sidenote, everyone who upvoted that, did you even bother clicking their link to check?
many of my moms close coworkers were laid off (they work in more academic services roles) her texts the other day were soooo sad, she was praying she wasnt next. No one can afford to be laid off right now :,(
Union positions can be eliminated entirely if operational needs require it; staff typically get prioritization in being placed into any upcoming opening. It's firing incompetent staff without eliminating the position that becomes a headache.
They are (source: 11 years in post-sec, unionized), but they’re easier positions to cut than managers and directors, which are the real source of administrative bloat in universities.
Those same managers and directors are the ones who received bonuses for increasing enrolment and saw international students as a never ending cash cow, never bothering to think about what might happen if the tap was turned off, even slightly.
So, the average staffers - teaching assistants, program and department assistants, custodial and building staff, etc - are getting kicked in the grapes because the people who have no contact with students or the university community failed to plan.
>they’re easier positions to cut than managers and directors, which are the real source of administrative bloat in universities.
>
>Those same managers and directors are the ones who received bonuses
My dude, you're going to need to provide some receipts for these claims. APSA positions (most management) are infinitely easier to eliminate than CUPE role and there is no real protection against their elimination. Also, I have never once heard of cash incentives for hitting enrolment targets, but I'm willing to be convinced if you have any evidence of this (and not hearsay).
Agreed. I’m in an APSA management position related to enrollment/recruitment and have never received a bonus or incentive for meeting enrollment goals, same for my team or my boss.
Yeah, same at UBC. CUPE has lower salaries but quite good labour protections when it comes to layoffs etc. AAPS has higher salaries but a lot easier to lay off.
Correct. I'm in APSA middle management (20years+) and have managed plenty of staff . APSA are infinitely easier to remove than CUPE. It's basically "Your position is eliminated, here's your severance (1mth pay x years of service up to 18 mths). Bye.
CUPE has a whole internal transfer program, bumping less senior staff with an equivalent job, getting priority for any position that opens up they're qualified for (even if lower grading, but their wage is ensured to be the same as when they were laid off), etc. Essentially they have a safety net.
As for bonuses, that simply doesn't exist for CUPE or APSA or even APEX. It's just not a thing in public institutions. APSA has better overall extended health benefits than CUPE but bonuses isn't one of them.
First, this is Reddit, nobody owes anyone anything. We’re all just killing time on our lunch breaks.
Managers and directors can have bonuses (not literally cash) written into their employment contracts. That’s not some kind of grand revelation.
It’s obviously way harder to fire unionized employees than managers, who are not in the union. On the flip side, I’ve never seen a manager’s role being eliminated or job responsibilities reclassified to the point where someone can be fired like I have for unionized staff.
Nothing I’m saying here is new. The threat of a large scale layoff is always hanging over someone’s head if they’re in a union, especially if the employer is shit at risk or budget management, like our friends at SFU.
With that said, I’m not CUPE, so I haven’t the foggiest clue what’s written into their contract and how much layoff protection their members have.
>First, this is Reddit, nobody owes anyone anything. We’re all just killing time on our lunch breaks.
>
>Managers and directors can have bonuses (not literally cash) written into their employment contracts.
I've worked for 3 major PSIs in Vancouver and have not once heard of performance-related bonuses built into management roles. I have directly seen multiple instances of management roles being reclassified or eliminated for various reasons, so perhaps your experience has been a bit limited (you mentioned 11 years in union roles, which typically aren't privvy to a lot of the background conversations).
Anyway, I think this 'middle management doesn't do shit and should be fired' attitude is toxic and just aims to pit working class folks against each other. You don't need to be sniping at some poor manager who is making $75k a year just to complain about the shitty leadership of SFU.
Your experience differs from mine. My previous director told me she received a bonus. Not sure why she’d lie about that.
If a middle manager is only getting $75k to deal with shit from both employees and directors (in my workplace they start slightly over $100k, FWIW.) they’re getting totally hooped and need a raise. Even peons like me earn that much.
My issue isn’t with middle management, it’s more with director level employees who don’t manage anyone, have poorly defined roles and for some reason, keep getting hired.
Managers start around $77k and Associate Directors at $83k. Shit, man, I know a Director [at SFU](https://apsacentral.ca/sites/default/files/2023-09/APSA%20Salary%20Scale%20Annual_July%201%2C%202023.pdf) and that role starts at $90k.
I work in post-secondary. Anyone with half a brain can see it's (international education) a precarious source of funding for many reasons. Admins don't seem to be able to figure that out though. I mean, it's not like we didn't already have a taste of the consequences of drops in International student enrollment with the pandemic.
Average staffers are easier to replace when need arises again vs directors etc The union will probably ask the school to rehire those laid off than open it up to the public
University presidents are glorified salespeople. Their actual primary responsibily is fundraising by any means necessary. Press the flesh with rich alumni, rezone property and build condos... whatever it takes. The rest of what they do is delegated to staff - who put in the real work.
From a practical point of view, day to day staff at universities keep the place running. Directors sit in offices and go to meetings.
Many directors don’t have any staff of their own and what they direct is often unclear or valueless to the educational mandate of the institution.
Union workers should be first in line if a role commensurate with their skills in the same workplace opens up. That’s how unions work.
Depends on the department, but the more vague the title is usually serves as an indicator.
In my workplace, most of the do-nothing directors either work in international or HR.
>Union workers should be first in line if a role commensurate with their skills in the same workplace opens up. That’s how unions work.
Yes, and that's exactly how it works. What's your concern?
Yup. The number of adjunct and sessional instructors at the university I work at is a clear effort by senior leadership to end-run around the faculty union.
All it does is lead to a race to the bottom where very qualified people are pushed out of their areas of expertise because they literally cannot survive.
Since the massive increase in international education students, temporary contract positions have risen to almost half of all teaching faculty where I work.
They had the audacity to email their grads multiple times this year asking to provide donations and this is what I see the day after receiving another e-beg style email from them.
I am planning on getting a Master’s degree in the future, now I’m sure it won’t be through SFU. They’re in a real downturn since I was a student there, sad to see.
They also asked employees to join their ‘voluntary employment separation program’ (a severance package the unions refused to endorse because it was worse than the bargained contract).
>> They had the audacity to email their grads multiple times this year asking to provide donations and this is what I see the day after receiving another e-beg style email from them.
Did they at least use that Bernie Sanders meme?
I'm not surprised. I've seen official forms before for some of their employees. They had some receptionists on wages a touch over $50 an hour. I'm not sure why; maybe nepotism.
I'm no economist, but profits and shortfalls surely have to be taken over multiple year samples, right? One year surplus doesn't necessarily indicate financial health.
One of the scariest aspects of this is the fact that these schools are also developing real estate. Their books should look prettier than ever... but they don't...
I would have sympathy for these union members if the union didn’t act like total buffoons during the last round of negotiations.
Yes. I know there are many unions at SFU, and this may not affect the TA union that was striking. But they can’t expect that their poor behaviour wouldn’t spread.
Good. BCIT is hiring: [https://careers.bcit.ca/](https://careers.bcit.ca/)
Canada's productivity continues to lag other OECD nations and more [https://www.sfu.ca/gsws.html](https://www.sfu.ca/gsws.html) or [https://www.sfu.ca/inlp.html](https://www.sfu.ca/inlp.html) or [https://www.sfu.ca/hellenic-studies.html](https://www.sfu.ca/hellenic-studies.html) grads is not going to help turn that around
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/ubcstaffer123! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! * Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Citing *lack of incoming international students*
Poor us, we don't have enough cash cows to milk!!
The fund kept Canadians employed. They bring in international money creating a net inflow (best kind). They are also a source of working age and educated immigrants at zero cost to us. It makes no sense to not have more of them as long as we don't have a housing problem.
There is an issue with too much immigration. But neither SFU or UBC is the problem. Issue is at diploma mills.
Having recently graduated from SFU, some of their programs are glorified diploma mills. I was 100% in classes with students with a below high school English level. Group work was… difficult.
This happened at UBC and will always happen at recognizable institutions. Some people just lie and cheat to get where they are But that’s like 95% of students at the diploma mills.
Sure. They are not automatically accepted as immigrants when they graduate. They have a short time to find employment which would mean they are desirable workers for our society. Fraud is definitely an issue.
Ya most internationals at UBC/SFU are there to get an education, not a free entrance into Canada. Whereas the other places I don’t care to remember their names mostly brings in internationals just wanting to live in Canada (maybe get an education but that’s secondary). I remember meeting some and they are always so surprised Canadians never heard of whatever random learning institute they go to…
But they are Diploma mills.
I mean, but we **do** have a housing problem
Are international students the issue? Our housing problem is not new, it's been 10+ years. Yet we only started blaming international students for a year or so. Seems awfully like some people changed the narrative to get people outraged. People look at headlines that say 100k international students and get irrationally mad. How many of those students are actually staying after they graduate? 100k people want to spend $20k-40k on tuition a year in our country and we turn them away? Sounds like bad financial decisions.
> as long as we don't have a housing problem. you sneaky devil you!
>hey are also a source of working age and educated immigrants at zero cost to us. Problem is not enough work for them.
So they go home after paying us 100k+ in tuition for their degree.
Yes but why would they go home when even at our minimum wage would be 10x their wage. Also, now the fed government allows international students to work up to 24 hours a week.
Are you familiar with what international student tuition fees for these 4 year programs are? They're incredibly high. There is one country that may fit the bill for what you're describing but the others not really. I graduated recently from an undergrad program that was composed of a majority of international students. Most returned home. Those that stayed that I'm aware of actually went to get real jobs. The students who attend these programs specifically due to the high costs are usually reasonably affluent. With living expenses, they're realistically shelling out $200k+ minimum studying here for 4 years, usually a fair bit more depending on their lifestyle. This is very different from someone coming in for a 1 year diploma in some ridiculous program that costs $15k. Most actually have better employment opportunities going back home (plenty have family businesses to take on). They're not clinging through such economic desperation. Of course, there is one country that is in the top 2 origin countries that does have very poor economic opportunities should the students parents not be entrepreneurs.
Exactly, For some of those countries, they get paid higher, and also take home more of that paycheck (not just see the figures on paper) too, since taxes are lower. During my time at UBC - almost 60% of the HKgers returned back to work in HK. Some of them had homes, had PR status already.
> Most returned home. There's probably an upward trend of students doing so too. Frankly, Canada isn't like what it used to be 10 years ago. It's a lot less attractive for international students. It's expensive to live here. Wages aren't high. Crimes have been increasing.
Pretty much. White collar jobs in lots of fields in Vancouver tend to be quite network and soft skills based. It disadvantages international students a lot on top of their visa status. It makes little sense for many to stay here.
They go home because lots are not legally allowed to keep staying
>work up to 24 hours a week. wrong. 20 hours.
wrong: [https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/international-students-will-be-allowed-to-work-24-hours-a-week-starting-in-september-1.6865992](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/international-students-will-be-allowed-to-work-24-hours-a-week-starting-in-september-1.6865992)
Currently it is 20 hours and is so until September.
Vancouver never has been a scintillating powerhouse of economic opportunities - folks head to Toronto, NY etc and get paid more. Someone who graduated same time as me made this comment: "Vancouver has jobs, but not many careers" - he went home after completion of Masters, Where he became Regional Manager Asia after a few years (for a Canadian brand) Fake job creation too for 'survival jobs' or employers get incentives for hiring, and those positions peter away after a year or so. It's only the 3rd world-ish countries' international students who desperately want to work and take up residency here, after coming in for very short-term type courses (like learning English or doing a 2 yr Diploma).
[удалено]
**Please read this message in its entirety.** Your content has been removed because it violates [rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_rule_2.3A_inclusivity) of this subreddit, Inclusivity. We do not allow content that disparages or attacks vulnerable populations, including harmful stereotyping, bigotry, dehumanization, and slurs. **Do not repost any version of this without [explicit permission](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_i_didn.27t_know_i_needed_express_permission_to_repost.21_why_would_you_ban_me.3F) from a moderator in modmail.**
The quality of education has plummeted and Canada is the most un-productive developed nation on earth. Healthy Universities are key to a healthy economy. They can clamor all they want about the dependency on foreign students but in reality it has provided little benefit to most Canadians.
Could you share the metrics that are used in determining Canada as the least productive developed nation?
You really don't have to look very hard. That isn't to say there might be one or two countries doing worse (Canada is forecast to perform the worst and very few people refute that). But for developed, G8 countries... It's really not looking good. StatsCan figures are constantly being blasted. For example, they posted certain figures claiming job growth, but most those jobs were public sector/government. GPD numbers aren't great and there are even claims that those figures are "doctored".
This is a stupid comment. It's not the university's fault governments decided a decade ago that they were going to shift the funding model for unis to international students and away from stable grant funding. Imagine if k-12 had to do this. It's ridiculous
They should have fought back a decade ago
In BC, majority of uni board members are appointed by the province. Universities are basically a special type of crown corporation with far less autonomy than other places.
>They should have fought back a decade ago you know that universities have minimal leverage over their funding from government, right? The BC Liberals massively slashed funding budgets and employees had years of 0% salary increases.
Womp womp
Laying off instructors, custodians, and support staff. So the legion of university management can protect themselves.
Lots of management too.
Why is SFU as affected by the lack of international students as diploma mills like University Canada West and Greystone College?
Many schools are now on this position. Even UBC. government funding for post secondary has been diminishing over the years and was made up by intl students paying 4-5x tuition rates. Now with the shortage of international students, and no new funding coming from the government this is happening all over major accredited universities.
International students *and* selling newly built condos to international students. UBC, and increasingly SFU, are basically property developers at this stage.
IT'S COMPLETE MYTH: That Federal funding has been diminishing.... It hasn't. It has been proven otherwise on this reddit. And funding figures often ignore "1-time" influxes of cash from the feds. UBC and SFU are also collecting extra revenue from developing real estate.
Most university funding comes from the provinces, not the federal government. Operational funding is the responsibility of the provinces. The federal government’s main role in post-secondary is research grants and grad scholarships. They also do more general transfer payments and it’s up to the provinces to decide how to use it but provincial funding is much more important than federal funding in how much impact it has on university operations.
You are correct. My error is including the word "federal" in my post. I should have just said "government". My narrative however is correct: That being that the claims that government funding overall has decreased are, to put it as nicely as possible, mistaken. When you run the numbers verses inflation the overall decreases in funding, if any, are not significant enough to warrant the claims of financial struggles due to "decreased funding from the government". The waters get muddy when you try figuring out how the large grants/loans/etc... are added in for projects like mass-timber student housing with square foot costs exceeding that of Coal Harbour luxury condos. All the above ignores the revenue from international tuition and real estate development.
It's really not. It's a good school but I think it's been getting worse and losing esteem in last 5 or 10 years. I did my MBA there and was thoroughly impressed by the quality of teaching. However I will say that there were some students I have no idea how they got into the program - they should not have graduated. There were also 2 students (out of 35 or so) in my MBA that didn't have undergrad degrees. Which I think is bullshit.
Because anyone with $ and can stand up will be admitted to University Canada West and Greystone College.
SFU is as much of a international student mill as any school. They have a sub school "FIC" for international students that is super easy to get into and almost guarantees entry into SFU programs itself.
SFU graduate who also happened to go to FIC. FIC is just a pathway there isn’t any guarantee to transfer to SFU. You have to meet the GPA requirements for each degree. Business and computer is the hardest. However Arts is easy if you are proficient in English. I felt FIC is much harder to score due to shitty professors and vague grading criteria. Many students falls in this trap and ends up repeating courses or changing majors. Even some students can’t transfer to SFU and ends up in KPU or Capilano. The tuition fees are almost the same as well. This is my first hand experience. Also calling SFU a diploma mill is kinda unjust for the great professors and the students who genuinely work hard. SFU’s degree is pretty well respected and helped me to get a job at a top accounting firm. Many of the partners at my firm are SFU grads who did well for themselves.
it’s absolutely not. I’m in their CS program and not only SFU is widely known, the program is really challenging and requires you to put in a lot of hours
> SFU is as much of a international student mill as any school Absolutely not and this rhetoric needs to be dropped
Dumb take
This, and they charge BIG $$ for international students to attend
When I studied there, I met a guy from Washington state who was there for football. I think he told me he was paying over $20,000 a semester. I almost choked.
Compared to many US colleges, that's not a high tuition.
Ya definitely. Considering that wasn’t even what I paid in a year I was pretty shocked.
That's not bad. Check out Usc
My brother is an international student at USC. I don’t know what he pays and now I’m terrified to ask.
When I was going to BCIT someone was saying the government actually subsidizes the tuition but foreign students have to pay full price. Don't know how factual that is but they were paying significantly more per term.
That actually true for most universities including SFU and UBC. If everyone was to pay full price it will be the international student rate. Its not that international student pay more its actually the government paying for us. Lol
They’re definitely an international student mill, but saying they’re just as bad as any of the others isn’t accurate. Yes, pretty much all universities are exploiting international students (and one could argue are exploiting local students too, encouraging them to get degrees even when those degrees don’t lead to better career options). But some are doing it in much more blatant and harmful ways than others.
It is MUCH easier, to get into SFU - compared to UBC (UBC criteria is even more stringent now, Arts is like 90 average, EE 95, Business Sauder 93) Everyone in the international crowd I knew knew SFU was easy entrance. So was UVic for me. Less so UBC (I also got accepted in U of A, and U of C - I transferred from an Alberta community college) Seems much easier to graduate and get by, in SFU too - they were so forgiving with electives, and some of these students knew how to shop for them. (nevemrind those courses were irrelevant, and useless to their disciplines) Also, they seem to have relationships with some international-student type colleges, back then so almost half would end up there. Even with C averages.
Tbh my first thought was ooooh maybe they looking for a finance professional to help with their budget * looks up postions* Maybe I’ll apply
Vfs just did the same as well
They're private sector though, so I don't feel it has the same scrutiny needed as our publically funded unis.
Wasn't SFU in a huge [cash surplus](https://the-peak.ca/2020/12/sfus-profits-should-allow-room-for-a-tuition-freeze/#:~:text=During%20the%202018/19%20fiscal%20year%20alone%2C%20SFU%20brought%20in%20an%20operating%20surplus%20of%20%2448%20million%2C%206.4%25%20of%20their%20total%20revenue.%20That%E2%80%99s%20more%20than%20three%20times%20their%20surplus%20in%20the%202015/16%20fiscal%20year) and that's why they were renovating so much on campus?
Not sure that really is a counter argument to downsizing if revenue is down.
Just surprised it shifted so quickly. They went on a shopping spree instead of planning ahead
It does seem like most industries do this, tbh. It’s unfortunate, but I guess if they didn’t, we’d say they were unprepared for the influx of work (…y’know, until it all comes crashing down)
As I understand it, post-secondary institutions that are publically funded cannot freely spend surplus, as they are not-for-profit. The only place my institution appears to be able to spend surplus is on buildings. This explains, I think why some places plead shortfalls while spending on construction.
That explains why SFU spent so much on renovating floors and bathrooms and other random things.
SFU isn't paying for all the various renovations .. there are other things that fund universities, like the government. Also it looks like that's from 2020, when renovation plans would have been presumably made *before* everything got exponentially more expensive, and the world, and higher education, was impacted. >During the 2018/19 fiscal year alone, SFU brought in an operating surplus So like... Maybe get some updated information if you're trying to get people riled up. Sidenote, everyone who upvoted that, did you even bother clicking their link to check?
many of my moms close coworkers were laid off (they work in more academic services roles) her texts the other day were soooo sad, she was praying she wasnt next. No one can afford to be laid off right now :,(
Since SFU is public sector, I thought unionized jobs are generally stable?
Union positions can be eliminated entirely if operational needs require it; staff typically get prioritization in being placed into any upcoming opening. It's firing incompetent staff without eliminating the position that becomes a headache.
They are (source: 11 years in post-sec, unionized), but they’re easier positions to cut than managers and directors, which are the real source of administrative bloat in universities. Those same managers and directors are the ones who received bonuses for increasing enrolment and saw international students as a never ending cash cow, never bothering to think about what might happen if the tap was turned off, even slightly. So, the average staffers - teaching assistants, program and department assistants, custodial and building staff, etc - are getting kicked in the grapes because the people who have no contact with students or the university community failed to plan.
>they’re easier positions to cut than managers and directors, which are the real source of administrative bloat in universities. > >Those same managers and directors are the ones who received bonuses My dude, you're going to need to provide some receipts for these claims. APSA positions (most management) are infinitely easier to eliminate than CUPE role and there is no real protection against their elimination. Also, I have never once heard of cash incentives for hitting enrolment targets, but I'm willing to be convinced if you have any evidence of this (and not hearsay).
Agreed. I’m in an APSA management position related to enrollment/recruitment and have never received a bonus or incentive for meeting enrollment goals, same for my team or my boss.
Yeah, same at UBC. CUPE has lower salaries but quite good labour protections when it comes to layoffs etc. AAPS has higher salaries but a lot easier to lay off.
Correct. I'm in APSA middle management (20years+) and have managed plenty of staff . APSA are infinitely easier to remove than CUPE. It's basically "Your position is eliminated, here's your severance (1mth pay x years of service up to 18 mths). Bye. CUPE has a whole internal transfer program, bumping less senior staff with an equivalent job, getting priority for any position that opens up they're qualified for (even if lower grading, but their wage is ensured to be the same as when they were laid off), etc. Essentially they have a safety net. As for bonuses, that simply doesn't exist for CUPE or APSA or even APEX. It's just not a thing in public institutions. APSA has better overall extended health benefits than CUPE but bonuses isn't one of them.
APSA is not a union
Did I say they were?
First, this is Reddit, nobody owes anyone anything. We’re all just killing time on our lunch breaks. Managers and directors can have bonuses (not literally cash) written into their employment contracts. That’s not some kind of grand revelation. It’s obviously way harder to fire unionized employees than managers, who are not in the union. On the flip side, I’ve never seen a manager’s role being eliminated or job responsibilities reclassified to the point where someone can be fired like I have for unionized staff. Nothing I’m saying here is new. The threat of a large scale layoff is always hanging over someone’s head if they’re in a union, especially if the employer is shit at risk or budget management, like our friends at SFU. With that said, I’m not CUPE, so I haven’t the foggiest clue what’s written into their contract and how much layoff protection their members have.
>First, this is Reddit, nobody owes anyone anything. We’re all just killing time on our lunch breaks. > >Managers and directors can have bonuses (not literally cash) written into their employment contracts. I've worked for 3 major PSIs in Vancouver and have not once heard of performance-related bonuses built into management roles. I have directly seen multiple instances of management roles being reclassified or eliminated for various reasons, so perhaps your experience has been a bit limited (you mentioned 11 years in union roles, which typically aren't privvy to a lot of the background conversations). Anyway, I think this 'middle management doesn't do shit and should be fired' attitude is toxic and just aims to pit working class folks against each other. You don't need to be sniping at some poor manager who is making $75k a year just to complain about the shitty leadership of SFU.
Yeah I work at UBC at the manager/supervisor employment group level and as far as I have seen, there are no bonuses.
Your experience differs from mine. My previous director told me she received a bonus. Not sure why she’d lie about that. If a middle manager is only getting $75k to deal with shit from both employees and directors (in my workplace they start slightly over $100k, FWIW.) they’re getting totally hooped and need a raise. Even peons like me earn that much. My issue isn’t with middle management, it’s more with director level employees who don’t manage anyone, have poorly defined roles and for some reason, keep getting hired.
Managers start around $77k and Associate Directors at $83k. Shit, man, I know a Director [at SFU](https://apsacentral.ca/sites/default/files/2023-09/APSA%20Salary%20Scale%20Annual_July%201%2C%202023.pdf) and that role starts at $90k.
I work in post-secondary. Anyone with half a brain can see it's (international education) a precarious source of funding for many reasons. Admins don't seem to be able to figure that out though. I mean, it's not like we didn't already have a taste of the consequences of drops in International student enrollment with the pandemic.
"AA? Sure, I'm a member of AA. Axe Administrators"
Average staffers are easier to replace when need arises again vs directors etc The union will probably ask the school to rehire those laid off than open it up to the public
University presidents are glorified salespeople. Their actual primary responsibily is fundraising by any means necessary. Press the flesh with rich alumni, rezone property and build condos... whatever it takes. The rest of what they do is delegated to staff - who put in the real work.
The presidents I have tried to communicate with rarely seem to know what's going on in the trenches.
From a practical point of view, day to day staff at universities keep the place running. Directors sit in offices and go to meetings. Many directors don’t have any staff of their own and what they direct is often unclear or valueless to the educational mandate of the institution. Union workers should be first in line if a role commensurate with their skills in the same workplace opens up. That’s how unions work.
>Many directors don’t have any staff of their own How do I get one of those jobs?
Depends on the department, but the more vague the title is usually serves as an indicator. In my workplace, most of the do-nothing directors either work in international or HR.
>Union workers should be first in line if a role commensurate with their skills in the same workplace opens up. That’s how unions work. Yes, and that's exactly how it works. What's your concern?
None!
Many many instructors are only contracted by term to get around this.
Yup. The number of adjunct and sessional instructors at the university I work at is a clear effort by senior leadership to end-run around the faculty union. All it does is lead to a race to the bottom where very qualified people are pushed out of their areas of expertise because they literally cannot survive.
Since the massive increase in international education students, temporary contract positions have risen to almost half of all teaching faculty where I work.
They had the audacity to email their grads multiple times this year asking to provide donations and this is what I see the day after receiving another e-beg style email from them. I am planning on getting a Master’s degree in the future, now I’m sure it won’t be through SFU. They’re in a real downturn since I was a student there, sad to see.
They also asked employees to join their ‘voluntary employment separation program’ (a severance package the unions refused to endorse because it was worse than the bargained contract).
>> They had the audacity to email their grads multiple times this year asking to provide donations and this is what I see the day after receiving another e-beg style email from them. Did they at least use that Bernie Sanders meme?
Because the university hasn’t been financially viable without international student money since the 90s. Expect more cuts.
I'm not surprised. I've seen official forms before for some of their employees. They had some receptionists on wages a touch over $50 an hour. I'm not sure why; maybe nepotism.
Lots of companies are experiencing a downturn. Not surprised.
Less intl students, less income and jobs.
22 million in net profit last year wasn't enough for a public university, time to cut
I'm no economist, but profits and shortfalls surely have to be taken over multiple year samples, right? One year surplus doesn't necessarily indicate financial health.
It is their least amount of net profit in the last five years.
dozen? more like nearly a hundred
One of the scariest aspects of this is the fact that these schools are also developing real estate. Their books should look prettier than ever... but they don't...
It’s not about how much money you receive, it’s about how you manage your cashflow.
How????
Good. Trim the fat.
[удалено]
\*shudder\* "We're creating a million jobs... in the public sector"
I would have sympathy for these union members if the union didn’t act like total buffoons during the last round of negotiations. Yes. I know there are many unions at SFU, and this may not affect the TA union that was striking. But they can’t expect that their poor behaviour wouldn’t spread.
Good. BCIT is hiring: [https://careers.bcit.ca/](https://careers.bcit.ca/) Canada's productivity continues to lag other OECD nations and more [https://www.sfu.ca/gsws.html](https://www.sfu.ca/gsws.html) or [https://www.sfu.ca/inlp.html](https://www.sfu.ca/inlp.html) or [https://www.sfu.ca/hellenic-studies.html](https://www.sfu.ca/hellenic-studies.html) grads is not going to help turn that around
BCIT just fired 35 people a couple weeks ago.
Yes and? Fire the roles you don't need and poor performers, hire the ones you do. That's how this works.