SFU scandal: brooms and an apology
Clement Abas Apaak, Former SFSS President
So, the charges against Hattie Aitken are that: 1) she took money from a cash register without authorisation and 2) that she leaked information from the SFSS lawyer to Gallivan and Associates that could have caused the society $1.5-2 million. Oh, my God, these are the most frivolous charges I have heard in my 36 years on this planet.
Let us start with the first their first charge. How is it possible for her to be dishonest when she left a note indicating that she had taken $80 dollars from the cash register? The $80 was her Per Diem for the Gallivan conference. This is standard money for all attendees on behalf of the society. She had to take the money because she and I were travelling the next morning as delegates to the Gallivan conference on behalf of the society. Yes, she did not get authorisation because there was no one with power to give permission, but she left a note to indicate that she had taken the money. Is this stealing, as they have implied?
Their second concocted charge is even worse. What a joke — there is no way in hell that Hattie had any information that could cause the society any money or to sign a five-year contract. I was at meetings where we talked to the lawyer about the health plan and whether or not we should start talks about possibly renewing the contract. We agreed that it was too early to do so, period. None of the G-7 were at these meetings. Did they care to ask those of us who were there what was talked about? There was no information that Hattie could have passed on that could harm the society.
Briefly, before the society enters into contractual agreements, the society selects a negotiating team, usually students and staff, to investigate and negotiate on our behalf. Draft contracts are then circulated confidentially to Board members before a vote at a Board meeting is held to accept or reject such a contract. These processes allow Board members to study and debate merits and demerits. The truth is that there is no way a staff person or a single Board member can cause the society to sign a contract.
Seriously, the reasons they have given for firing Aitken have no merit. The issue was a ploy to get rid of the current broker. They had hoped that SFU students would not pick up on this, but we did. They forgot that for the first time in many years, we have over half the members of a previous Board still studying at SFU. These former Board members, myself included, have full knowledge of how the system works and some of us were very involved in the process that they have overlooked, and meetings they have used as a basis to conduct this sham.
Please bring a broom to the SGM in Convo Mall on the 25th of October at 2:30 p.m. I will take up the role of apologising profusely to Hattie Aitken on behalf of SFU students for the gross injustice and disgraceful way in which the G-7 have treated her. Hattie, many of us have always known you were innocent, and will fight to ensure that your good name is cleared. We will start by ridding our society of seven incompetent and self-serving directors. You served us with dedication for 26 years, and we hope you will forgive us and come back after we clean our society up.
In solidarity,
Clement Abas Apaak, Former SFSS President