A Collective Voice for Collective Interests
August 6, 2026
One of the most important features of the APSA Basic Agreement is that it establishes APSA as the sole representative of you, our members. In other words, it makes APSA the sole representative for key items like salary and benefits bargaining; and for advocacy for your terms and conditions of employment with the University.
Instead of APSA members being on individual contracts with the University, having only an individual voice in the face of the overwhelming power of the University, APSA members like you have a collective voice: strength, as it were, in numbers. This collective voice established by the Basic Agreement helps ensure, as best as possible, that your interests are represented fairly, justly and independently. One of the key roles of the APSA Board, myself and my small team is to ensure that your collective voice is heard.
APSA is also independent of the University and, as you might expect in such organizational relationships, there are times when we disagree with SFU over various issues of concern to you, our members. An example. We in APSA may say to University representatives that a member named Saanvi* was mistreated — say around a Human Rights issue. The University may disagree and respond, “Well, Andrew, there’s absolutely no evidence that Saanvi was mistreated in the way you allege.” In such a case, we in APSA will work with Saanvi to find the appropriate resolution. This may mean that we file a grievance or also work with her to file a Human Rights complaint. As sometimes happens, the case may even make its way as far as arbitration to be adjudicated.
Now, on the surface, it appears that APSA and SFU are opposed: we appear to be on opposite sides of the metaphorical table. We’re saying that Saanvi was mistreated and SFU is saying that she wasn’t.
At first blush, it looks like a classic labour-management conflict: APSA versus SFU. At the deeper level of shared interests, however, things aren’t always what they seem. As a B.C. employer, SFU is committed to uphold the Human Rights code and, as an institution through its policies, the University is committed to equity, diversity and inclusion. We in APSA are also committed to ensuring that you our members have your Human Rights respected; and we’re certainly committed to seeing that your rights under SFU policy to equity, diversity and inclusion are also respected.
Also at that deeper level of shared interest, both we in APSA and SFU as an employer want APSA members to be respected, to work in psychologically and culturally safe environments and also to be compensated fairly, among other significant issues. We share with SFU a commitment that you are respected, that you are compensated and treated fairly, and in ensuring that SFU can attract and retain employees.
In that sense and many others, though sometimes in opposition, SFU and APSA are working for a deeper shared interest that benefits you and the University’s ability to fulfill its mission. My thoughts in this regard aren’t new: the Sufi poet and mystic, Jalaluddin Rumi, wrote something that gets to the heart of what I’m trying to express: “It is necessary to note that opposite things work together, even though nominally opposed.”
There are myriad examples in which APSA and SFU could similarly be described.
* Note: the name and situation are fictitious to illustrate the issue.