Originally Posted by mike_302

Whatever you want to think. $40,000 is not that much for a corporate manager to make. IF you want to think that knocking off $10,000 will improve the system, by all means fight for it. You'll have essentially eliminated most of the intelligent people from ever wanting to be MSU President (not saying there's been a lot in the running in the past anyways) because anyone that is potentially successful has FAR better opportunities awaiting them.

I disagree. All MSU presidents are undergrads. It certainly makes sense for any undergrad to attempt to take a year off to make money before going off to grad school or the like seeing as most of us have loans to pay off. And considering that most students won't make $15/hour during that year off the MSU exec would be something to aim for regardless of whether it is $19 or $15-$16.

It's not the general majority that I would be concerned about satisfying with a salary: It's the SMART people with POTENTIAL who aren't "most students" and who would serve as better presidents. This is what I've been saying from the beginning.

$30,000: Attract the average student to the role.
$40,000: Attract a slightly higher calibre of student... One that could be making ~$40,000/yr to start in some corporate position because a corporation knows they are going to do something USEFUL...

Originally Posted by mike_302

It's not the general majority that I would be concerned about satisfying with a salary: It's the SMART people with POTENTIAL who aren't "most students" and who would serve as better presidents. This is what I've been saying from the beginning.

$30,000: Attract the average student to the role.
$40,000: Attract a slightly higher calibre of student... One that could be making ~$40,000/yr to start in some corporate position because a corporation knows they are going to do something USEFUL...

Well since it was found out during thread (myself included) that nobody KNEW they got paid that much since it isn't thrown in the open, then obviously it may not have attracted the best talent. If the promoted that fact especially since it is obvious many people are not happy with it, and as a result we got higher quality candidates, then I would agree with you.

Most people know CEOs make boatloads of money so they would attract better talent, most of us just thought being on MSU was voluntary or minimum wage

Originally Posted by Snowman

Well since it was found out during thread (myself included) that nobody KNEW they got paid that much since it isn't thrown in the open, then obviously it may not have attracted the best talent. If the promoted that fact especially since it is obvious many people are not happy with it, and as a result we got higher quality candidates, then I would agree with you.

Most people know CEOs make boatloads of money so they would attract better talent, most of us just thought being on MSU was voluntary or minimum wage

Two responses:

1. Meh. To that I would suggest that "better" candidates just don't care very often As many of us have identified already, the MSU seems pretty irrelevant to most of us.

2. The better candidates probably know. The better candidates wouldn't be so ignorant of any potentially interesting role. Any the "better" candidates would have already known the Presidential role is a full-time role. The "Better" candidates that don't do their research on a potential role, just because they think it's a volunteer role, ARE actually ignorant and just looking for a good paying job.

Fun fact: This "salary" of $40,000 isn't HIDDEN or confidential... It's just not spoken about frequently by the average student, because the average student doesn't give a flying f***. The average student, as was pointed out already, pays tuition, comes to class, MIGHT do an extra-curricular (although from my experience, that's a minority), and doesn't ask a single question about where their money is going

Originally Posted by mike_302

Two responses:

1. Meh. To that I would suggest that "better" candidates just don't care very often As many of us have identified already, the MSU seems pretty irrelevant to most of us.

2. The better candidates probably know. The better candidates wouldn't be so ignorant of any potentially interesting role. Any the "better" candidates would have already known the Presidential role is a full-time role. The "Better" candidates that don't do their research on a potential role, just because they think it's a volunteer role, ARE actually ignorant and just looking for a good paying job.

Fun fact: This "salary" of $40,000 isn't HIDDEN or confidential... It's just not spoken about frequently by the average student, because the average student doesn't give a flying f***. The average student, as was pointed out already, pays tuition, comes to class, MIGHT do an extra-curricular (although from my experience, that's a minority), and doesn't ask a single question about where their money is going

That's a whole lot of assumptions. I don't agree, firstly, that our MSU should be mimicking the habits of corporations, regardless of whether or not by technicality it is one. It's meant to be representing students on campus first and foremost.

I would rather a president that holds the position because of their passion for doing the job than a president that does it for the monetary incentive and I sincerely don't care if that perhaps means they don't perform "as good" as those who would be swayed by it.(I'm confused how one measures performance of a president in this sense, they have different platforms and goals. People vote accordingly. Maybe they'd be better at navigating the "bureaucracy" of the student union, but I think true passionate dedication is more important)

Even then, if we take it as fact your claim that the monetary incentive is providing us the best candidates possible, that could not matter. Anybody could run, and anybody could win. We could have the worst possible candidate (matter of opinion, but I digress) win the election and then we'd still be paying them the same amount as any of the other "better" candidates.

Finally, and I feel this is the biggest problems with your argument: the ability of someone to win an election is not representative of their skill at doing a job. It is representative of their ability to win an election. They could make an absolute mockery of the position and still get paid $40,000 to do it as our current system stands.

Originally Posted by Eric_G

That's a whole lot of assumptions. I don't agree, firstly, that our MSU should be mimicking the habits of corporations, regardless of whether or not by technicality it is one. It's meant to be representing students on campus first and foremost.

I would rather a president that holds the position because of their passion for doing the job than a president that does it for the monetary incentive and I sincerely don't care if that perhaps means they don't perform "as good" as those who would be swayed by it.(I'm confused how one measures performance of a president in this sense, they have different platforms and goals. People vote accordingly. Maybe they'd be better at navigating the "bureaucracy" of the student union, but I think true passionate dedication is more important)

Even then, if we take it as fact your claim that the monetary incentive is providing us the best candidates possible, that could not matter. Anybody could run, and anybody could win. We could have the worst possible candidate (matter of opinion, but I digress) win the election and then we'd still be paying them the same amount as any of the other "better" candidates.

Finally, and I feel this is the biggest problems with your argument: the ability of someone to win an election is not representative of their skill at doing a job. It is representative of their ability to win an election. They could make an absolute mockery of the position and still get paid $40,000 to do it as our current system stands.

I give up.

The reality of the situation is being completely ignored here.

Money makes the world turn. If you would prefer the average "passionate" over the one who wants the job and is smart enough to want fair pay, so be it. Just another reason I'm glad to be gone soon, and not paying any more money to these silly groups.

The "best" candidate with the most skill and ability is the one you should be counting on to win the election... You can't count on the best candidates even being IN the election if the best candidates see better paying opportunities.

But sure, we'll go with the "passionate one" that doesn't care about a fair wage.... Because you know, that person is probably going to run a multi-million dollar organization the best (and like it or not, the MSU is an organization, or a corporation... "Representing students", or managing some other business portfolio is irrelevant: They're both tough jobs that are done better by certain people, and not necessarily "the passionate ones")

Originally Posted by mike_302

I give up.

The reality of the situation is being completely ignored here.

Money makes the world turn. If you would prefer the average "passionate" over the one who wants the job and is smart enough to want fair pay, so be it. Just another reason I'm glad to be gone soon, and not paying any more money to these silly groups.

The "best" candidate with the most skill and ability is the one you should be counting on to win the election... You can't count on the best candidates even being IN the election if the best candidates see better paying opportunities.

But sure, we'll go with the "passionate one" that doesn't care about a fair wage.... Because you know, that person is probably going to run a multi-million dollar organization the best (and like it or not, the MSU is an organization, or a corporation... "Representing students", or managing some other business portfolio is irrelevant: They're both tough jobs that are done better by certain people, and not necessarily "the passionate ones")

If you really believe that dangling $30,000 (incentives included) in front of the student body wont attract top quality candidates, you need to get your head out of your ass. If anything increasing the salary to a ridiculous amount like 40,000 wouldnt attract better candidates. If anything it would attract more students that just want a payday.
Finally, thank you for giving up, because i was getting sick of you constantly calling everyone else "average students". If you want to talk about average students, your in fucking eng SOCIETY. only average eng students need to lighten their course load with society programs... doesnt feel good being called average for an unreasonable reason eh bud.

Originally Posted by Chris23

Finally, thank you for giving up, because i was getting sick of you constantly calling everyone else "average students". If you want to talk about average students, your in fucking eng SOCIETY. only average eng students need to lighten their course load with society programs... doesnt feel good being called average for an unreasonable reason eh bud.

Nah, I base my frustration and claims on 4 years of witnessing ignorance amongst the vast majority (not the entirety... I have seen some solid, active community members) of the student population; you are basing your attempted insult on a poor understanding of the Society program.

And to boot, we have this thread raising a point about the student government that SHOULD be common knowledge, but seems to be a shocker to most students since they pay hundreds of dollars to it... If you're offended that I'm disappointed at students who sign cheques with their eyes closed, that's not my problem

What bothers me is the MSU campaign elections. This is a legitimate paid position yet they allow people who do not take it seriously to run, ie. The Emperor... are you kidding me? What if this person had actually won? These so-called joke campaigns are just silly.

Originally Posted by mike_302

Nah, I base my frustration and claims on 4 years of witnessing ignorance amongst the vast majority (not the entirety... I have seen some solid, active community members) of the student population; you are basing your attempted insult on a poor understanding of the Society program.

And to boot, we have this thread raising a point about the student government that SHOULD be common knowledge, but seems to be a shocker to most students since they pay hundreds of dollars to it... If you're offended that I'm disappointed at students who sign cheques with their eyes closed, that's not my problem

Im basing my comment on the general consensus of the eng society program. And well im sorry that the majority of the student body hasnt taken time to research this information. You seem to think it would make a difference if we researched this before paying for our education. Last time i checked, university tuition and supplementary fees are non-negotiable. so there is really no point in researching the breakdown of where the money goes. Or is that just what the above average students do? No benefit would come from researching this information, except for the same outrage that is being shown by the average students of McMaster University

Originally Posted by Chris23

You seem to think it would make a difference if we researched this before paying for our education.

No. I think it would make a difference in these campaigns if people researched what they are involved with.

This particular campaign is thriving on the majority's failure to know where millions in MSU fees are going to.

Other campaigns for a number of positions (including SRA campaigns) are thriving on promises to do stuff with other organizations that the candidates have never spoken to. Or they promise to do things which don't belong to the MSU.

Originally Posted by chappy89

i find it amazing that there are so many people in the school that were unaware of these things. I bet you are all the types of people of sign off on bills without reading them.

BTW...i have these magic beans for sale...

and i have a chicken that lays golden eggs

Originally Posted by mike_302

No. I think it would make a difference in these campaigns if people researched what they are involved with.

This particular campaign is thriving on the majority's failure to know where millions in MSU fees are going to.

Other campaigns for a number of positions (including SRA campaigns) are thriving on promises to do stuff with other organizations that the candidates have never spoken to. Or they promise to do things which don't belong to the MSU.

I agree with you on that much at least, its basically a pissing contest on who can make the most ridiculous promises for SRA elections. seems to be a common trend in all forms of elections

Originally Posted by Chris23

I agree with you on that much at least, its basically a pissing contest on who can make the most ridiculous promises for SRA elections. seems to be a common trend in all forms of elections

I agree entirely, and it's why I make a direct note of that in my campaign platform:

"As a Student Union there are limits to what we can actually do around Campus. That's just the truth, and that's something I pride myself on being willing to admit freely. I won't stand by and make false promises I can't keep in order to win votes. Not my style. That said, there are no limits on what we can Band Together as a group and advocate for, and offer to collaborate on with other bodies. We can't force anyone's hands on these things-- but we can certainly let them know what we think of them and what our wishes are. With this in mind, here's what I would like to see the government of the MSU pursue:"

P.S: Please note, this isn't meant to be a plug-- as a candidate, I don't like being labelled as one of the people doing that just by association.

Originally Posted by Eric_G

For the salaries, I have a source in my actual campaign platform, from Macleans magazine: http://oncampus.macleans.ca/educatio...ase-their-pay/

But, if you want direct to the source: you can look up the President's and VP's salaries by going through the actual by-laws of the MSU (this is likely why this has been kept under wraps for so long... who's actually that masochistic?!). So you don't have to do that, this is where I got that information from: https://msu-production.s3.amazona w... rch%2025.pdf

You'll notice that they don't give you the actual calculated salary that adds up to. I wonder why that may be?

Hey Eric.

I'm curious what your platform means in regards to transparency. Transparency typically implies operating in such a manner so as to make it easier for others to see what has transpired. Your claim is that there is transparency lacking on account of the majority of students not knowing that the president of the Students Union makes a yearly salary of over 30k. Yet, you cited the operating policy of the MSU as a direct source in the above post. It's there and available to anyone, student or not.

Meetings for the SRA are open to anyone (they're even streamed live online if you can't be there in person). Any SRA member will candidly tell you what they make as I've asked some today. So my question is: do you think this is truly an issue of transparency or a collective unawareness on behalf of the student body concerning its government? Because they're two separate issues.