OMG UPDATE: Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to get updates on updates!

Updated on Thursday, July 2

#21074

OMG: Feds evicts Imprint after 37 years

MOD'S NOTE: Our birth place! :(

84 comments

  1. The title is misleading, the article says Imprint is being offered space in the building.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At double the rate? It's like constructive dismissal. It has the same effect but gives apparent cover. Smells of eviction.

      Delete
    2. The article also says the space is almost half the size of their current office.

      Delete
    3. I was one of the candidates for VP Internal, and from the very short time I spent in Imprint as part of the elections, I can tell you right now they do not have enough space as is.

      Delete
    4. what is imprints current rent for the space they have ?

      Delete
  2. They evicted them out of their current office. It doesn't matter if they offered them another space, its still an eviction from the current office.

    ReplyDelete
  3. pay attention to what's happening, folks, and listen to me carefully here. what's happened is not merely a student union evicting a student run paper, but a microcosmic example of the kind of adversarial relationship, conflict, and oppression that takes place in the outside world. look at this for what it really is: a business institution, with heavy political influence and predominantly bottom-line imperatives driven and effectually MANDATED by external business forces (meaning businesses that basically lobby with FEDs) exerting their power and authority over a press system that has maintained virtual freedom until they pushed just a little too hard and likely revealed certain unwanted truths about FEDs to the public eye. people need to start understanding that you can't have a free press under authoritarian institutions, no matter what they call themselves, "student-run", "democratic", or otherwise. what happened here is this: Imprint, for expressing critical analysis of institutional dysfunction and exercising freedom of speech, was evicted by FEDs, a predominantly business institution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Get used to it, if you can remember UW took over Fed Hall from Feds by force even though students paid for it for 20yrs

      Delete
  4. UW admin's interests also drove this action to the degree it can exert influence on FEDs. From what's been talked about in the last year, it seems like a lot of influence. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is such shit on Feds and Uni admin part. How dare they try to shut down the student voice and concerns. This isn't North Korea you disgusting excuses for a top tier institution. The Feds staff especially the 4 conniving execs need to be brought down. This is so malicious I am appalled that I am forced to pay money to an authoritarian student union. Imprint is the best thing that came out of this passive student body. I AM ENRAGED HOW CAN YOU ASSERT YOUR UNDEMOCRATIC POWER OVER THE VERY STUDENTS THAT ALLOW YOUR EXISTENCE TO REMAIN.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because those execs were elected by the students, and Feds is in charge of the SLC and what happens to it?

      If you don't like it, contact your student councillor. At the very least, Council can say they don't approve, and advise the Board to reconsider (though ultimately only Board can compel the execs to change their action plan).

      Delete
    2. ^"if you dont like it, go talk to the people who don't care about your opinion because they'll evict imprint regardless since they're only in office for 1 year"

      Delete
    3. The councillors and board members are all pretty useless. I dont think I have seen one good thing come of any of them in the last few years of being here.

      This decision was *definitely* driven by the exec and full time staff.

      Delete
    4. That seems a bit unfair to say that none of them do anything. You just don't see what they do. I find it hard to believe that loads and loads of volunteers have accomplished nothing.

      Delete
  6. Evict the student newspaper in retaliation for reporting the facts? Looks like #FedsDoesThat

    ReplyDelete
  7. Not allowing students to express their opinions in a university run environment?
    Disliking the fact that the press is reporting facts because all news presses are SUPPOSED to do that?
    Removing a great opportunity for volunteers (Note- UNPAID) to gain experience and learn from what they are doing (graphic design, marketing, etc)?
    Feds gaining more office space? Sounds power hungry and greedy to me --way to go Feds, I'm grateful that part of my tuition is paying a bunch of people that are just in it for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You believe that Imprint is reperesting students opinio? What is their readership? (By that i mean people who pick it up for more than just doing the crossword) Where do your student dollars actually go that are paid to them? It is ignored by students and UW Admin. Imprint says its here to keep people accountable and they spend all their effort covering FEDS. How about looking at the University? FEDS spends 2.6ish million dollars of your money every year, the University spends close to a billion! Why are we not hearing about the desicions made by Feridun, (President) and Chris Read (Associate Provost Students), and Ian Orchard (Provost). These are the people that truely effect your student experience.

      On the topic of printing facts.... I have personally witnessed and imprint reporter saying ".... people love it when you screw up, I'll just write the article and print a redactment after the fact.". Top notch journalism.

      Imprint needs a reality check so they actually start serving students. They need to start earning the space and resources they currently get. Maybe this will help them do that.

      Delete
    2. 7B. ^ I work at Imprint, I really doubt a reporter said that, and even if they did, an article with false information would never be allowed to run by the editors.

      Also we don't just report on Feds, we cover decisions made by the administration very regularly. If you're personally one of the people just picking it up for the crossword, I strongly encourage you to pick up an issue to see what I'm talking about.

      Delete
  8. Find strangth to forgive person who "evicted" u

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is reputation management by FEDs, and through them UW admin. I've lost respect for both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because giving them other space in the SLC doesn't let them write?

      Delete
    2. It's actually more expensive and they would be getting half the space they had before. FEDs are practically kicking them out.

      Delete
    3. Where did you see that it would be more expensive? Do you have more information?

      Delete
    4. The Federation of Students board of directors terminated the company’s lease at the end of the winter term, with Imprint Publications receiving notice on May 1. The discussions that followed the termination of the lease included the potential of doubling the rent, a smaller space, or no longer having any space in the SLC.

      Source : uwimprint.ca

      Delete
    5. @9.d
      Based on the "or", that statement is more doubling the rent on their current location OR moving them to smaller space OR them no longer having a space in the SLC. If they had meant doubling their rent for a smaller space they would've written "a smaller space at double the rent or no longer having a space in the SLC"

      Delete
  10. Imprint is not getting evicted nor did Feds ever say that they were evicting them. That term was fabricated by the newspaper for dramatic effect. While I do not agree with Feds decision, I think people need to get the facts straight before coming on here to blindly criticize the situation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Imprint was served an eviction notice... where are YOU getting your facts from?

      Delete
    2. 10, weasel words. See 1a. We're not criticizing the situation. We're criticizing the FEDs' action.

      Delete
    3. Evict:
      e·vict
      əˈvikt/
      verb
      past tense: evicted; past participle: evicted
      expel (someone) from a property, especially with the support of the law.

      Imprint is being expelled from a property (their current space in the SLC). It's stupid if you want to take the VPOF's word for it because it seems she hasn't ever picked up a dictionary.

      Delete
  11. A terminated lease is essentially the same thing as eviction.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Is NOBODY going to bring up the fact that this article was also co-written by a bitter past full-time Feds employee??? Imprint has been allowing a CLEAR conflict-of-interest all year by having a past full-time Feds staffperson doing writing about their former employer. And here is just the prime example of it.

    Remember to be critical of what you read - and who is doing the writing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is also an opinion piece floating about by the EIC of Imprint. It gives more information. Also, it's stupid to solely be critical of Imprint, when Feds is obviously trying to save their asses with the VPOF's non-transparent and uneducated blog post.

      Delete
    2. "Conflict of interest"... you keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it means.

      That isn't a conflict of interest, plain and simple. Is it a person with a grudge? Probably. Is it somebody using their past experience to write with a better understanding of the situation? Definitely. But it isn't a conflict of interest because that would require him using one position to advance his personal interests, not using knowledge from a previous position to help him with his current position.

      So to you, unknown-person-who-is-mysteriously-hating-on-a-previous-trouble-making-Feds-staff-and-also-is-sticking-up-for-Feds, can I ask you to go back to doing whatever it is that you do in your day job with Feds and stop being so overtly in support of what is clearly a stupid decision by the Feds board?

      Delete
    3. ^^ 12 is probably part of Feds just posting anonymously.

      Delete
    4. 12.c, this happens every time someone calls out feds for their nonsense. The feds employees with nothing better to do come out to discredit whoever is speaking out against them.

      Delete
    5. I am the original poster. I am not a Feds employee. I have a Journalism degree. I was an editor of a newspaper. It is a conflict of interest to report on a past employer WITHOUT having to declare your conflict of interest to the public. Tear me apart all you want, but I have the experience to back up what I'm saying. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue.

      Delete
    6. What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

      12.e - THAT is what you sound like.

      Delete
    7. 12e, you sounded fine. On the other hand copy/pasted tired memes as just above don't do anything for me, least of all convince me. ^

      Delete
    8. Theres no such thing as second chances. Wtf am I doing here. Anyways, not all asians have to be smrt. But maybe if ur smrt enough u can get laid. Dorks get laid all the time. They know how to flirt.

      Delete
  13. It's good to see that all the Imprint staff and volunteers are on OMGUW.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you mean Feds staff. Imprint is already openly airing their opinions. It is Feds that has released non-information and kept silent on this, and likely trying to maintain their anonymity through this site.

      Delete
    2. Considering how this site was created by members of Imprint at Imprint, that should be no surprise. Maybe if feds created a venue for (semi) open conversation, they would be around to dodge questions too.

      Delete
  14. Good riddance. As someone who came to the school with an interest in writing, a few read-throughs and one week as a contributor was all I could handle. The appalling quality of the paper is a direct result of the lack of talent and commitment on the part of its leadership. The whole thing is a huge misuse of student money, and the only way to save it is to scrap the current editorship and start fresh.

    - Former editor of another (short-lived) student newspaper

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 13a. You are with imprint. I can hear it in your bitchy tone of writing. Gives it away every time lol.

      Delete
  15. Best way to deal with FEDS and to wake them up to the real world since a lot of their dealings are in secret and questionable is to report them enough times to the CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) and an audit will deal with them very effectively and put them in their place or maybe not if they come through the process clean but it's worth a try.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Feds is audited every year, and the results are presented annually to the general meeting

      Delete
    2. The annual audit is a private audit, not done by the CRA.

      However, the CRA comprehensively audited Feds several years ago, and Feds is still working to implement all of the requirements set out by the government as a result of that audit (most notably this has led to Feds getting more involved in the finances of the student societies).

      Delete
  16. I've read both sides of this thing and you know what? All of the Feds haters are still going to get to read Imprints shitty articles because nowhere does it say that Feds is shutting Imprint down. I have yet to read Imprint and find anything useful. Imprint is getting a new lease and space! So what is the big deal? Have people even seen the current imprint space...it's fucking huge and I never see it being used anywhere near to capacity. Talk about hoarding student space...and you know what else, who keeps imprint accountable? No one, interesting eh, they can do a lot ...like raise their fee by 30% in the last year almost entirely at the discretion of their BOD.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Feds may not be shutting down Imprint, but if Imprint has to move to a smaller space, it means that they will have less space for their volunteers and therefore attract fewer volunteers. This will lead to a decline in the quality of the paper, despite what you say about the uselessness of Imprint as it is.

      The space in Imprint is admittedly unused a lot of the time. However, most of the time (note: MOST) it is packed to capacity with volunteers preparing the paper. So even if there are times that it goes unused, there is a lot of time that it does not have enough space. Moving to a smaller office is not going to make this better.

      As for the 30% fee increase, you are actually totally incorrect. The Imprint fee hasn't been increased in 14 years, so it wasn't simply a "30% increase in the last year". It also wasn't "almost entirely at the discretion of their BOD," but rather it was brought forward to to an Imprint General Meeting by their board, and then it was voted on both there AND at the University Board of Governors.

      Delete
    2. Does anyone know of any other student organizations on campus which have a place to play video games?

      Delete
  17. The quality of Imprint is heinous anyway. Those people aren't writers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THANK YOU for saying what we're all thinking...

      Delete
  18. I've helpfully translated the response from Feds, for those who need assistance reading between the lines.

    https://twitter.com/Markster3000/status/617020899443785728

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Mark. I just read it. A stream of euphemisms, meaningless marketing pap.

      Delete
  19. ITT: Students learning how real government works. Time to realize government is corrupt children. All of this should be opt-in.

    ReplyDelete
  20. A smaller space can work, people can make better use of (cozy) space but if rents are going up then that is a problem.

    16a If they internally audit that's one thing, the CRA audit is tougher but what might need to be audited or at least leaked to the rest of the media are some of the ways they deal in secret, the lengthy lease they got on the SLC etc. They need bigger office space? for what?, then act like elitists in their fiefdom that they've created.

    Hey, at least all parties are very passionate and involved, regardless of what is right or wrong they are doing and going through so much hard core real world learning right now as opposed to just doing their coursework.

    Both sides could simply walk away from it all tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess you don't trust professional independent auditing firms : http://www.feds.ca/wp-content/blogs.dir/57/files//2012/08/audit-2013.pdf

      Delete
    2. 21, the CRA has audited Feds before. In the 6 years I've been at Waterloo, it's happened twice. They were fine both times, other than a few issues with the student societies the first time.

      The SLC lease was signed with the University of Waterloo, which means you can probably get ahold of it via the Freedom of Information Act.

      Feds wants more office space because Feds, as a general rule, always wants to hire more staff. In a world where you can't grow your profits, "growth" becomes 'increasing the number of people on the payroll." This is basically why every government ever is bloated.

      Delete
  21. As a former undergrad and a current grad student at uWaterloo, I can say without hesitation that I don't give 2 cents about what happens to Imprint today or going forward. Never read their shit and never will. Most useless thing I ever saw in life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^What do you care about?

      Delete
    2. As a different former undergrad and a current grad student at uWaterloo, I can say without hesitation that I don't give 2 cents about what happens to Feds today or going forward. Never liked their shit and never will. Most useless thing I ever saw in life.

      Delete
  22. 7A: Do you actually read their articles? There is plenty of student involvement in the articles, including their opinions. If people don't read the press, that's solely up to them -- what you said does not validate for the entire population at the school (not counting university visitors).

    We are not hearing decisions made by the people you have mentioned because they oversee and supervise the entire university (and student services for the associate provost, students which includes housing + residences, student success, health etc.). They are not directly in charge with FEDs because someone else is already specifically prepared to fulfill that role. Please note that information about what they (the people you have mentioned) do is most likely private because it is confidential (See Secretariat and Office of Governors).

    Money is money, and I personally would like mine to be spent for a good cause. I'd let Imprint stay because let's face it, Feds is pickier at selecting people on becoming a part of them than Imprint does. Why take away student opportunities or even hinder the chances for them?

    Do you have any actual proof that this so-called reporter said that? If not, your point is clearly false because I'm 100% positive that Imprint does lots of reviewing before publishing it and it must abide by University guidelines for one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The university sucks except for student services like dental services. I think that money is just money because thats all theres left at the end of the day.

      Delete
  23. After 37 years what broke down to cause this failure?

    ReplyDelete
  24. See, I don't think this is vindictive. I just think Feds is incompetent.

    http://www.uwimprint.ca/article/5195-letter-from-the-imprint-board-of

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 25, I disagree. This was a callous, heavy-handed, cynical act. FEDs has the authority and they've abused it. Not just now. It's been getting worse for a couple of years.

      Delete
    2. 25a, agreed. I don't think they did it because the hate the free press or anything though. I think they did it because they want more space for more staff. They saw an opportunity for more space, and instead of negotiating a compromise in good faith, they used the full brunt of their power right off the bat... because they could.

      Delete
    3. 25b, I disagree. I think FEDs (and through them UW) used space as a rationalization to remove Imprint. Otherwise there wouldn't be the vitriol against Imprint we've seen from FEDs.

      Delete
    4. 25c, what vitriol against Imprint are you referring to? I've heard a lot of people "talk" about Feds holding a grudge, but I haven't seen any actual evidence of it.

      Delete
    5. 25d, if you aren't admitting to seeing it already nothing's going to convince you to say so.

      Delete
    6. Its already been dealte with. This one is the least important because the guy is bald.

      Delete
  25. lol Feds! Remember you paid for the Feds' salaries with your fees!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Alternate titles for this article:

    "Two-time losing FEDS presidential candidate, current Imprint president, publishes whiny article about FEDS making decisions out of spite"

    "Imprint president has a feeling FEDS doesn't like them"

    "We don't like that FEDS is making business decisions based on our articles, here's an article we wrote asking FEDS to change their business decision"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 27, who cares about the title? It's what's happening and why, that matters. The article itself is not the subject matter we care about.

      Delete
    2. Sorry what? Feds is making business decisions? By kicking out the only tenant that's been there, paying rent consistently, for 37 years? How is that a good business decision?

      And seriously? You think this is about bitter ex-candidates? Who never ran against any of the people in office? Who have also chosen to let go of Imprint employees?

      No. the truth is that an alternate title for 27 is: "I'm a Feds exec."

      Delete
    3. The "two-time losing FEDS presidential candidate, current Imprint president" actually has no control over publication, as the content of the newspaper is entirely out of their control. This came from the editor, not the president.
      And 27, you sound really uninformed about this and like you are just a volunteer in Feds that has been told over and over that Feds is the best, without ever trying to understand what a bloated and shitty organisation it is.

      Delete
  27. I'm a UW CS undergrad. I have also done an business undergrad at York and for a bit Ryerson. Let me tell you that UW's student paper is extremely poor compared to my past alma matter. UWs student union is far better run than others. You do not need much square footage with everyone having computers nowadays.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For a CS undergrad, you sure don't seem to understand logic. Imprint may be run worse than other schools' newspapers and Feds may be run better than other schools' unions, but it doesn't follow that Feds is run better than Imprint.

      Delete
  28. Is there a way to remove FEDs as the official student union? I think it's required that there be one, but can an alternate be presented? Is there a reset button? The current one's power structure has become compromised by UW admi,n so that it represents UW the institution's will not its students.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One would assume it would have to come from the students' themselves. FEDs has the highest paid salaries for student unions in Canada. I really doubt they will want to change anything regarding their noses in the trough.

      Delete
    2. 29, it's not impossible, but it's an extremely complicated process. You'd have to establish a new corporation, and you'd have to get the Board of Governors to recognize it as the official student union and collect fees for it instead of Feds, which would probably first require a binding referendum in support of Feds disbanding and this new organization receiving recognition.

      Then there's the fact that the University would probably only allow this under the condition that the new student union hire a certain number of the previous union's staff - especially the top-level ones. This would be necessary to save the burden of massive severance costs (which the University is on the hook for if Feds can't pay them).

      Personally, I think the change would be superficial at best. You're better off searching for a way to reintroduce student governance into Feds.

      Delete
    3. Reintroduce student governance into Feds would really be an uphill battle imo especially at UW. Let's call a spade a spade, students at UW just don't care. They're here for co-op meaning they need the university to supply them with job positions and are willing to pay extra to attend. They're totally reliant to the whims of administration here because they know they wouldn't make it in the real world which is why they're here, to rely on the university to coddle them. It's simply the majority demographic at UW.

      Delete