Redacted character assassination sanctioned by Okanagan College

Would YOU want to work there?

THIS IS FROM A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST I FILED…so many redactions. Giving testimony is easy when the person you’re defaming never gets to know the defamatory things said…and when it’s not defamation because the college conducting an investigation means anything you say—nasty, untrue, vile—is protected speech. Good times.

BULLYING AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT INTERVIEW Date: May 30, 2016 

Time: 1:37pm 

Present: 

Dawn Southern 

Irene Holden, 

s.22 

Irene: Here to investigate complaint vs. Snowsell and (vice verse). I've read but have not yet been privy to Colin's complaint. Would like to start complaint against Colin. l am trying to get a grip on everything and sometimes getting it verbalized helps. Were you always 

Irene: , Colin was not here...he came in 2007? 

Irene: What was your relationship like? 

No matter how many 

times tried to engage with him, could not seem to have a connection that went anywhere. s. 22 

Irene: So socializing but not a real connection...did the connection worsen? 

. They had meeting at ; house, no minutes taken, had resolved to tell that if she didn't step down as chair, they would recall her. 

"how many times would you write a meeting to the 

President?" They sent letter to and cc'd Rod or Craig McLuckie. 

found out they felt the dept was dysfunctional. had no idea about this. Meetings were informal and productive. 

Irene: So would say that no idea that they were unhappy? 

No idea. There was a 2 year period. Nothing about Colin's behavior that would suggest that there were issues. One

lon't think you want to hear what Colin said. ....(Colin had some 

negative comments then). 

Irene: : they're talking about all this negative stuff. Was the letter tc a surprise? 

A total surprise. No minutes so no idea what they discussed. 

to 

. Eg. Pressure on term faculty (Colin z to say yes to chair. 

not 

controlling and would not expect people to vote a certain way. 

Irene: Things get nasty in 2010 and steps down? 

Yes. About a vear after the letter. 

Irene: What effect did this have on your relationship with colleagues? 

Irene: What role was Colin playing 2011 onwards? 

s. 22

.relationship with Colin always has been 

strained. 

Irene: Part of the issue in this appears to be how dept members communicate - you constantly communicate through email. Did that start immediately? 

Not when was chair (other than info emails), 

Set the tone for how we were going to 

discuss things.. _ _ . . So...email is pretty much a constant theme. Printed out some meeting minutes where someone brings up that we need to discuss more in person than over emails. 

Sitting in same room with people...things get increasingly difficult. r, Colin has taken it upon himself You can take one email as being mean or nasty but when someone is repeatedly saying.. you get course release...it got to the point where you would say "what is Colin going to say now"? 

Irene: Was he similar with other chairs? 

Yes. My assumption is that you have access to all of our emails. 

s.22 3 

Irene: I have a pile of them. 

He would argue with about how she should organize her time 

this). After mediation, it wasn't so terrible but then little things would happen. Which dept would get film studies ---communications vs ??? Was a bit of a war. 

Colin questions (same for all). 

What's interesting is that when we are in a 

meeting together face-to-face, Colin would not say nasty things ...just behind a screen. meeting with continuing members only re Ed Plan... Colin over email already (goes back a couple of years)...he came to meeting and looked a little bashful. Someone pointed out that a mistake. sorry about that. Colin said, no worries "mistakes happen". 

Irene: What led complaint? 

He was sending multi-screen, really nasty emails. It started around scheduling process in Fall or in Feb; asking people to attend Experience OC. He didn't want to do that. Colin and I would talk to but also Associate Dean. I 

wants us to. It came to a head when Colin said what 

authority do you have to tell us how we do our service. 

?.ssage on the phone (2 years later). doesn't even change his email message. 

Irene: So the issue started to escalate around Experience OC? 

Colin's emails (were contradictory). 

Apr meeting at end (was not on agenda)..that people are in the garage to get voting rights. while surpised, went with the conversation 

this was evident wrote an email regarding what other depts. did. email said it was a surprise. 

in our 

This released a tyriad from Colin. If you care so much about term rights ....why are you taking a I the summer work? So escalated. 

Irene: Did Colin demand that Raluca take this up when she became chair? 

Yes. He said I want Raluca to do this and want to stop sending emails.

Irene: Have you seen his complaint 

I have seen portions pertaining 

Irene: Why not? 

Irene: so should this ease off? 

Colin intrudes and sends nasty emails. 

If Colin doesn't know he's pissing 

off, I'd be surprised. One of the reasons, of dislike of Colin than others in department. I Irene: The complaint...he alludes to it as being retribution s. 22 

Irene: He accuses Df publicly shaming him? Wasn't he doing the same thing? 

Irene: He also says kept him from sitting on hiring committees and not to have a say on dept hirings". 

Irene: I have this but haven't read this yet. 

Irene: Was there an incident where did not want him on a hiring committee?

s.22 

Irene: What about the frequency of department meetings? What is main method of communications? 

Not frequent and don't meet frequently. The more we email, the more we dislike each other. I think we've had 4 dept meetings this past year. Is very difficult for us to have dept meetings — people teaching from am to evening... meetings between 6:00and 8:00 (think we've had 3-4 meetings this year). meeting over spring break but was resistance to that. 

Irene: He claims, that he responds to emails but does not initiate. 

I suppose so. 

Irene: What is he responding to 7. 

I guess so. Sometimes he responds tc There is an initial email started to deal with dept issues — eg. new diploma — he was upset 

never seen a diploma go with a split vote...and said this in an email and Colin had a major issue with this. He responded to this.. does he need to respond with condescension and 

Irene: He says in this complaint, that re waging a never-ending campaign against him...he describes this as waging war. He describes this as a pathological dislike of him....(goes on).... 

Irene: What else will I find? 

There is a meeting where Colin That is part of his character. Eg. in minutes, he'll want it documented if someone attended, and whether they presented (if s like an ego trip). 

He did write an email the department apologizing. He wrote a separate email 

recognizes 

that he's being a jerk 

He says some really nasty things in those last couple of emails. 

Irene:

s.22 

He's said some things that are hard to handle. 

He had an issue taking summer work. 

.also in meeting minutes re noted that some work will be awarded as per C/A...there are serious complications if you start to contravene the C/A. I thought we were trying to be as nice as possible to terms and then as soon as they were continuing, they do this to 

Irene: What do you think the remedy is? 

Also Colin does not come to meetings (think he only came to one meeting this past year). 

Irene: So how can this move forward? 

Irene: Or he won't attack because 

Hard to say. 

Irene: If you think of anything else that you feel should be covered, please contact me. 

Irene: So it's escalated? 

Yes. It's a blow-up. So has he been hiding this for so long that now it's finally coming to a head? What he is doing is making a much worse atmosphere for our dept. Getting a job in this sector is difficult 

Irene: Why not? 

Don't think there was a high level trust. Academics...highly educated but highly insecure. Definitely email is not the way to go, 

Meeting concluded: 2:48pm

s.22 

BULLYING AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT INTERVIEW Date: May 30, 2016 

Time: 12:36 pm 

Present: 

Dawn Southern 

Irene Holden, 

Irene: Purpose of meeting. Investigate complaint against Colin Snowsell. I've read most of the email trails. I need to hear from you the various aspects . Colin hired as a term, (both hired with 

understanding there would be positions at the end of the term, which happened). Initially, relationship was fine. 

Irene: He teaches in Vernon primarily. 

yes 3-4 years ago he moved there. 

Irene: Initially was fine? When did things fall off the rail? 

engaging in behavior which was inappropriate 

when Marlo became chair (so by mid-2011). 

Irene: She took over 

Yes 

Irene You say he attacks the chairs. Is this right? Is the term correct? 

Colin sees the chair as having some sort of power and he has expectations of what the chair is supposed to do. Whether or not that is realistic....The chair does scheduling., etc. People have a different relationship with the Chair. Whoever is chair may be more likely to come into conflict with someone who is the chair potentially. 

Colin was treating her the same way. 

our department was put through mediation in 

2010. 

Irene: So when you say that Colin attacked the Chair, it wasn't Colin who attacked the previous chair? I would say he >pearheaded it and then the rest of us.... 

Irene: You said that Colin didn't target chair?

s.22 

Hell often bring up issues of timing and because, eg. scheduling, 

able to accommodate all of his requests in a timely manner so never turned into anything. Irene: You say scheduling is one of the topics that encourage Colin to start these emails. Others? Department policy 

Irene: Any? 

There is no predicting. Could be an innocuous decision, I cannot predict. If decision is counter to his interest. 

Irene: Does he participate in the decision making part of the process? 

He wasn't at last meeting so didn't participate in those. 

Irene: Is that typical? Doesn't participate in person? 

Irene: Do you have many department meetings? 

Generally 34. Only had 2 in last year. 

Irene: Why? 

People don't want them. We fight. Mike was trying to organize one in Feb or March and members wanted to discuss in person; ended up that people didn't want to come in during reading week. Colin specifically said "is there a specific reason we need to meet"? 

So even though for years we've been saying need face to face meeting to discuss complicated items... but people are not inclined to have meetings (eg. come in at night). 

Irene: What does "we fight" mean? 

We argue. We cannot come to a decision. It's when there are big decisions. Eg. we recently revised one of our programs and this took 3 years...people who weren't on the committee didn't support all of the decisions (4 people on committee; 3 people not)...in this case, people on committee won because of numbers (4 vs 3). Did not have full dept support. 

Irene: Why can't you reach decisions? 

Different perspectives — professional communications vs. theoretical. Small dept with limited funds and competing for those funds and you can see the split. 

Irene: What is it like to be a faculty member....and you can't reach decisions. Do you argue unprofessionally...?

s.22 

Meetings ...people left in tears sometimes. Sometimes people take things personally. Given the history of our dept since 2010, most people can't separate this. 

Irene: Why 2010? 

2010 was the recall year. The mediation year. Everything was laid bare. The wounds not healed. Irene: What wounds was there? If you were all together on the issue 

No. What became clear is that we all had issues but not the same issues. 

Irene: Has it gotten worse? 

There is a divided line. 

Irene: Who teaches theory vs.... 

—theory people. Everyone has to teach at least 1 theoretical. Mark has 

some crossover into the theory. one course on a regular basis. Prof, comm people, Mike Sharon when she was a member and Mark straddles (though Mark teaches primarily professional communications). 

Irene: The diploma was about theory? 

CCJS. Communications, **?, Journalism Studies. 

Irene: Who sat on committee? 

Mario, Colin, Raluca and Mark. 

Irene: Why take so long? 

We fought for over a year just over the title. 

Irene: 

Colin's behaviors fell into those described...seen pattern of emails 

targeting the chair, aggressively disagree with people in meetings, he built himself up by putting others down. Always questions other people's knowledge. There was one instance (via email) where people arguing over which courses we wanted to teach. An issue of resources. So we agreed were going to have a meeting specifically to discuss areas of expertise and who could teach what and come up with an equitable sharing of the limited resources. We never did have this meeting.

s.22 10 

...because became a "hot button" issue. Was so many things, have action items, and then have hot button issues which kept getting deferred to next meeting...deferred to next meeting, deferred to next meeting... Usually meeting in evening so only have 2 hrs. Becomes in the end, easier to avoid it. 

Irene: Was that at the end after the Apr13 meeting? 

Irene: Do the others participate as well? 

Not generally, usually starts....he wasn't at least meeting so he didn't participate. the minutes after the last meeting (next day), he starts emails ...I think 4 things discussed...term faculty voice; summer hiring issue  

"if you care so much about 

the rights of non-continuing members". 

Irene: So he's literally attackinf in this email. 

The bullying and harassment policy requires that ee's report incidents of bullying and harassment even if not involving them. 

So Colin's treatment of has gotten worse and worse. This is an email trail that everyone is a part of. So if doing this in front of everyone, what is he saying directly to 

We had 3 term emails included this year. Terms saw the extent of this 

...so everyone saw and was a discussion re term and in front of them, and they are included. It was totally inappropriate. 

Irene: Is this the email chain 

That was the Feb one. 

email chain. 

Irene: Is this all due to Colin? 

into Feb one and the recent one...and asked to be taken off the

Yes. After Apr 13 ..this particular time. 

11 

s.22 

(Colin got back from sabbatical). 

Irene: What did this look like? 

Irene: Went awry in 2016? 

We normally have a dept meeting Dec, we didn't. Discussion re having one in reading week, we didn't. Things were fine in the Fall as no one had a cause for interactions. Nothing came up. 

Irene: Sabbatical? 

August 1, 2015. 

Irene: One Year? 

Yes back August 1, this year. 

Irene: So even while on sabbatical, you attend meetings? Is this normal? 

Is up to the individual. Certain things can't get involved in while on leave but this we can, and like to have a say where we can. Have to choose a new chair so...Raluca became chair (unofficially and then had to do through the Dean's office). Raluca is not back until August 15, 2016. is done as Chair on June 30, 2016....we're sharing Chair duties a few of us until Raluca starts. 

Irene: did Mr. Snowsell apologize? 

He apologized, 

Irene: What do you feel is the remedy to all of this? 

I feel we should be 2 separate departments. We really are 2 separate departments. Irene: Is this what causes the problems? 

We have limited resources....discretional resources go to CCSJ diploma and rest go to service courses. We have just enough courses to cover faculty. 

Meanwhile, 

Colin has been 

unsupportive of this. We have also felt that theory people want a piece of our pie so there is

12 

s.22 

resentment. So professional people on one side, and theory people on other side (competing for scarce resources). We haven't even put a proposal before them and, when first talked about, Colin said why would you do this, who would take this, etc...majority of conflict 

Irene: And she is going to be Chair? 

Yes. 

Irene: How do you fix this? You've tried mediation, that didn't work. 

. _ I think we had one meeting where we all came together. You need to have a meeting where you decide what the role of the chair and faculty members are. This meeting never was held....deferred, deferred, deferred. Never happened. 

Don't know how to come back from? 

Irene: What effect on you? 

Irene: That's all I have. Anything else? 

the fact that Colin was able to 

overturn the vote that we took at this meeting...this was the moment of truth that Colin was a bully (re scheduling). He was blaming for sneeking the issue in on the agenda. We had all agreed to a decision and Colin overturned it with one email dated Apr1.9 (ie. to defer the decision). 

Time ended: 1:25pm

13 

s.22 

BULLYING AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT INTERVIEW Date: May 30, 2016 

Time: 11:45 am 

Present: 

Dawn Southern 

Irene: Please tell me about. 

"Bating and ranting" — especially in last email trail; very basic discussions relating to whether we were going to have a meeting or not; ended up name-calling 

Irene: Do you have a copy of those emails? 

Irene: Are these the emails asked to be removed from the email trails? Irene: Colin has been here that long as well? 

Irene: Did you notice any other email trails? 

Like I said, it wasn't until this year where included. 

was in communication and then sometime between then and November, was removed as chair and the department was involved in mediation. I was not involved in that "situation" at the time nor did I know the details. (So you can see, I was not fully involved then). 

Irene: Were the emails ever directed at you? 

No. Email is not effective in general to negotiate through some of the problems we are having Irene: Was it only Colin who was bating and ranting?

14 

s.22 

Mainly was Colin was doing it. responding to someone bating, makes it go further. People did respond. However, might be hard if you are the one bated. would respond. 

Irene: weren't always involved in face-to-face meetings? 

We had one meeting this year but was 

teaching over part of it and one meeting I attended. 

Irene: Atmosphere? 

Irene: You couldn't detect tension? 

Was at one meeting where 

the discussion went on and on and on 

Irene: Colin voiced non-continuing faculty's needs and seemed 

He was named by Colin email trail included 

garage. 

That 

and some others who were newer but not in 

Colin would like to see what that complaint would be. He felt that term faculty who had travelled here would be really needing that money from summer. That would be a direct reference to 

Colin 

started to tall< about said that as a term employee, The tone shiftea ana was attacking tor taking summer classes. 'this is an example of where these emails go....". Shortly after (couple of days), email trails started up again. 

Irene: So the meeting was held where you were discussing these issues and was not very contentious. Regular faculty were discussing in a non-contentious way. Turned contentious in the email trail. Irene: Does he instigate the trail? 

No. It's a general email and administrative in its tone and people chime in. 

Colin comes in and works in a direction that not come to a conclusion. 

Irene: So 

contentious. 

initiates the emails and Colin chimes in and turns it into something a little more

15 

s.22 

That's right. 

Irene: Colin of using emails to bully and dominate. Who? 

Directly, Indirectly, non-continuing faculty, whom he already clarified don't have a voice. 

Irene: Emails trails.. how they wander and go round and round. What stops them. Irene: 

Irene: Did it appear genuine? 

He cited his overwork and his courses started at 8:30am which cause a lot of travel. This brings back a point that we can't do anything about it. 

I am not sure if he is aware he is doing it or 

whether it is on purpose. 

Irene: How does this affect your interest 

Irene: Is your feelings all as a result of these emails? 

Irene: I would think you and colleagues would have some form of reservation about using email? 

They have difficulty sometimes meetings 

not sure exactly why. 

Irene: That's all I have unless you feel I have missed something? 

No. 

Conclusion: 12:11pm

16 

s.22 

BULLYING AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT INTERVIEW Date: May 31, 2016 

Time: 1:25 pm 

Present: Irene Holden, Dawn Southern 

....(conversation started before laptop was up — so started notes mid-way through conversation. Discussion was in progress regarding what informatior had received already about from Chris Rawson).... 

want to wage war against him... 

Irene: hating the members in the department? No... 

Irene: ....I think what we need to do is tell you 

Irene: 

details. 

Irene: In 2010 

Irene: 

Irene: 

We are not revisiting 2010. I don't know all the -le seems to think that there's some retribution

s.22 17 

Irene: Was she just the messenger? 

She cancelled the course. 

course 120 then Colin wouldn't have to travel, and I wouldn't have to travel... 

Irene: What was Colin's complaint? 

Colin's complaint. Colin 

continuing (working FT) and we would do our best. 

if we cancel 

it takes 2 years to get 

this new diploma (journalism diploma).... 

.and that's what happened. Colin's thing was that then suddenly his complaint was 

. and there was. 

that there was no consultation about the diploma.. Irene: I thought there was a committee? . Colin didn't want it.

problem 

Colin got Vernon. 

18 

s.22 

Colin had a 

favored Colin...however, 

— how do you feel about working in Vernon, as 

faculty members have to be involved in the community. Colin answered well, 

So Colin's thing was no consultation. 

. . . 

Irene: Did Colin say anything about being "autocratic" 

Colin got everything, 

Colin a vote and 

we said this to them things was that he had felt that having a vote was difficult as he felt he had no choice but to vote 

Irene: 

Irene: 

He does tend to concentrate on the chair. Who knows why he was 

.probably because it was useful to him as a term member;

s.22 19 

The way he talks is like Oxford... It's Kal Campus ...he teachers crummy classes. I think he has a real authority thing. He says the mediator asked him what is the role of the chair and Colin's response in mediation is that the chair's job is to make everyone happy. 

He invests the chair with 

authority and then accuses the chair of misusing the authority. 

Irene: 

Yes. Although there was protracted discussion re the diploma (journalism studies) and medieval and cultural studies. The beauty, the irony, is that suddenly no one wanted to get rid of journalism studies and so then we keep it..so one moment no consultation, then went to - but we've got to keep it. 

The committee was struck to do this We made a mistake in that we made it a majority committee and that that was how it was voted in. 

Irene: 

. It took a long time to get to final version. 

Irene: 3 years? 

Don't thing it was that long. What about block transfer? They hadn't done anything; they didn't know anything. They debated a few things for a couple of years. We could not seem to get out of it. The problem with that is that this is what Colin asked for..it was not personal..we never said publicly ...read the Ed council doc... 

Irene: In Ed council notes ..."the review committee says that the program...." But in reality, the concern is with their own workloads personally. (DCS: didn't capture all this wording read by Irene) 

The reason they didn't wantthe 

same courses, is because they wanted to swap them out and this was because of their own workload. 

Irene: Irene read from document: ..."current associate dean..hated them.... the department and hated all of us" (DCS did not capture all of the verbage read by Irene)

20 

s.22 

Irene: Was the debate respectful? 

Colin's rhetoric is that - why can't you just accept the expertise of your colleagues? You can't ask for consultation and then not have discussion, You can't have it both ways. The comment about hating the dept..) don't remember this. 

Irene: 

Irene: So was it as toxic as it had been 

.Colin angry with this 

then voted in. Other people given an opportunity. I think nominated nominated Colin in last round but he didn't want it. 

Irene: Colin's not been chair? 

He's only been cont since 2010. He didn't accept the nomination as far as I understand it. 

If he thinks then he's mad (as in crazy). He is pretty much unhappy with his lot. He's done some terrible things like...in 2010, was assoc dean, friends at time with Colin. So apparently (gossip of course)... left and apparently said, he would take Colin with him. I think he was disappointed. He did a horrible thing...he published a story in a well-known journal who was a caricature of who is probably a caricature of 

Irene: (read excerpts — did not capture all of content) 

...like a rubber hose equipped police office of the mid 20th 

century....she knows exactly where to hit and how hard without leaving a mark."

s.22 21 

Irene: (Read another excerpt) "how terrible each day..." (coughing- Irene left briefly)...past 6 years has been for me and for each of my esteemable colleagues who, like me, did nothing to deserve this"...(coughing — Irene left briefly)... 

the cause of all of this, is Colin. I think ....he just always is the lightning rod making it worse. 

Irene: a "negative influence on the dept; difficult to work with; sewing discontent at every turn..." 

Iren: Why? 

He were the They'd been there 2 years. I'm pretty sure he wrote the Aug23 letter He was the new party in the dept. 

Irene: 

Irene: 

damaged by him — 

For

Colin to say he was damaged? I think he tried something and it didn't work. 

Colin really hated He hopec 

would be fired he thought: 

Irene 

would be there for him. 

I think he did have some sense that would happen. 

22 

s.22 

Irene: What about this? (referring to documents that 

Irene: After you did what happened? 

happened. 

Colin was responsible for what 

He is a negative influence; you see it in his emails. 

Irene: This correspondence has to do with 2010 (referring to what 

2olin was there. Colin and were scathing re the documentary. Colin manipulated 

Irene: I just wanted to see your reaction to some of this.

23 

s.22 

So what happens now? 

Irene: I continue to meet with everyone. I will issue some findings and a report. I am not sure if the college is interested in what I feel is a remedy. 

How long before wrapped up? 

Irene: probably this week but is a question of when i have time to go through correspondence and documents. 

Irene: Have not met with him yet. 

. Colin did refer to 

him Also the mediator. 

Irene: I feel uncomfortable with that. Being a mediator myself, I would not do. Her focus would be different; she was not a member of the department. Her focus would be trying to fix it so is a different focus. 

Have you met with as well? 

Irene: Will by Skype I believe. 

will you want to see me again? 

Irene: I don't think so. Not unless sometimes comes up in interview with Colin or in correspondence. 

Irene: Thank you. 

Meeting ended: 2:57pm

s.22 24 

BULLYING AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT INTERVIEW Date: June 1, 2016 

Time: 1:27 pm 

Present: Colin Snowsell (Interviewee), Irene Holden, Dawn Southern 

....(conversation started before laptop was up —so started notes mid-way through initial conversation. Discussion was in progress regarding email exchanges which had taken place...) 

Irene: ....the cruz of the issue centered around email exchanges which had taken place. As I understand it, she had requested to be taken off the exchange. What was your reaction? 

Colin: Out of the 3 complaints, are the ones I don't understand at all. Nothing amounting to bullying and harassment. She initiated the topics, people respond and then she bows out — I find this frustrating. I also don't understand why she didn't address herself to me personally, she knows who I am and where to find me. We used to have a fine relationship and used to be social (she's covered my classes and I've covered hers). We had a personal relationship until she became friends with 

It's insincere ... she had an opportunity to talk to me and give me a sense of her discomfort. Also, when you start the conversation, you have an obligation to finish....if she had, she would have seen that Raluca and Mario understood the legitimate nature of the conversation. I don't understand her complaint. 

She wrote me personally after I sent out the group apology. She was the only one. I told her she could have responded to me personally. She passes me with her eyes on her feet. That is not collegial. 

Irene: Is there much one-one one with them? 

Colin: ...Mario and Raluca...we have lunch. Known Raluca since I've been 29. The 3 of us are friends. Mark I never see. I've probably not been in the same room with him for a year. 

Irene: Is there a division in dept? 

Colin: Yes. There are 2 factions...arose 6 years ago...5 of us (all continuing members) felt that management was dictatorial and exclusionary. We also felt it was far too easy to find yourself in her disfavor. In my situation, I didn't know if I would be hired into continuing. She asked Raluca and I to appear at conventions and stand at tables, even though we are not voting members. She wanted me to appear 3-4 hrs at the Grand Hotel on a Sunday...I was in my first year, had all these courses, had to prepare for all the courses for the next day! Said no — she never spoke to me after that day like a human being. 

approach is that the Commications dept is her dept. We weren't trying to complain about her or harm her; we asked the Union about this. We didn't have the language in the collective agreement at the time. So... no policy then so they decided to put this to mediation. The Union has a policy now how to deal with a complaint, is in the collective agreement (never used to be)...think that was because of this situation. Craig McLuckie was the Assoc Dean at the time that I dealt with...

s.2225 

Irene: There was an external mediator I thought? 

Colin: First spoke to Craig. We asked the Dean's office —we didn't want to fire anyone; we just wanted a new chair. Craig referred to it as a "mugging". The problem is that HR never asked me; no one did...never asked what the substance was of our discontent. 

Irene: What about the Mediator? 

Colin: Mediator never took sides. Only had one meeting with Irene: In the meeting, you were to each identify with 

and the mediator. 

the issues with her? 

Colin: Yes. stopped responding to my emails after I refused to do the Sunday work at the Grand. She was a union person and she knew the policy re asking to do the Sunday work. She determined my future; I didn't do what she wanted. She never would speak to me. I asked why 

wouldn't respond... ) said cause you pissed her off. I didn't do what she wanted but I shouldn't have had to. I wrote her a contrite email in the end. 

She wrote..."I'm trying to decide if you're an asshole" This is what we discussed in the mediation. She said it was a joke. 

I said I would be happy to teach film in Vernon for this was an issue as well. She doesn't welcome input from anyone. 

Irene: I understand she stepped down. Did things improve? 

Colin: They deteriorated and got worse. The first time we sat down without mediator, declared that the mediation had been a wasted process. said "do you think we will ever forget what was said?; do you think there will be no consequences?". It was clear that the mediation was going to inflame things further. At this meeting, or another meeting, declared that she hated us and hated having hired us. Until she became Associate Dean, that was how she responded. 

doesn't ever do anything in writing. She was the president of the union and would yell at us. She would leave meetings crying. This was not collegial. will not let us move on. I included in complaint; she is smart. She ensures nothing is in writing. 

Irene: Both complaints deal with email exchanges...it appears to be the communication style that is most favored? 

Colin: Hostile emails. Yes. Very. 

Irene: One thread Feb 2016 about Experience OC. Interesting that your first experience was similar with 

Colin: Experience OC didn't emerge... it has always been a contentious issue. 

All continuing employees expected to perform service. I included in my email that it doesn't necessarily include trade shows... there are many options. So we have argued in dept (festered

s.22 26 

endlessly).. pet project is that the way to grow enrolment is to stand behind tables and hand out colored leaflets. We have asked there to be some kind of tracking to ensure that this is effective. Our sense is that it is not. There is no tracking. Kids are not looking forward to go to College in order to look at handmade colored leaflets...it's dated and we're the Communications dept. Why don't we update the website? It is not a good use of our time. To ask me to come in on a Sunday for the 31-ci time that week to Kelowna. Poor use of my time. When as chair, circulates requests from re Experience OC...if you look at this email starting our recent apocolypse.. it's a lot of work, different audience (Gr11) they come to hang out with kids from other high schools. Honestly Communications is hard and we're trying to say stop using your smart phones for this. Mark said sessions cancelled re low enrollment.... This is optional. Not required. All of this could have been avoided if they had said that the other Associate Dean should handle the Communications dept. 

There's been years to track enrollment and why; they still haven't done this. I reminded that nothing has changed and we did offer sessions and they didn't run. then says the Comm dept is the only one not to participate....everyone responds politely. We go online and see that approx. 1/3 of the depts not participating. We tell him and he says well we're the only diploma not participating. We look again...we see writing and publishing is not participating. I point this out (copy of email provided to Irene). I pointed out the language in the C/A. He responded how dare you bring facts into the discussion. 

Irene: Do you think you're challenging his authority? 

Colin: What authority? He's chair. We responded that we would fulfil our service but in a different way. He seems to come out at us about this. He comes out at us for a third time. The ostrich approach seems the safest approach. 

Irene: "article 20 invests you with this authority...." A bit of a challenge but not over the top. 

Colin: I think the chair is a difficult position as you are the lightning rod for decisions. (showed another email). He's threatening us and tells us that our supervisor is telling us to do this. 

He maintains that this is not optional and should be viewed as mandatory. He's saying Rob said is mandatory. We asked for evidence. When he says the dean's office; it seems like it's his wife. 

Irene: She's the Associate Dean. 

Colin: She still can't make "service" mean one particular thing. 

Irene: She can represent the Dean's office as Associate Dean. 

Colin: It would be interesting to see what Marlo says as she had a conversation with Rob Huxtable. Rob didn't even know what Experience OC is. He apparently said is misrepresenting me? 

If it is going to be mandatory, I want to know. If there is going to be an adverse consequence, we need to know. Administration has to respect the language in the C/A. is a member of the OCFA. There is no reason that Rob can't attend meetings. 

Irene: He wants Rob to attend meeting.

s.22 27 

Colin: No. He doesn't want Rob or Tim to attend. We want Tim or Rob to attend. We encouraged Mike to invite Rob. We think he didn't invite Rob as Rob would not have agreed. 

That's my response. 

Irene: The Feb2016 thread... "Oh for the love of god..." one. 

Colin: She's a Communications professor. In which textbook does it recommend responding from your phone with the phrase "oh for the love of god"... 

Irene: She apologized. 

Colin: She apologized as she wanted to complain. was part of the original complaint against las no friends. I'm sympathetic to her role reversal. In letter, he writes about how serious this was...I question what adverse consequences she has sufferd? She's been chief stewart, associate dean... has hurt the author more. 

Why didn't I complain about before. Who would believe that 

would get a reprimand from the office? I have dark thoughts that the college looks for the highest title and then sides with that title. There is no win for me by coming out against I will be on their "list" even more so. 

Irene: You said has not suffered; you have. How? 

Colin: and I both resigned positions in the Union because of her. one of those roles is not tact and diplomacy. 

Irene How have you suffered? 

performs a role and 

Colin: My dept in process of hiring. I am never been involved in process of hiring. I volunteer and do not get asked. Think I got to be on 1 hiring committee. 

Irene: Who determines this? 

Colin When we reconfigured, I was not involved and I was told that it was not my area of expertise. Experience OC is now the only way I can perform. 

(Rod asked to meet with Colin outside _2:04pm — 2:06pm) 

Irene: You were talking about that you felt marginalized. 

Colin: Visit to hallway was to twig my memory. I was looking on weekend to try and produce all of the email exchanges. The first fight Feb2014 when Jillian was chair we decided to combine two arts diplomas... as they weren't transferring well. So Committee formed (4 of us)..we spent a good year working on and brought forward a functional diploma after a lot of hard work. said I don't give a shit about your diploma...and blocked diploma for a year at expense of our students, in order to persecute us. Professors are meant to disagree.

s.2228 

Irene: It's how you disagree. 

Colin: Our dept, for first time decided that we were going to go forward with a split vote (4 vs 3 of them). By their own admission, none of them teach any of our courses. said l don't teach in that dept so I don't give a shit. So language circulated because they are doing this because you don't want to teach certain courses. So first email exchange I ask for evidence where dept has a split vote and decided not to. They didn't. is the chair; he still has to represent the 4 of us...but he doesn't, he represents himself. said everyone looked at and decided that we are not approving as not going to touch an internal feud...they said to get your shit together. They blocked it and they don't have professional reasons for blocking it. It seems it is because of who we are. Any college who believes in the health and safety of employees should have allowed us to have. I have talked to my GP; I have never met Rob Huxtable (been in same room with him once)...I would suggest that everyone has a good idea about the dysfunction in this department and yet no one deals with. Why didn't someone in HR deal with it? I've never been in HR before. Why didn't Rob Huxtable show up in meetings? He's never showed up. Someone who is afraid of HR and his department would not have written the letter the way did. 

Irene: What do you mean? 

Colin: He talks about my sexual history. He is hostile. 

Irene: Angry? 

Colin: He's angrier than he ever was. He will never stop this. 

Irene: Will you? 

Colin: In 2010, I moved to separate town to get away from them; I have no presence on social media. I never check my email. I have no ill will. I have no social connections with professors any more as can't handle the feud. It seemed to me the safest thing is to move one town over. 

Irene: That's where the continuing position was. 

Colin: Many continue to stay in Kelowna for social reasons. 

Irene: Apr2016 email thread...tell me about... 

Colin: That's a doosey isn't it? (will leave contentious email exchanges with you). Even including my last self-rightous... 

Everyone has their limits and if you push someone into a corner; eventually they feel the need to fight back. 

Irene: Why? 

Colin: I feel like has a habit of piling on in debates that don't concern her. In her own language, "I don't care; I don't give a shit". I think she doesn't like me personally. If you take away personal animosity as a reason, nothing is left as a reason as to why these emails happen. I have never initiated.

29 

Irene: You're replied to all. You spread it. 

Colin: Yes, in the interest of transparency...I reply to all. This is what 1 did in Paris (showed email)....May last year...1 tried to write individually and took off from email thread, and cc'd Marlo, and said not trying to start a fight...(after thread to dean's office; yet chair doesn't have right to do this — it's like a trip to the principal). 

Irene: "You must stop sending this emails for all times"? 

Colin: All caps..how is that calming the situation? 

Irene: I see one where he said he is done. That was in capitals. 

Colin: My response was to say that you can't tall< to people like that. His response was to say, yes 1 can. In this thread, Mario and Raluco...no Communications professor has ever been asked to work a 5 day week with 3 trips (missed part of this???)...the precedent was being set for all time. Every chair has looked at schedules and changed them. 1 didn't want to do classes on 5 days as want a day to prep..I'm not shirking my responsibility. 

Irene: Are you suggesting that the complaint is as retribution? 

Colin: 1 look at everything and cannot come up with bullying and harassment. Iren: That's up to me to decide. 

Colin: I don't think has any fear from me. He's going on ESL. Raluca is going to be chair and I've known her since 1 was 29 — we have an excellent working relationship. Hopefully, with gone, a new normal will prevail. have decided that all term employees are the subject of a complaint. Will I ever be chair after this — probably not. 

Irene: Would you want to be chair? 

Colin: After Raluca. 

It's unreasonable to expect that, as chair, there are not going to be contentious issues and that members will write to you sternly. 

Irene: But not disrespectfully. Debate is healthy but how you debate. 

Colin: If you want respect; you have to earn it. Ask to show you one email where he's addressed me civilly or given me a compliment. 

Irene: Would you be surprised that he talks about your emails the same way? 

Colin: No. But likely he's already insecure about the work he is doing. 1 don't have the power to make him feel a certain way. is not even doing what his own union requests him to do. He receives 2 course releases and the only significant task he has is scheduling. So when he writes an email and says I screwed up and its too late and you can't do anything about it. This affect us. 

s.22

30 

Irene: Apr 13 meeting — did you attend? Was there a discussions re same issue? 

Colin: Day before he said we don't have anything to discuss. We asked him why attend a meeting if we can't do anything about it. I think they're saying, I didn't attend meeting so I can't reopen the meeting. Yet I can't see why not. I didn't understand why a section ran with only 3 courses. I said you voted but I would like to reopen. Most colleagues said "totally". I don't understand what meant when she said I had a magic, manipulative effective...I don't think there is anything wrong with reopening an agenda item. 

Irene: Unless you didn't attend for a reason. Why didn't you attend? 

Colin: I don't think it's mandatory to attend. I didn't think there was anything of consequence on the agenda. 

Irene: You said you avoided though. 

s.22 

Colin: They're contentious. Can't bare to face 

Irene: You've yelled. 

Colin: In emails. 

Irene: This wonderful email communication tool. 

Colin: I apologized for this twice. I apologize to personally as well. was already off to the races with a bullying and harassment charge. They would not take the seriously offered apology. I don't know why they were so determined to bring up the bullying and harassment charge and waste all of our time and resources over the summer. 

Irene: Counter claim. You jumped to include and yet you haven't had much to do with her. Why reference her? 

Colin: Because decided to undermine his own complaint about email exchanges and brought up all the old email exchanges. I also think hopes you don't know the context. With it's difficult to know where he starts and where Sharon begins; or where Sharon is acting on behalf of Rob Huxtable or perhaps where acting against Rob Huxtable. 

Irene: Are you aware that Rob Huxtable asked to come directly to him, rather than )ecause of their relationship? 

Colin: Then why is going to 

Irene: You mention that you include starts. 

because you don't know where ends and 

Colin: If Nanted to be responsible in her position.. complaint start when went to should have not responded as (referenced the history)... She should have advised her that she could not advise her. I don't think they would have complained without approval.

s.22 31 

Irene: You can't substantiate that. 

Colin: No. 

Irene: Is your intent to open wounds? 

Colin: No. Intent is that the college needs to understand who they have in their midst. You could look at it this way... In Drathconian ??? ...let's say, all of us are fired. Would this solve the problem? Most of us hired by her and complained about it. You will find that in 3-5 years, the same thing will happen as she cannot keep friends. The origin and source of problem...you cannot help but look at the toxicity of the legacy of what she left us with. Ask Marc A why was hired? Thought this would appease 

and she would calm down. The more she yells and cries, the more she gets what she wants. No one seems to thinks she got this position because of tact and diplomacy! 

I think in her heart, she thinks it is still her Communications dept. In the most recent fight re Experience OC, she was writing in her capacity as Associate Dean. 

Eg. Craig McLuckie went to great lengths to distance himself from dept. She didn't. She pariticipated in a joint workshop with Communications, as Associate Dean. We cannot speak freely in such a meeting, in a room where she was former chair and yelled I hate you. She had only been Associate Dean for a short time at that point. 

Irene: If you were chair and the rest of the faculty came to you and said, we don't want you to chair, we don't like you, we don't want you... how would you feel? 

Colin: That's a mischaracterization. Do you really think we said that, in that way? Irene: Not in letter? 

Colin: I've not really talked to If 5 of my colleagues came to me and said we have problems with your management style. If it was me, I would do a self-assessment. refuses to see herself the way other people view her. I would not fuel myself with vengeance...this would eat me up alive. It seems to be eating them up alive. is motivated by vengeance according to what she said in department meetings. 

Irene: They were angry; hurt... Have any fences been mended? 

Colin: Every email I sent to is bent over backwards trying to be civil and not trying to pick a fight. 

Irene: If you were chair, and you were continually questioned about what you do with your release time, do you not see this as a little inappropriate? 

Colin: ...(did not capture all...went into describing a situation with his prior supervisor where question him and his supervisor described his obligations as his supervisor) Bart (supervisor) did not take this in a negative sense — he said I have an obligation to produce and be seen to produce. I was told when you become a graduate student, you have an obligation to produce. You don't stop producing when you are a professor. Every other institution I've been at, we let each other know if we seem to not to be producing. We are incredibility privileged, the benefitswe get... we don't even have to be present. The problem with college system is there is no incentive to continue to be productive. The smart phone

32 

has totally changed my job. All of the theory is out the window; it's an exciting time to be a professor. We need all hands on deck to get a handle on this and move forward. For Jillian to type "I don't give a shit"...it's not appropriate. 

Irene: How do we get all hands on deck? 

Colin: I think everything that can be done will be done. will be gone and on leave. Raluca will be Chair and she's incredibly professional. I assume that a lobotomy is off the table. I think when Sharon was appointed, it would have been good for Rob Huxtable to say, I understand how you may feel but she has really good skills and this is what I'm doing ...Mike Boulter will go to me, etc. This clarity would have been helpful. When we read the email about her being Associate Dean, we almost passed out. 

Irene: Is everything going to be wonderful with Raluca coming back? 

Colin: are angry because they are outvoted on every contentious issue. Irene: You don't play a part in this? 

Colin: I am not the person writing in the heat of the moment Sometimes my emails may not convey the warmth of whom I am; my father is a preacher sometimes I tend to pontificate. I think no one thinks that no one will ever go after 

Irene: Let's say you become the chair and How do you manage this? 

Colin: No problem. I have experience in management. All of the problems expresses are self-afflicted. If he'd done his job better, this would not have happened. If he had looked at the schedules ..taken initiateve..done what his predecessors have done...none of this would have happened. It's not just me complaining. Mario complains. If I was chair, I would be really efficient. 

Irene: Have you taken exception to some of actions as chair? 

.where is the evidence? We 

Colin: They say I have. When you have the opportunity to lay this out.. 

had no contention - I had disagreements with her but me —1 speak out and I am consistent. 

Irene: That's all I have for you. 

Meeting ended: 2:57pm 

I think that this speaks highly of s.22

33 

s. 22 

From: 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:24 PM 

To: 

Subject: 

His most recent email to the department 

(today) claims he's too afraid to speak his mind, that he's being bullied 

Sent from my iPad 

1

34 

From: 

Sent: Friday. Anril 15. 2016 2:15 PM 

To: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

s. 22 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

l copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email, 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting representative present as well). Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada V1Y 4X8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

and l can meet (with the possibility of an HR s. 13/22 

2

Hi Rob,35 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

3

36 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Robert Huxtable 

Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

RE: Meeting Request 

s. 13/22 

Importance: High 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

I copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email, 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting well). 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada V1Y 4X8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

Hi Rob, 

and I can meet (with the possibility of an HR representative present as s. 22 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

1

37 

s.22

38 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:13 PM 

To: Robert Huxtable; Chris Rawson 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Hi Rob, 

Thank you for your swift attention to this. Eve has already booked me into your calendar for next Wednesday afternoon. 

Thanks again, 

s. 22 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

l copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting well). 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada V1Y 4X8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: Eve Avis 

ind l can meet (with the possibility of an HR representative present as s. 13/22

s.22 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

2

40 

Linda LeGallee 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 3:28 PM To: 

Cc: Chris Rawson Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

s.22 

l expect that Dawn Southern (HR) might be 

present at our meeting. Just take the time to be prepared to articulate your concerns clearly, and recognize that if/when such issues are pursued after the initial meeting there is care taken to gain all relevant information when determining how to proceed. 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs 

Okanagan College, BC, Canada V1Y 4X8 

Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

Fron 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:13 PM 

To: Robert Huxtable; Chris Rawson 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Thank you for your swift attention to this. Eve has already booked me into your calendar for next Wednesday afternoon. 

Thanks again, 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

To Chris Rawson 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

1

41 

Hello 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting well). 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada VlY 4)(8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi 

I can meet (with the possibility of an HR representative present as s. 13/22 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

2

42 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: Meeting Request Importance: High 

Hi Rob, 

s.22 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

1

43 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

s. 22 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

To: Chris Rawson 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hello 

s. 13/22 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

l copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting well). 

Thanks, 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada V1Y 4X8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) Hi Rob, 

can meet (with the possibility of an HR representative present as 1

44 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

l look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

2

45 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM 

To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Importance: 

Hi Rob, 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

1

s.22 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: April 15, 2016 9:42 AM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

If you care so much about the rights of non-continuing members why are you teaching our summer courses when our practice the entire time I have been in the department is to allow these courses to be taught according to the financial needs of our non-continuing members, who do not receive a salary over the summer? 

l was a non-continuing member the first two years l was here, and l would not have been able to afford my rent were it not for this policy. 

Sincerely, 

Colin 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

1

s.22 

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:44 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi everyone, 

I agree with you, I did bring up the issue without any warning, and I apologize for doing so. It has been on my mind for some time, and had wanted to address the issue. I understand I did not bring it up according to the expected process. 

Original Message  

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 3:01 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi all, 

Thanks for collecting this information. I was planning to do it in advance of the next department meeting. This issue needs more than to be brought up as an added item on an agenda, at the end of a meeting. i might have missed this point but I do not remember adding it at the start of the meeting either, that is before we approved the agenda, in which case the minutes should reflect this discussion as only an end of meeting rushed item. Either way, I'm very uncomfortable with how this topic was dealt with yesterday, which explains my request for information and deferral till the next meeting. The points raised by Colin are essential and need to be discussed among continuing members, in a meeting for which they can prepare. 

Cheers, 

OKANAGAN COLLEGE 

1000 K.L.O. RD 

Kelowna BC V1Y 4X8 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 12:17 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

2

s.22 

48 

Hi 

I'm not sure how you could have voted on whether or not non-continuing members have a vote at a meeting where non continuing members are present, since they'd be unable to vote at a meeting at which they do not (as of yet) have a vote. l see no mention of a vote having taking place in the meeting minutes. 

In any case, if avoiding bias was your intent surely this was the not the best first run at it? "It might be interesting what departments outside of Arts do, but seems to me that we should act according to our conscience, professionalism, and respect for our colleagues. You are welcome to interpret each of those abstractions as you wish (to avoid potential bias in my word choice)" 

There are, at least, it seems to me, three things to keep in mind when deciding this: 

1) Our department size is quite small. If non-continuing members have a vote (on things like the unit plan) then the future direction of the department could well be decided by a majority of members who are not continuing (and might not therefore be around to participate in the future which they have nonetheless directed). 

2) Continuing members are able to vote freely because they have job security. Non-continuing members do not have this; this (this is my understanding anyway) is why non-continuing members are usually not asked to vote (because it places them in a compromised position: they might be inclined or persuaded to vote the way of the people who will play a role in determining their future at the college). 

3)If this is going to be put to vote, it should be done so at a meeting--or over an e-mail thread--that includes only continuing members. 

Sincerely, 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: l 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 11:19 AM 

To: 

Subject: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi folks, 

As per our discussion yesterday about voting practice in Arts, here are some responses. I can't find anything in the CA regarding non-continuing voting rights or lack of. Perhaps someone else can look through it. 

From 

In the History Department we have always given term faculty the vote but we record it as "all in favour — passed" in our minutes (since 2005 and the re-birth of OC). Only if Rob is at our meeting in person do we not allow term members the vote. 

3

s.22 49 

From 

I believe we do the voice but no vote! 

From 

Term faculty have voice but no vote in the English department when it comes to the education plan and other hiring issues. 

It might be interesting what departments outside of Arts do, but seems to me that we should act according to our conscience, professionalism, and respect for our colleagues. You are welcome to interpret each of those abstractions as you wish (to avoid potential bias in my word choice). 

I'm not sure if we counted yesterdays vote, or had put it off until more information was gathered. Have a pleasant day everyone, 

4

50 

Linda LeGallee 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

From: 

Saturday, April 16, 2016 4:42 PM 

s. 22 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi Rob,

51 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of 

Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

2

s. 22 

From: 

Sent: April 16, 2016 4:41 PM To: I 

Subject: 

s. 22

53 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM 

To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi Rob, 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

I look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

2

54 

Linda LeGallee 

s. 22 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM To: Chris Rawson Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request Importance: High 

Hello 

s. 22 

Yes, lets meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

l copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting well). 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada VlY 4)(8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

meet (with the possibility of an HR representative present as s. 13/22

55 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM 

To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: Meeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi Rob, 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department, 

l look forward to hearing from you, 

s. 22 

2

56 

s.22 

From: 

Sent: April 18, 2016 11:36 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Please, let me off this email train! The next replier, remove my address. I'm not reading them, so I want it to be clear that I'm not a willing audience member. 

Original Message  

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:31 AM 

To: 

Cc 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi to all, 

If I didn't chime in earlier, perhaps it was because over the past two years each time I have attempted to exercise my professional right, and what I feel is my moral obligation, to express dissent over various administrative issues which speak to abuse of power, I have been met with the following: 

• This time last year, while on sabbatical in Paris, when I complained that a five-day work week with two days commuting was something I felt the Chair, in my behalf, should argue against, I was threatened to be reported to the Dean's office to discuss my tone. I consider this to be a breach of my professorial right to free expression. No one should accept working conditions that include this as an acceptable reprimand from the Chair—no matter who holds the position. 

1

s. 22 

57 

• Twice by you have been called down in rude and abrasive language (where you, as you like to do "call bullshit"). This is unacceptable. You have no right to silence me through what amounts to bullying me, and a misuse of the free space that an e-mail exchange between professors in the Humanities is meant to entail. 

• Repeatedly, valid points made by me, as well as other members, have been dismissed with both vague and unsubstantiated appeals to power by that claim "The Dean's Office" or "Rob" said this or that. We are professors. Academia demands rational arguments based on evidence, not appeals to authority. In the case of the completely idiotic debate over Experiene OC, Rob Huxtable was not consulted once by r If this is incorrect, it must be incumbent on to provide evidence: on what date did the meeting occur? Who took minutes? How was the discussion framed? 

Even if it is the preference of the Dean, whoever the Dean may be at any given time, that professors assist in marketing it is an obvious and clear violation of each professors's right to determine how best to acquit his or her many and varied duties in the case of a given semester: many of us (some of, anyway) remain actively involved in research and writing: if, any semester, we choose to prioritize this work over the job of standing behind a table and handing out completely useless coloured pieces of paper to a few students, this is our right. And any professor who cares about academic freedom should be on the correct side of this debate, and not blindly siding with administrative power. 

If the Chair feels events like Experience OC are important than the Chair should do them: this is why the position comes with a two-course release. If feels that he cannot represent the new diploma then needs to ask himself what he has been doing for the past eight or so years since what we teach in CMNS 100 and 110 is not so advanced that ANY professor in our discipline could not speak to it intelligently for 45 minutes. 

In the case of 235 replacing the 110 in Vernon, I and had asked repeatedly over the entire course of the Winter semester (so beginning in January) to consult with both business and Rob Huxtable. No meeting with either on this topic seems to have taken place. It is completely unacceptable that the Chair, in a four-month period, could not have created some sort of paper trail to speak to this. The vote that was taken at the last meeting seems to have taken place in total ignorance of what either stakeholders (the Arts Dean and Business) felt about this course. This, to all of us, should seem a pretty shitty way of decision-making. Why have we spent two years developing Arts courses if, when a TLU in Vernon becomes available, were going to assign the course to a travelling professor from Kelowna (shortly after I've just been told that I can't teach 120 in Kelowna, a course I developed, because "Rob" doesn't like commuting), and keep it a business elective because "Rob" or "business" in some completely vague, never substantiated way, wants to keep business as usual? How does this occur to any of us that this is properly doing our jobs? 

So, . to return to your point: first of all, it is never too late to do the right thing. We teach in Communications, a discipline in Canada that is entirely and solidly based on a Marxist critique of power. I SHOULD have said this in previous years: I didn't because I allowed myself to be afraid, because the Chair was threatening me. When term employees see the Chair threatening even longstanding and continuing members, what do you think the effect on free and public discourse is? So, this is what I am saying now, ok? 

I do not care if CAN claim the summer work: no one who believes any of the Foucault they read in grad school, who is already receiving a full salary, should EVER take $10,000 out of the mouths of unprotected term employees just because the contract says they can. There are legal rights. And there are moral rights: we are having this discussion because raised the issue of "conscience" and no one, except me, objected to the introductin of this new evaluative system then. 

, if you don't know this then you should think back to grad school and ask yourself why you became a professor in the first place. And, to be clear, I am not "casually impugning" anything. I am stating directly that on moral grounds I find that when a colleague in my department, who is the partner in a two-income professorial household, takes away work from professors who have travelled across the country to work in our department, and who will be back again in the Fall, and who do not have any income over the summer, something morally repugnant has been done. If anyone objects to what I am saying then, by all means, instead of shouting me down from the sidelines, calling me names, appealing to power without evidence, or threatening me, make the complaint official. File a grievance against me through the proper channels so that I can respond accordingly. 

2

58 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:01 AM 

To: 

Cc: . 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi everyone, 

Also for the record, no one complained that in continuing faculty took available summer work in 2015 (Milan), 2014 (Marc), and 2013 (Marc). For those three years, 122 was cancelled--due to both low enrollments and no one wanted to teach them. 

Only now that I have taken the work such a complaint, or even any discussion, about it exists. 

From: 

Sent: April 18, 2016 9:35 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi all, 

For the record, it's not my recollection that "the department" decided to return to the OCFA mandated procedure. I know I never agreed to this and have continued to feel strongly that summer work should always be offered first to our salary-less term colleagues. But our former policy depended upon all continuing members voluntarily suspending their CA-guaranteed 

right to the work (according to seniority). As soon as even one continuing member decides they in fact want a summer course, no dept policy can prevent them from claiming it. This is what happened, and was why we had to abandon the old policy. 

I think there has been general agreement that we don't like the CA's firm seniority-based language--which potentially enables the same faculty member to claim every summer course in perpetuity (as happened for years in English). If we are committed to a more rotating system, I wonder about a policy whereby when it is their turn, continuing members get to decide if they want to teach summer session or hand the courses off to term members. This too clearly contravenes the CA, 

3

59 

but it might be a middle ground between the old policy and the CA mandate. And/or, if we continue offering 112/122 in the spring, with both enrolling, we could allocate at least one course as term work. 

I don't know... a discussion/policy is still probably pointless. Whatever we agree to will not be binding and could be tossed out by any continuing member any given summer. Individual members always have the option to decline the work, and it's always going to be up to us individually to either do so or not. 

cheers, 

s. 22 

From: 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 8:53 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi. s. 22 

Thanks for outlining the timeline of how we dealt with summer work in the past. The emails from the Chair that you are referring to below have required, at least in my view, yes or no answers rather than a discussion. Also, my understanding has always been that my "no" means that the work can move to the next in line. Clearly, we have reasons to review this policy as a department. 

Cheers, 

OKANAGAN COLLEGE 

1000 K.L.O. RD 

4

Kelowna BC V1Y 4X8 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: 

Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 4:40 PM To: 

Cc: 

Subject: Re: Email Etiquette 

Hi everyone, 

60 

s. 22 

In the interest of transparency to term members, I am compelled to correct you for the record on the matter of term work, Colin. 

It is true that when Colin and Raluca were hired our department decided to contravene summer hiring procedure as defined in the OCFA collective agreement, which stipulates that summer work be offered to faculty in order of seniority, first to continuing and then to term members. As Colin correctly states, this resulted in him teaching in the summers of 2009 and 2010. By the summer of 2011 both Colin and Raluca had converted to continuing members. Also by the summer of 2011 the department decided to revert to the summer hiring procedure defined in the CA, and this is the procedure we've been following ever since. 

If I recall correctly, after that point (Summer 2010) Marc taught Summer I most years, until last year when I taught it, and this year, when is doing it. Summer II was typically offered to term faculty, not out of some noble sense of solidarity, but because no continuing member wanted to take it on. And, as we discussed at our department meeting, in recent years even when we've been able to find someone to teach it, Summer 11 has been cancelled for low enrolment. 

I have copied and pasted below email from Nov 24, 2015 to all continuing members of the department, in which he asks whether any of us want the summer work and stipulates, "After Continuing, then the question goes to 'parked' term and then onto other term, Michael, Ed, Aaron." Despite this clear reminder of summer hiring procedure, you, Colin, did not take that opportunity to argue on behalf of term members' priority rights to the work, as we can see in your response to email request, also pasted below. 

Perhaps this is an issue we need to return to as a department, as we are with the discussion of term member voting rights. There were some very specific reasons why our department resumed following CA procedure for summer hiring, and we can discuss those reasons at a future department meeting, should the question of summer hiring practices appear on a future meeting agenda. 

As it is, I find it rather disingenuous of you, Colin, to be suddenly such a vocal proponent of this issue considering your silence on it this year every time I sent an email about Summer hiring--which he did on 3 separate occasions between Nov 2015 and Feb 2016, according to my records. It was on the last of these occasions that notified continuing members that he would be taking the work himself. And given that you recently accused me of "casually impugning the integrity of [my) colleagues," I felt I could not let your recent accusations against go unanswered. It is, as you wrote in your most recent email, ''not professional to remain silent." 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 2:11 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Summer session?

Not me. 

CS 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

s.22 61 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/cornmunications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: 

Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 11:51 AM 

To: 

Subject: Summer session? 

Hi again, 

Do any of you want the summer session courses? l will be moving 122 to be concurrent with 112, to see if that encourages enrollment, and finding an instructor. 

After Continuing, then the question goes to 'parked' term (Amy, Janice), and then onto other term, Michael, Ed, Aaron. Let me know, 

On Apr 16, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Colin Snowsell <CSnowsell@okanagan.bc.ca<mailto:CSnowsell@okanagan.bc.ca» wrote: Hi to all, 

A few words, if l may, on what e-mail etiquette is and isn't. 

E-mail etiquette does not mean abstaining from critique. 

We are professors in a discipline that includes both critical social theory and professional writing, and so when the professor who holds the departmental chairship—a title meant to bestow a nominal amount of power—circulates an e-mail that, in using the words "conscience," invokes ethics and morality, in an attempt to shame his colleagues to vote according to his wishes, we have the obligations of our discipline and our profession upon us: we must respond. 

E-mail etiquette does mean editing one's words before sending them to others. 

It should not be acceptable to claim indifference as an excuse as does here: "and glibly didn't feel like spending time on revising." Surely, all of us who teach professional writing would award a failing marl< to the student who defended his/her decision not to craft a tone suitable to the audience accordingly? We are, as we respond to e-mails through our college e-mail addresses, involved, very clearly, in a professional setting that demands professionalism. Professional writing should not be something we expect only our first year students to perform: if we're not going to spend time painstakingly crafting and revising our own documents, it seems to signal that we don't actually believe what we teach. 

6

s.22 

A few final words on conscience: I think it is entirely fair when the issue has been raised by to raise it in ano6tner context so that our non-continuing members know why our summer work was not available to them. The continuing members of our department agreed, in a friendly professional way many years ago, to abstain from claiming summer work when the department had term employees who had already taught for us, and for whom work was available the following fall/winter. This was done in the spirit of solidarity: I taught these courses the Summers of 2009 and 2010 and would have had to leave Kelowna each of these summers were it not for this work. B.C. is in the middle of a housing crisis, and Kelowna is one of the most expensive places to live (even when you're receiving a salary over the summer). claimed this work for himself this year, unilaterally and without a vote—as is his right through the OCFA CA. But it was not a decision that the rest of us took or support. 

We also, as continuing members, have an obligation to speak in defense of our non-continuing colleagues: it is not professional to remain silent, and continue only to fight our own corner. As we all know, we have a clusterfuck of a department: for precisely this reason, it is not ethical to ask our non-continuing members to vote, when the power relations in the department are so complex. I know this from experience. 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanaga n.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 201610:07 AM 

To: 

Subject: Email Etiquette 

Hi All, 

From my point of view, this email trail has now taken a turn in tone that I feel the department needs to avoid. Like the rest of you, I'm quite busy right now, so if I'm going to be in an email trail, I'd like it to be productive, not picking again at wounds that clearly need to heal. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Best, 

Original Message  

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 9:43 AM 

To: I 

7

s. 22 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample63 

If you care so much about the rights of non-continuing members why are you teaching our summer courses when our practice the entire time l have been in the department is to allow these courses to be taught according to the financial needs of our non-continuing members, who do not receive a salary over the summer? 

l was a non-continuing member the first two years l was here, and l would not have been able to afford my rent were it not for this policy. 

Sincerely, 

Colin 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanaga n.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:44 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi everyone, 

l agree with you, l did bring up the issue without any warning, and l apologize for doing so. It has been on my mind for some time, and had wanted to address the issue. l understand l did not bring it up according to the expected process. 

Sincerely, 

Original Message  

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 3:01 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi all, 

8

Thanks for collecting this information. I was planning to do it in advance of the next department meeting. Thhis isissue needs more than to be brought up as an added item on an agenda, at the end of a meeting. I might have missed this point but I do not remember adding it at the start of the meeting either, that is before we approved the agenda, in which case the minutes should reflect this discussion as only an end of meeting rushed item. Either way, I'm very uncomfortable with how this topic was dealt with yesterday, which explains my request for information and deferral till the next meeting. The points raised by Colin are essential and need to be discussed among continuing members, in a meeting for which they can prepare. 

Cheers, 

OKANAGAN COLLEGE 

1000 K.L.O. RD 

Kelowna BC V1Y 4X8 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 12:17 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi 

s. 22 

I'm not sure how you could have voted on whether or not non-continuing members have a vote at a meeting where non continuing members are present, since they'd be unable to vote at a meeting at which they do not (as of yet) have a vote. I see no mention of a vote having taking place in the meeting minutes. 

In any case, if avoiding bias was your intent surely this was the not the best first run at it? "It might be interesting what departments outside of Arts do, but seems to me that we should act according to our conscience, professionalism, and respect for our colleagues. You are welcome to interpret each of those abstractions as you wish (to avoid potential bias in my word choice)" 

There are, at least, it seems to me, three things to keep in mind when deciding this: 

1) Our department size is quite small. If non-continuing members have a vote (on things like the unit plan) then the future direction of the department could well be decided by a majority of members who are not continuing (and might not therefore be around to participate in the future which they have nonetheless directed). 

2) Continuing members are able to vote freely because they have job security. Non-continuing members do not have this; this (this is my understanding anyway) is why non-continuing members are usually not asked to vote (because it places them in a compromised position: they might be inclined or persuaded to vote the way of the people who will play a role in determining their future at the college). 

3)If this is going to be put to vote, it should be done so at a meeting--or over an e-mail thread--that includes only continuing members. 

Sincerely, 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

9

65 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.oka nagan.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 11:19 AM To: 

Subject: Voting practice random Arts sample Hi folks, 

s. 22 

As per our discussion yesterday about voting practice in Arts, here are some responses. I can't find anything in the CA regarding non-continuing voting rights or lack of. Perhaps someone else can look through it. 

From 

In the History Department we have always given term faculty the vote but we record it as "all in favour— passed" in our minutes (since 2005 and the re-birth of OC). Only if Rob is at our meeting in person do we not allow term members the vote. 

From 

I believe we do the voice but no vote! 

From 

Term faculty have voice but no vote in the English department when it comes to the education plan and other hiring issues. 

It might be interesting what departments outside of Arts do, but seems to me that we should act according to our conscience, professionalism, and respect for our colleagues. You are welcome to interpret each of those abstractions as you wish (to avoid potential bias in my word choice). 

I'm not sure if we counted yesterday's vote, or had put it off until more information was gathered. Have a pleasant day everyone, 

10

66 

Linda LeGallee 

s. 22 

s. 22 

1

67 

From: Robert Huxtable 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:03 PM 

To: Chris Rawson 

Cc: Eve Avis 

Subject: RE: Meeting Request 

Importance: High s. 13/22 

Yes, let's meet as soon as you are able. An allegation of harassment is obviously a very serious matter, and we should not delay in addressing the issue. 

l copy Chris Rawson (acting Director of HR) in this email, 

Eve, would you schedule a meeting representative present as well). Thanks, 

Rob 

Robert D. Huxtable, PhD 

Dean, Arts & Foundational Programs Okanagan College, BC, Canada VlY 4X8 Ph: 250-762-5445 (ext. 4765) 

Administrative Assistant: Ms. Eve Avis (ext. 4734) 

From 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 11:00 AM To: Robert Huxtable 

Cc: 

Subject: tvieeting Request 

Importance: High 

Hi Rob, 

can meet (with the possibility of an HR s. 22 

I'd like to meet with you about an issue of ongoing harassment that is occurring in the Department of Communications. The actions and behaviors of Colin Snowsell have created a poisoned environment in our department 

l look forward to hearing from you, 

2

68 

19 April 2016 

Dr. Robert Huxtable, Dean, 

Arts and Foundational Programs 

Kelowna Campus 

Okanagan College 

Dear Robert Huxtable, 

I'm writing regarding a breakdown of communications via email exchanged within the Communications Department at Okanagan College, a breakdown which I feel is detrimental to the health and well-being of employees who are directly targeted or who are unwitting participants as audience in reply-all exchanges. The focus of my concern has become the email conduct of Colin Snowsell, Communications Faculty member. 

email exchanges where 

members begin discussion with clear goals, for example, giving feedback on a proposed course outline. But too often, such emailed discussions divert into what appears to be baiting and ranting on the part of Colin Snowsell. These discussions get railroaded by Mr. Snowsell and utilized for the purpose of airing air other grievances and deepening divisions, which require reading between the lines to understand. In one recent email trail, Colin Snowsell voiced non-continuing faculty member needs and 

s. 22

s.2269 

concerns undermining current department chair Mr. Snowsell was attempting to divide the ranks and make it appear that he was the self-appointed voice for the downtrodden non-continuing members; his goal seemed to be to situate the chair, , as opposition, working against the interests of non-continuing CMNS faculty. 

Recently our department had a face-to-face, traditional sit in a table-circle, meeting that was arranged with enough notice for all to attend. Mr. Snowsell was not in attendance, missing an opportunity to create that necessary, full, human interaction. Instead, soon after the meeting, as Michael Boulter finalized some discussion points via email, Mr. Snowsell again began the long ranting responses that have grown in length and breadth and negative tone. 

Mr. Snowsell has repeatedly raised the concern that his freedom of expression is being stifled while attacking the ideas of his colleagues. 

In an email trail that began last week, when Mr. Snowsell quite abruptly shifted the tone from a general, brief discussion, to directly address and call into question the actions of 

the — — . . 

Mr. 

Snowsell continued to rant and bait members calling them out by name, 

Mr. Snowsell attempts to give his objections weight by invoking Foucault and Marx, claiming he is the one harassed, drumming up argument. Although Mr. Snowsell is clearly well-read and knowledgeable about these things; he fails to understand the intricacies of context and mode of communication.

s.22 70 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: April 21, 2016 2:32 PM To: 

Subject: RE: Moving CMNS 200-71 Hi 

s. 22 

A class starting at 1, and running as a 3-hour block would be idea for me. I would prefer the Tuesday, but don't mind the Thursday, if that's all that is available. 

While this change is being made, would it also be possible to see the first section of 122 (as a placeholder, at any rate until the department has decided how/if to fill it, in Vernon) Wednesday and Friday (any time in the morning, before 110, which begins at 1 p.m. on W/F). 

This will allow me to have a four-day work week. 

Pd also like to apologize to you: it's not my place to give you, or any of my colleagues, an ethics lesson on anything. Frankly, I have found a five-day work week with two early morning commutes incredibly taxing. I feel like I was taking this stress out on you--which is not acceptable, and is not the person I am. I know that my outbursts must have caused you some stress as well--and I am sorry for that, as well. I do not wish to be the source of anyone's unhappiness, and I feel like this must surely have been the case. My behaviour was not collegial: it was unprofessional of me, and, again, I apologize, very sincerely. 

I hope your sabbatical treats you as well as mine did me. 

Sincerely, 

Colin 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

1

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: 

Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 10:19 AM To: Colin Snowsell 

Subject: Moving CMNS 200-71 

Colin, 

71 

Matt Kavanagh has indicated that Writing and Publishing will be offered on the Vernon Campus for 2nd year students on Tuesdays and Thursdays. CMNS 200 is currently offered on Mondays 1430-1720. 

To encourage W&P students to take 200, l would like to move the course to Tuesday or Thursday, or both, depending on your preferences. The first issue is that you teach in Kelowna, ending at 1000. From your perspective, what is a reasonable amount of time for you to travel back to Vernon, to teach 200? Matt has said any time after 1130 for the W&P students; how much time would you like? That is, 2 hours, 3 hours, etc. The second question is do prefer a three-hour class or a 2x1.5 hour class? 

if you could get back to me on this soon, that would be great. Sharon is working on the Winter schedule this week, and putting in the schedule change request quickly is best. 

s. 22 

2

s.22 72 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: April 21, 2016 2:39 PM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: an apology 

Hi to all, 

It's obviously no excuse for my lack of professionalism, but teaching five days a week with two early morning commutes to Kelowna seems, very obviously, to have chipped away at what I had (wrongly, obviously) assumed were my inexhaustible reserves of stoicism (if not, exactly, bonhomie). 

It is not my place to offer any of you ethics lessons on anything. I was wrong to write what l did, and I was (if this is even possible) wrong-er (yes, "wrong-er,"--I'd go that far) to write anything using the tone that I did. 

I am keeping on this list only because she deserves an apology from me, as much as you all do. 

The job we do is tough enough without angry rants from some guy in the North Okanagan. Sorry about that, everybody--I was miles and miles and miles out of line. 

Best wishes for a happy summer, 

Colin 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

1

s.22 

73 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:31 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi to all, 

If I didn't chime in earlier perhaps it was because over the past two years each time I have attempted to exercise my professional right, and what I feel is my moral obligation, to express dissent over various administrative issues which speak to abuse of power, l have been met with the following: 

• This time last year, while on sabbatical in Paris, when I complained that a five-day work week with two days commuting was something I felt the Chair, in my behalf, should argue against, I was threatened to be reported to the Dean's office to discuss my tone. I consider this to be a breach of my professorial right to free expression. No one should accept working conditions that include this as an acceptable reprimand from the Chair—no matter who holds the position. 

• Twice by you, have been called down in rude and abrasive language (where you, as you like to do "call bullshit"). This is unacceptable. You have no right to silence me through what amounts to bullying me, and a misuse of the free space that an e-mail exchange between professors in the Humanities is meant to entail. 

• Repeatedly, valid points made by me, as well as other members, have been dismissed with both vague and unsubstantiated appeals to power by that claim "The Dean's Office" or "Rob" said this or that. We are professors. Academia demands rational arguments based on evidence, not appeals to authority. In the case of the completely idiotic debate over Experiene OC, Rob Huxtable was not consulted once by If this is incorrect, it must be incumbent on to provide evidence: on what date did the meeting occur? Who took minutes? How was the discussion framed? 

Even if it is the preference of the Dean, whoever the Dean may be at any given time, that professors assist in marketing it is an obvious and clear violation of each professors's right to determine how best to acquit his or her many and varied duties in the case of a given semester: many of us (some of, anyway) remain actively involved in research and writing: if, any semester, we choose to prioritize this work over the job of standing behind a table and handing out completely useless coloured pieces of paper to a few students, this is our right. And any professor who cares about academic freedom should be on the correct side of this debate, and not blindly siding with administrative power. 

If the Chair feels events like Experience OC are important than the Chair should do them: this is why the position comes with a two-course release. If feels that he cannot represent the new diploma then I needs to ask himself what he has been doing for the past eight or so years since what we teach in CMNS 100 and 110 is not so advanced that ANY professor in our discipline could not speak to it intelligently for 45 minutes. 

In the case of 235 replacing the 110 in Vernon, I had asked repeatedly over the entire course of the Winter semester (so beginning in January) to consult with both business and Rob Huxtable. No meeting with either on this topic seems to have taken place. It is completely unacceptable that the Chair, in a four-month period, could not have created some sort of paper trail to speak to this. The vote that was taken at the last meeting seems to have taken place in total ignorance of what either stakeholders (the Arts Dean and Business) felt about this course. This, to all of us, should 

2

s.22 

seem a pretty shitty way of decision-making. Why have we spent two years developing Arts courses if, when a TLU in Vernon becomes available, we're going to assign the course to a travelling professor from Kelowna (shortly after I've just been told that I can't teach 120 in Kelowna, a course l developed, because "Rob" doesn't like commuting), and keep it a business elective because "Rob" or "business" in some completely vague, never substantiated way, wants to keep business as usual? How does this occur to any of us that this is properly doing our jobs? 

So to return to your point: first of all, it is never too late to do the right thing. We teach in Communications, a discipline in Canada that is entirely and solidly based on a Marxist critique of power. l SHOULD have said this in previous years: I didn't because I allowed myself to be afraid, because the Chair was threatening me. When term employees see the Chair threatening even longstanding and continuing members, what do you think the effect on free and public discourse is? So, this is what I am saying now, ok? 

I do not care if CAN claim the summer work: no one who believes any of the Foucault they read in grad school, who is already receiving a full salary, should EVER take $10,000 out of the mouths of unprotected term employees just because the contract says they can. There are legal rights. And there are moral rights: we are having this discussion because raised the issue of "conscience" and no one, except me, objected to the introductin of this new evaluative system then. 

, if you don't know this then you should think back to grad school and ask yourself why you became a professor in the first place. And, to be clear, I am not "casually impugning" anything. I am stating directly that on moral grounds I find that when a colleague in my department, who is the partner in a two-income professorial household, takes away work from professors who have travelled across the country to work in our department, and who will be back again in the Fall, and who do not have any income over the summer, something morally repugnant has been done. If anyone objects to what I am saying then, by all means, instead of shouting me down from the sidelines, calling me names, appealing to power without evidence, or threatening me, make the complaint official. File a grievance against me through the proper channels so that I can respond accordingly. 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications 

From: 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:01 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi everyone, 

Also for the record, no one complained that in continuing faculty took available summer work in 2015 (Jillian), 2014 (Marc), and 2013 (Marc). For those three years, 122 was cancelled--due to both low enrollments and no one wanted to teach them. 

3

s.2275 

Only now that such a complaint, or even any discussion, about it exists. 

From: 

Sent: April 18, 2016 9:35 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi all, 

For the record, it's not my recollection that "the department" decided to return to the OCFA mandated procedure. I know I never agreed to this and have continued to feel strongly that summer work should always be offered first to our salary-less term colleagues. But our former policy depended upon all continuing members voluntarily suspending their CA-guaranteed 

right to the work (according to seniority). As soon as even one continuing member decides they in fact want a summer course, no dept policy can prevent them from claiming it. This is what happened, and was why we had to abandon the old policy. 

I think there has been general agreement that we don't like the CA's firm seniority-based language--which potentially enables the same faculty member to claim every summer course in perpetuity (as happened for years in English). If we are committed to a more rotating system, I wonder about a policy whereby when it is their turn, continuing members get to decide if they want to teach summer session or hand the courses off to term members. This too clearly contravenes the CA, but it might be a middle ground between the old policy and the CA mandate. And/or, if we continue offering 112/122 in the spring, with both enrolling, we could allocate at least one course as term work. 

I don't know... a discussion/policy is still probably pointless. Whatever we agree to will not be binding and could be tossed out by any continuing member any given summer. Individual members always have the option to decline the work, and it's always going to be up to us individually to either do so or not. 

cheers, 

4

s.22 76 

From: 

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 8:53 AM 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: RE: Email Etiquette 

Hi 

Thanks for outlining the timeline of how we dealt with summer work in the past. The emails from the Chair that you are referring to below have required, at least in my view, yes or no answers rather than a discussion. Also, my understanding has always been that my "no" means that the work can move to the next in line. Clearly, we have reasons to review this policy as a department. 

Cheers, 

From: 

Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 4:40 PM 

To: Colin Snowsell 

Cc: 

Subject: Re: Email Etiquette 

Hi everyone, 

In the interest of transparency to term members, I am compelled to correct you for the record on the matter of term work, Colin. 

It is true that when Colin and Raluca were hired our department decided to contravene summer hiring procedure as defined in the OCFA collective agreement, which stipulates that summer work be offered to faculty in order of seniority, first to continuing and then to term members. As Colin correctly states, this resulted in him teaching in the summers of 2009 and 2010. By the summer of 2011 both Colin and Raluca had converted to continuing members. Also by the summer of 2011 the department decided to revert to the summer hiring procedure defined in the CA, and this is the procedure we've been following ever since. 

If I recall correctly, after that point (Summer 2010) Marc taught Summer I most years, until last year when I taught it, and this year, when Mike is doing it. Summer 11 was typically offered to term faculty, not out of some noble sense of solidarity, but because no continuing member wanted to take it on. And, as we discussed at our department meeting, in recent years even when we've been able to find someone to teach it, Summer II has been cancelled for low enrolment. 

5

77 

I have copied and pasted below email from Nov 24, 2015 to all continuing members of the department, in which he asks whether any of us want the summer work and stipulates, "After Continuing, then the question goes to 'parked' term (Amy, Janice), and then onto other term, Michael, Ed, Aaron." Despite this clear reminder of summer hiring procedure, you, Colin, did not take that opportunity to argue on behalf of term members' priority rights to the work, as we can see in your response to email request, also pasted below. 

Perhaps this is an issue we need to return to as a department, as we are with the discussion of term member voting rights. There were some very specific reasons why our department resumed following CA procedure for summer hiring, and we can discuss those reasons at a future department meeting, should the question of summer hiring practices appear on a future meeting agenda. 

As it is, I find it rather disingenuous of you, Colin, to be suddenly such a vocal proponent of this issue considering your silence on it this year every time sent an email about Summer hiring--which he did on 3 separate occasions between Nov 2015 and Feb 2016, according to my records. It was on the last of these occasions that notified continuing members that he would be taking the work himself. And given that you recently accused me of "casually impugning the integrity of [my] colleagues," I felt I could not let your recent accusations againsl go unanswered. It is, as you wrote in your most recent email, "not professional to remain silent." 

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 2:11 PM 

To: I 

Subject: RE: Summer session? 

Not me. 

CS 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 

From: I 

Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 11:51 AM 

To: 

Subject: Summer session? 

Hi again, 

s. 22 

Do any of you want the summer session courses? I will be moving 122 to be concurrent with 112, to see if that encourages enrollment, and finding an instructor. 

After Continuing, then the question goes to 'parked' term (Amy, Janice), and then onto other term, Michael, Ed, Aaron. Let me know, 

6

78 

On Apr 16, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Colin Snowsell <CSnowsell@okanagan.bc.ca<mailto:CSnowsell@okanagan.bc.ca» wrote: Hi to all, 

A few words, if l may, on what e-mail etiquette is and isn't. 

E-mail etiquette does not mean abstaining from critique. 

We are professors in a discipline that includes both critical social theory and professional writing, and so when the professor who holds the departmental chairship—a title meant to bestow a nominal amount of power—circulates an e-mail that, in using the words "conscience," invokes ethics and morality, in an attempt to shame his colleagues to vote according to his wishes, we have the obligations of our discipline and our profession upon us: we must respond. 

E-mail etiquette does mean editing one's words before sending them to others. 

It should not be acceptable to claim indifference as an excuse as does here: "and glibly didn't feel like spending time on revising." Surely, all of us who teach professional writing would award a failing mark to the student who defended his/her decision not to craft a tone suitable to the audience accordingly? We are, as we respond to e-mails through our college e-mail addresses, involved, very clearly, in a professional setting that demands professionalism. Professional writing should not be something we expect only our first year students to perform: if we're not going to spend time painstakingly crafting and revising our own documents, it seems to signal that we don't actually believe what we teach. 

A few final words on conscience: l think it is entirely fair when the issue has been raised by to raise it in another context so that our non-continuing members know why our summer work was not available to them. The continuing members of our department agreed, in a friendly professional way many years ago, to abstain from claiming summer work when the department had term employees who had already taught for us, and for whom work was available the following fall/winter. This was done in the spirit of solidarity: l taught these courses the Summers of 2009 and 2010 and would have had to leave Kelowna each of these summers were it not for this work. B.C. is in the middle of a housing crisis, and Kelowna is one of the most expensive places to live (even when you're receiving a salary over the summer). claimed this work for himself this year, unilaterally and without a vote—as is his right through the OCFA CA. But it was not a decision that the rest of us took or support. 

We also, as continuing members, have an obligation to speak in defense of our non-continuing colleagues: it is not professional to remain silent, and continue only to fight our own corner. As we all know, we have a clusterfuck of a department: for precisely this reason, it is not ethical to ask our non-continuing members to vote, when the power relations in the department are so complex. l know this from experience. 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.oka nagan.bc.ca/communications<http://www.oka nagan.bc.ca/communications> 

7

79 

From: 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 10:07 AM 

To: 

Subject: Email Etiquette 

Hi All, 

From my point of view, this email trail has now taken a turn in tone that I feel the department needs to avoid. Like the rest of you, I'm quite busy right now, so if I'm going to be in an email trail, I'd like it to be productive, not picking again at wounds that clearly need to heal. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Best, 

Original Message  

From: Colin Snowsell 

Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 9:43 AM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

If you care so much about the rights of non-continuing members why are you teaching our summer courses when our practice the entire time I have been in the department is to allow these courses to be taught according to the financial needs of our non-continuing members, who do not receive a salary over the summer? 

I was a non-continuing member the first two years I was here, and I would not have been able to afford my rent were it not for this policy. 

Sincerely, 

Colin 

Colin Snowsell 

College Professor 

Department of Communications 

Okanagan College - Vernon Campus 

7000 College Way 

Vernon, BC, V1B 2N5 

www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications<http://www.okanagan.bc.ca/communications> 8

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:44 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi everyone, 

I agree with you, I did bring up the issue without any warning, and I apologize for doing so. It has been on my mind for some time, and had wanted to address the issue. I understand I did not bring it up according to the expected process. 

Sincerely, 

Original Message  

From: 

Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 3:01 PM 

To: 

Subject: RE: Voting practice random Arts sample 

Hi all, 

Thanks for collecting this information. I was planning to do it in advance of the next department meeting. This issue needs more than to be brought up as an added item on an agenda, at the end of a meeting. I might have missed this point but I do not remember adding it at the start of the meeting either, that is before we approved the agenda, in which case the minutes should reflect this discussion as only an end of meeting rushed item. Either way, I'm very uncomfortable with how this topic was dealt with yesterday, which explains my request for information and deferral till the next meeting. The points raised by Colin are essential and need to be discussed among continuing members, in a meeting for which they can prepare.