On Jan. 18th Doug Ford announced that “good news is coming later this week”.

On Jan. 20th Ford announced that restrctions scheduled to be lifted Jan. 26th (including the ban on OUA student-athletes training) would now be lifted Jan. 31st ,called it good news and patted himself on the back for a job well done…because paying spin doctors to position bad news as good is what you do if you are Doug Ford.

Taking its cue from Ford, in a Jan. 21st announcement the OUA takes bad news (that the OUA is not resuming league based season schedules for any sport until Feb. 9th, a full 19 days from the date of their announcement, and a full 10 days from the date restrictions ease), attempts to spin it into good news by leading with the statement “the OUA’s return to training will commence Jan. 31st” (even though that was day old news, even though the OUA had nothing to do with the decision making process, and  even though it underscores the real failure of not getting the Ford government to lift the ban by Jan. 24th - the date after which the OUA had previously stated that competition would be negatively impacted).  Job well done?

Political spin (in both instances) gone awry and raising one indisputable fact regarding the OUA that all student-athletes are not aware of, but need to be, that lies at the heart of “how did it get to this?”.  Namely that the OUA is mandated to act in the best interests of its members.

Student-athletes are not the OUA’s members. Institutions are the OUA’s members (the universities), not the student-athletes.

This is taken directly from the OUA’s bylaws: “The Association has one category of member: General member – an Ontario university or degree granting institution”.

This causes a built-in conflict of interest pitting the best interests of OUA members (the universities), against the best interests of student-athletes.

Guess whose interests the OUA will always put first?

Thankfully however, challenges which the OUA historically faced rarely pitted the two against each other.  Until COVID.

COVID has changed university sports in Canada forever.  Suddenly.  That is the new reality.  In this new reality we have sadly seen wave after wave of decisions made that have dramatically impacted the lives, futures, and careers of student-athletes, decisions made with little or no independent input from student-athletes, as existing models, processes, and systems simply do not include a mechanism for independent student-athlete input.

Case in point:  The structure of the OUA.

This is taken directly from the bylaws of the OUA: “Voting rights: General members are entitled to appoint a delegate who has one vote”.

Remember, General Members are the universities.  Big surprise - none of the delegates are student-athletes.   All of them are from the administration of the member universities. 

Guess in whose best interests they act in?

Perhaps we can look to the Board for independent student-athlete representation?  Perhaps not.

This is taken directly from the bylaws of the OUA:

“Directors: The Board will consist of seven (7) Directors,

Two (2) Executive Heads,

Two (2) Ontario Committee of Student Affairs members,

Three (3) Athletic Directors”.

The OUA will point to the Two (2) Ontario Committee of Student Affairs members as representative of student-athlete input.

Really?

This is taken directly from the bylaws of the OUA:

“ Ontario Committee of Student Affairs (SCSA) members – the senior administrator at each Ontario institution holding responsibility for student issues, the student experience, and the majority of services and programs designed to serve and support students at the institution”.

Ontario Committee of Student Affairs members are not student-athletes, or student’s – they are administrative staff of the universities.   Paid staff of the universities.  Guess who’s interests they act in?

This means that student-athletes have no independent voice, no independent input into decisions made.  Decisions which impact their lives, futures, and careers.  Need a tangible example of what happens?

The OUA votes to support USPORTS decision to not to grant football players an extra year of eligibility after the 2020 season was cancelled…”because of COVID”. 

The reality: a potential insurance liability not related to COVID. 

Input from student-athletes?  Zero.                                     

Pushback from OUA against the USports decision?  Zero.

Only after a huge push back from student-athletes, parents (including threats of legal action), and the Canadian Student-Athlete Association, as well as coaches who break ranks over the decision and its impact on student-athletes and their programs, was it reversed.

Need further examples of decisions made by the OUA which negatively impacted student-athletes and which were made with no independent student-athlete input?   The “elite status” issue uncovers many.   Let’s look at the decisions made surrounding this issue:

June 8, 2020: OUA cancels fall 2020 sports. Based on a vote with no independent input from student-athletes.

October 15, 2020: OUA cancels spring 2021 sports. Based on a vote with no independent input from student-athletes.

June 14, 2021: Ontario announces Return to Sport Framework excluding OUA/OCAA from list of “elite athletic organizations”, and OUA announces its “Path for Return to Sport”.  A path created with no independent input from student-athletes.

Dec.21, 2021: OUA “pauses” sports until Jan. 24, 2022.  Based on a vote with no independent input from student-athletes.

Jan. 3, 2022: Ontario Government bans OUA/OCAA training (because not designated as “elite”) until Jan. 26, 2022.  January 20, 2022: Ontario extends ban on OUA/OCAA training to January 31st.   Jan. 21, 2022: OUA announces return to training Jan. 31st, and return to competition Feb. 9th.  Based on a vote with no independent input from student-athletes.

Why not make decisions based on votes with independent input from student-athletes?

All this series of decisions did was to, on Dec. 21st (the day the OUA paused sports until Jan. 24th), give the Ontario Government exactly what they needed to make their decision on Jan. 3rd to ban training until Jan. 26th, then again until Jan. 31st:  tangible evidence that the OUA did not deem continuity of competition as important to student-athletes, as every other organization deemed an “elite athletic organization” did. 

If the OUA says their student-athletes are elite but doesn’t treat them as elite, nor make decisions reflecting their status as elite…that is exactly what the Ontario Government is going to do, not treat them as elite. 

In this instance there was no time for debate and the Ontario government made a decision.   A bad one.  But one that was made easy by the actions of the OUA in absence of any independent input from student-athletes.

So how do student-athletes change this?

They need to demand an independent voice at the table and in the decision-making process so that they can make their voice heard moving forward.

Stay tuned...

...and go to www.canadianstudentathleteassociation.ca and become a member or supporter (there is no cost for either) today!