Coalition presses university leadership for answers as advocate links platformed rhetoric to workplace psychosocial risk
A coalition of more than 80 advocacy organizations, academics, faith leaders and community groups is pressing the University of Toronto for public accountability after a September 15, 2026 conference on antisemitism drew accusations of anti-Muslim and antisemitic remarks from some of its speakers. In a September 23 joint statement, the coalition frames the dispute as a workplace psychological health and safety issue as much as a free speech one, arguing that institutional endorsement of contested rhetoric by university leadership can affect the mental and physical health of the people who work and study on campus.
What the coalition is demanding
The conference, titled "A Canary's Song: Antisemitism in Our 'Free and Democratic Society,'" was opened by University of Toronto president Melanie Woodin, who, according to the coalition's account of the event, told attendees she was "delighted" to host it. The coalition's statement says several speakers made comments it characterizes as Islamophobic, anti-Palestinian and antisemitic.
Yaser Haddara, chair of the board of the Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council and one of the statement's signatories, said the coalition's objection is not to what individual speakers said.
"Our position is always in favour of freedom of expression and exchange of ideas," Haddara said. "But it's one thing to have speakers say hateful things like this. It's a completely different thing for the institution of the University of Toronto, represented by its president, to platform and host and celebrate a conference of this nature. And that's where we are demanding accountability."
Haddara said accountability means three things: an explanation of how the university approved the event and the president's participation in it, a public apology from Woodin, and "meaningful consultation with the community and the communities affected as to how to provide ... a more inclusive atmosphere at the University of Toronto." More than a week after the statement's release, the coalition had received no response from the university or the president's office, Haddara said.
University points to its booking policy
Responding to a request for comment, a University of Toronto spokesperson said the September 15 conference "was organized by an external group that booked space at the U of T Conference Centre in alignment with university policies for bookings by external organizations," adding that the university "does not sponsor, organize, or endorse events arranged by external groups," which are solely responsible for their content and choice of speakers.
The spokesperson said Woodin "is often invited to deliver welcome remarks at external events held on U of T's campuses, and occasionally does so as her schedule permits." The university pointed to its existing complaint process for discrimination and harassment and to its published free speech guidance, which addresses questions about whether hosting an event implies institutional endorsement of what is said there.
A psychosocial safety question for employers
Haddara, who says he has spoken with university students and faculty across Ontario and elsewhere in Canada, said many describe feeling invisible, unsupported and pressured to hide parts of their identity by their institutions, a pattern he said predates this specific conference. He also pointed to the university's response to pro-Palestinian encampments roughly two years ago, when he said U of T helped lead a multi-university response he characterized as student repression, as part of a broader pattern of concern.
Asked what he would tell health and safety professionals following the story, Haddara framed the dispute in psychosocial terms rather than purely as a free-speech dispute, an approach that lines up with why workplace harassment and bullying is increasingly treated as an occupational hazard rather than a matter for HR alone.
"This goes to feelings of safety and belonging and identity, and all of these have a very direct impact on mental health, as well as physical health," Haddara said. "I think it is very appropriate for your audience to be concerned about something like this and to raise it professionally. They need to have an input into standards of discourse on campus."
He was careful to draw a line, however, saying he does not support responses that shut down speech itself. "It's the responsibility of the university community to come together and reject those comments," he said, arguing accountability belongs at the institutional level, "where leaders in the health and safety field can and should have a strong input."
What comes next
Canada's National Standard for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace, a voluntary standard from the Canadian Standards Association known as CSA Z1003, lists organizational culture, civility and respect, and psychological protection among 13 workplace factors employers are encouraged to manage alongside physical hazards. Legal observers have described how Canadian employers are increasingly expected to treat psychological safety as a compliance issue rather than a soft benefit, a shift that lines up with the accountability language in the coalition's statement. Employer obligations under that framework are separate from, and broader than, any single controversy, but the standard's focus on leadership conduct and organizational culture is the lens in which Haddara is viewing this incident. It's a standard many Canadian employers still say they struggle to put fully into practice.
Haddara said the coalition has not settled on its next step, which could include further public pressure, outreach from University of Toronto-affiliated groups directly to the administration, or another approach altogether. "We are definitely interested in a conversation about this," he said.
