More elections.

An Bradán Feasa

Chris Bond is also going for Arts.

Scraggs

Yeah nicely done avoid mentioning the competition... actually
isnt there two Arts PRO's or am I crazy?

singingstranger

Scraggs wrote:

Yeah nicely done avoid mentioning the competition... actually
isnt there two Arts PRO's or am I crazy?

Yup - two officers for Arts and Human Sciences. Pending, of course, the new constitution, which will mean some reassignment of PROs if it's passed.

panda100

Just for all you Health sciences people-thats us meds,nurses,physios etc I think.colm Byrne is going for our pro-he's a 2nd med and was outlying faculty officer this year.He'll do a mega good job so dont hesitate to vote for him!:)

dajaffa

Not much of a choice given that he'll prob be the only one who goes for it. Just to point out that nurses get their own PRO, so health sci is physios, rads and meds only, though I have to say one would probably have been enough, especially considering whoever is elected for nursing (if anyone goes for it), will be gone for most of the time on placement, as will all but the fresher rep.

Vainglory

dajaffa wrote:

Not much of a choice given that he'll prob be the only one who goes for it. Just to point out that nurses get their own PRO, so health sci is physios, rads and meds only, though I have to say one would probably have been enough, especially considering whoever is elected for nursing (if anyone goes for it), will be gone for most of the time on placement, as will all but the fresher rep.

Only third year nurses are gone all year on placement, and from my experience this year it would be a great benefit anyway to have a rep from the placement year elected and in direct contact with the SU.

dajaffa

Oh I'm aware that no year spends all their time on placement, but from 2nd year onwards, they do spend quite a bit of time on placement, which would make it extremley difficult to have productive meetings of just nursing reps, cause loads of them will be off on placement and their hours are really long.

TBH, I'm a health sci student myself, and I don't think we have the numbers to justify having 2 PROs (we'll all be in the one building soon enough), when you consider Business and law share one between them, and from what I gather (though it's hard to tel at the mo), PROs are more or less helping the VP with stuff, co-ordinate the reps and report what the reps want etc to exec.

I also think it kind of separates physios, rads + meds from nurses, when we should all be one big happy family.

Also, I'm yet to hear of a nurse who's going for PRO, which could mean they won't have anyone, but we'll know officially soon enough.

panda100

dajaffa wrote:

Oh I'm aware that no year spends all their time on placement, but from 2nd year onwards, they do spend quite a bit of time on placement, which would make it extremley difficult to have productive meetings of just nursing reps, cause loads of them will be off on placement and their hours are really long.

TBH, I'm a health sci student myself, and I don't think we have the numbers to justify having 2 PROs (we'll all be in the one building soon enough), when you consider Business and law share one between them, and from what I gather (though it's hard to tel at the mo), PROs are more or less helping the VP with stuff, co-ordinate the reps and report what the reps want etc to exec.

I also think it kind of separates physios, rads + meds from nurses, when we should all be one big happy family.

Also, I'm yet to hear of a nurse who's going for PRO, which could mean they won't have anyone, but we'll know officially soon enough.

Yeah i agree with you here-it would be good if nurses were included in with meds,rads and physios.The segregation between these professions are just so apparent in hospitals that it would be nice to see the nurses and docs all being onw happy family in college at least-it would set up a good relationship for years to come!

dajaffa

this went up on newswire. There's no RON in these elections. The first 2 have been deemed elected.

"Engineering & Architecture Programme Officer:
Jennifer Murphy

Health Sciences Programme Officer:
Colm Byrne


The candidates for election are as follows:

2 Seat Constituency:

Arts, Celtic Studies & Human Sciences:

Bond, Chris
Dixon, Conor
Lynam, Paul Dessie
Monaghan, Sinead
Ranieri, Veronica

1 Seat Constituencies:

Business & Law:

Butler, John
Rath, Patrick
Reynolds, Mairead

Science:

O'Farrell, Niall
Tiernan, Jane


There were no nominations in the remaining constituencies."

What's going to happen to the constituencies with no PROs?

zap

there will be elctions for them in september along with class rep elections

singingstranger

Probably be reopened with the Class Rep elections next October...

edit: ooh, Zap got there first.

panda100

Sorry can I just ask another question??Just wanna get my facts straight

So the the two girls running for womens officer will be the gender equality officer if the new constitution gets passed??

singingstranger

Yup, pretty much... If it falls and the other amendment goes through, then same scenario.

panda100

What would we do without singingstranger:)

anonymous_joe

Does that mean men can't run for Gender Equality officer?

Now that'd be a surprise and a half.

Btw, in a class on Monday was treated to a discussion on how a masculine societal model had ****ed up businesses/societies/etc for so long, but it's ok, because we have 'feminine' models now. :rolleyes:

singingstranger

panda100 wrote:

What would we do without singingstranger:)

Eh, you'd wait until someone else (I'm thinking zap or dajaffa) told you instead! :rolleyes:

dajaffa

OK the campaigns will kick off on Monday, but who do people think will win and, I reckon yes will win in all 3, but will it get a 15% turnout?

VOTE PEOPLE

Jonny Arson

Better be a big NO to this proposed new student centre thingy anyway or I'll cry. The proposed rise in the SU fee if this goes ahead is absolutely disgraceful.

Chinafoot

I also hope its a no to this change in the constitution that basically makes the SU presidency a dictatorship.

Oh and I don't think the person elected to Women's Officer should be elected to Gender Equality Officer. They'll be elected on the grounds of their policies for women. Thats hardly a good start in the equality position.

If the SU are hell-bent on changing it then they should wait until next year and allow candidates to run a proper campaign.

HappyCrackHead

peachypants wrote:

If the SU are hell-bent on changing it then they should wait until next year and allow candidated to run a proper campaign.

The SU are not hell-bent on changing it... a very small group of people with influence within the union are. Among these are outgoing UCDSU President James "Jimmy crack-corn" Carroll and Peter "don't call me" Doris.

The incoming and might i add ACTING president of the union Dan "Heil" Hayden has been reported to both support and oppose the new Constitution and ditto for Deputy Pres Dave "I'm afraid of the real world" Curran.

These are the kind of people who are trying to take away certain rights of students and their representitives and you should not trust them, you should question their every action as is your right, nay your DUTY.

View the page on the new consitution.

Vainglory

peachypants wrote:

I also hope its a no to this change in the constitution that basically makes the SU presidency a dictatorship.

Oh and I don't think the person elected to Women's Officer should be elected to Gender Equality Officer. They'll be elected on the grounds of their policies for women. Thats hardly a good start in the equality position.

If the SU are hell-bent on changing it then they should wait until next year and allow candidated to run a proper campaign.

Hear hear.

"No" Campaign materials coming to a lecture theatre near you soon.

dajaffa

peachypants wrote:

Oh and I don't think the person elected to Women's Officer should be elected to Gender Equality Officer. They'll be elected on the grounds of their policies for women. Thats hardly a good start in the equality position.

Yeah I think that one's a bit unfair. If they wanted a gender equality officer for next year they should have ran that one with the last election. It's a bit stupid having people running to be Women's officer, then finding out they may or may not be running for gender equality officer.

I for one am in favour of the levy increase, but as a fresher, I can see how it'd annoy older years who know they'll be paying for it, but prob will never get to use it.

The real question neway is can the SU get 3,200 people to vote so the changes can be passed. I think the exec elections last year only got about 1,000 voters.

singingstranger

In fairness, both candidates have Gender Equality sections in their manifestos, so while it is indeed probably unfair to make them run for another job, both seem up for it...

dajaffa

Ah yeah they're both fine with it, but there may have been other candidates if it was EQ

panda100

dajaffa wrote:

Ah yeah they're both fine with it, but there may have been other candidates if it was EQ

Yeah I agree.I defiantly would not have run for a womens officer position but would have considered an equality officer position.They are two entirely completly different jobs.I cant see how you could run to be a WOMENS officer and still be a good equality officer at the same time,it's absurd.

singingstranger

panda100 wrote:

They are two entirely completly different jobs.I cant see how you could run to be a WOMENS officer and still be a good equality officer at the same time,it's absurd.

I understand what you mean, but still: Women's Officer job description + a couple of PC paragraphs = GEO. If you're a good Women's Officer then even if you're bad at the male-orientated stuff you'd still be an okay GEO.

panda100

singingstranger wrote:

I understand what you mean, but still: Women's Officer job description + a couple of PC paragraphs = GEO. If you're a good Women's Officer then even if you're bad at the male-orientated stuff you'd still be an okay GEO.

I dont know to me they seem entirely different:
womens officer description: Promoting personal alarms
Running a womens week for womens charities and dealing with womens issues

Gender equality officer:Shall campaign and lobby on all issues relating to discrimination and equality

They are completly different jobs-its like saying a nurse could fill in the position as a doctor cos even if their bad at the whole diagnosing the disease thing they can still be okay at helping the patient get better

singingstranger

panda100 wrote:

They are completly different jobs-its like saying a nurse could fill in the position as a doctor cos even if their bad at the whole diagnosing the disease thing they can still be okay at helping the patient get better

Point taken, but your analogy is perhaps a little strange in that doctors and nurses do complimentary jobs: doctor diagnoses disease but does nothing, patient dies. Doctor doesn't diagnose disease and nurse just does her best anyway, patient dies. The GEO thing (I'm thinking along the lines of two jobs, a Women's Officer and a Men's Officer, held by the same person here) isn't quite as complimentary as both would seem to have different independent duties without the symbiosis or synergy that a doctor/nurse pair have. I think after that, the logic for GEO is that having an officer for each gender is in itself sexist.