UCDSU Union or Service Provider?

Blowfish

Diorraing wrote:

Yeah, like the €63 we piss away on the SU every year. Does anyone know if you can leave the UCDSU. I know you have a constitutional right to disassociate yourself from organisations. I know a lot of people who would be glad to leave the SU.

Same here, there are plenty of people who would want to leave, it was discussed here, with the end result being that legally you have to be able to leave, but in reality it's a pretty difficult thing to do.

singingstranger

Diorraing wrote:

Yeah, like the €63 we piss away on the SU every year. Does anyone know if you can leave the UCDSU. I know you have a constitutional right to disassociate yourself from organisations. I know a lot of people who would be glad to leave the SU.

Two points:

1) As has been stated over and over again, the Union doesn't get €63.50 of your money; that goes straight to a University-taken mortgage to pay for the Student Centre, as approved by a Student body referendum in 1998. So blame today's young workforce if you're annoyed with that. The Union itself is funded by €16-odd from your registration fee, but no University admin can provide a fully accurate breakdown as to how much exactly the Union receives. €5 of this then goes to pay every full-time students' affiliation to USI, so in reality UCDSU gets about €11 of your money to operate on.

2) Obviously nobody has ever tried to go down the legal avenue of going to court to disassociate but pigeonbutler made a very good post on the thread that Blowfish just referenced, which is here.

anonymous_joe

A lot of people have said that the student body should register their dissaproval with the current state of affairs. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say they have. We call it apathy.

I voted once this year in UCD, for my class rep. The person I voted for I was assured was a sound bloke. (As indeed he is) That's the only reason I voted. I didn't have a notion as to what the position entailed.

The biggest issue many seem to have with the Union is their stances on issues that have nothing to do with the welfare of the student's they represent. Now, as young Firespinner can attest, I'd generally be centre-left on most issues, socially generally more left, while economically etc more centrist. In short, I agree with many of the positions the Union has taken, but, I was never, ever consulted about this. Some may say that by voting in class reps and sabbats we agreed to let the Union represent us, but I think that's bull****. That simple. Hardly anyone could have been arsed voting. I have little intention of ever voting in a Sabbat election, or anything of that type. Why? I couldn't give a flying ****. I don't see a Union that will ever represent me. Should I do something about it? Meh. I'll be gone from UCD (hopefully) in a couple of years.

Blowfish

Exactly anonymous_joe. When will the SU realise that the students have actually shown their disaproval. The students have voted with their apathy.
If there was an option whether or not to pay for the services provided, how many would actually pay it?

anonymous_joe

I like Coke so count me out. Oh and I can get food on my way home.

I'll say one thing though, can't argue with the 70c Irish Times. That rocks.

pigeonbutler

Blowfish wrote:

Exactly anonymous_joe. When will the SU realise that the students have actually shown their disaproval. The students have voted with their apathy.
If there was an option whether or not to pay for the services provided, how many would actually pay it?

Very few. Economically this is described as a free rider problem. Many of the services UCDSU provides are "pure public goods". Voluntary charges cannot fund pure public goods because non-payers cannot be excluded from the service.

The best example is National Defence. If taxes were voluntary everyone would still benefit from national defence regardless of whether they paid taxes. Thus people being rational (basic principle of economics) they wouldn't pay.

anonymous_joe

anonymous_joe wrote:

A lot of people have said that the student body should register their dissaproval with the current state of affairs. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say they have. We call it apathy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Sabbatical Elections have the highest turnout over the past number of years?

humbert

Myth wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Sabbatical Elections have the highest turnout over the past number of years?

And what was that, about 10%?, in other words people haven't given't a shit for ages!

pigeonbutler

humbert wrote:

And what was that, about 10%?, in other words people haven't given't a shit for ages!

No. More like 25% (very approx figure!) The programme Officer elections had 10% (controversially).

humbert

humbert wrote:

And what was that, about 10%?, in other words people haven't given't a shit for ages!

c. 4,400 / c. 22,000 = 20%. My point is that the turnout has increased this year, contradicting the point that was made previously about the student body having registered their disapproval with 'the current state of affairs.'

Now I know I'm looking at the glass half full, and ignoring that 80% of the student body did not vote. Look elsewhere throughout the country, particularly at the University Sector (for numbers alone - as the smaller a student body gets, the more on-campus coverage a sabbatical officer can achieve), and the turnouts are nearly similar, if not lower. Apathy is something that is apparent everywhere in life, not just in an SU. Plus there are other questions: How many evening students are there? How many postgraduates? How many off-campus students where the polling times weren't substantial enough? Do these have an effect on the turnout?

By the way, I think there should be an Internet Law in that any mention of Coke or Nestlé in the backing up of an argument which refers to what an SU does renders the argument null and void. Reason being is that several times (here in Trinity) I've noticed that a lot of students believe that all the SU does is boycott Coke & Nestlé. I know a lot of people are dissatisfied with what UCD,DSU does in relation to what are peceived to be non-student issues, and I'm not going to do the patronising thing of 'get involved! Change it yourself!' etc. However, what I will say is that next year when the hustings are happening, it may be an idea to ask the candidates yourselves what stance they will take on the above non-student issues, so that you can get the representatives that you want.

Perhaps I'm way off the mark, but either way I'll take off my idealistic hat now.

The_Minister

I'd say the higher Sabbat turnout was due to the drama of the elections. The rip-down campus campaign of one candidate's election team member, as well as Duffy's legions in the Arts Block probably gave the high turnout. I talked to people who voted just to spite Duffy because his campaigners kept pestering them. (You all remember them - they were yelling and shouting and ambushing you wherever you went). There were huge amounts of campaigners telling people how to vote.

EDIT: Added member. (The word not the bodypart.)

humbert

I remember that, dear god that was annoying, and it wasn't just Duffys guys they were all in your face, if that were ever to happen again I think the college should take steps against the SU, seriously decreasing the scale of the elections to something more befitting an event that at the most a fifth of the college care about.

Morgan Shelley

Turnout in the Sabbatical elections was between 21-23%.

The Exec elections had an 11% turnout, with a high turnout where there was a contested Programme Officer election, but a very small turnout in some other areas.

For instance, Vet went from 125 votes (Sabbats) to 14 (Exec), Ag went from 166 to 32 and Richview went from 96 to 28, while Quinn only dropped from 478 to 423.

Hope that helps.

anonymous_joe

Myth wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Sabbatical Elections have the highest turnout over the past number of years?

As many said, turnout was still ridiculously low.

I don't think this is a good thing, just an inevitability.

Myth wrote:

By the way, I think there should be an Internet Law in that any mention of Coke or Nestlé in the backing up of an argument which refers to what an SU does renders the argument null and void. Reason being is that several times (here in Trinity) I've noticed that a lot of students believe that all the SU does is boycott Coke & Nestlé.
.

Where does the whole Coke boycott come from? Is it to do with their actions in South America or what? Never actually quite worked out why.

Nestle's is because of their behaviour in Africa?

panda100

Humbert wrote:

If I remember correctly you were a major proponent of the coke bannage???

I voted for the coke ban but didnt have anything to do with the campaign at all.I voted no because of the extreme violations in humans rights occuring with coca cola workers in Columbia. However,I do not think it should have come to a referendum stage in UCD at all. As MNG said if I want to do something about my political beliefs I will join Amnesty International.labour,fine gael or world aid soc .I wont have the audacity to waste students time and money on a matter that really doesnt directly affect them .

Referendums run by the su should be reserved for important UCD issues such as the student centre referendum.
I also think that if someone is elected as an irish language officer,finance officer or Accomodation and emplyment officer they should stick to that job. I think it is rude and insulting if they saunter of and run two coca cola referendums while there is still students living in poverty etc as Finbar Dwyer did when he was accomodation and employment officer and Dan finn as the Postgraduate and Evening Students Officer.
I hope to maybe run for the position for outlying facultys officer next year and while I have a history of being involved with world aid soc I would never use the union as a vehicle to further my own world aid soc agenda,that is just not fair on the students that I would represent. Last year world aid soc run a very successfual campaign getting students signatures to eradicate developing world debt(well obviously not that succesful:D ).Those who wanted to sign the petition and get involved could and did.We didnt need the unions help or money as it is fundamenttaly not a students issues so not fair to utilise recources and money that could have gone towards a new bike rack, better services in the su shop etc etc

Pigeonbutler wrote:

Not as such. I wasn't around back in the day but I've heard Jane wasn't always as anti-Coke as she is now.
Want to tell them about "Coke for the Communists" Vainglory?

I dont think thats really fair to bring that up. College is all about learning about who you are and what you belive in so lots of people change their political course once they get to college.So we can forgive people for being on the wrong side of the coke ban as a naieve first year.:)

Myth wrote:

However, what I will say is that next year when the hustings are happening, it may be an idea to ask the candidates yourselves what stance they will take on the above non-student issues, so that you can get the representatives that you want.

Anyone at the husting this year will see that I did just that but only to the presidential candidates.It was my first time (and probably last time) to ever attend a union hustings.It was like they had let all the naughty Kids out of the creche for the day and they all ended up in theatre L of the arts block.It wasn't a good question and answers session at all just loadsa bashing between right and left. I asked that many student seemed apethetic to the politcal nature of the union,such as paying up to 500 euro for an anti deportation protestors fee's,If you are too be elceted do you promise that unions time,money and effort will be placed into issues directly affecting students??
Was quite funny cos there was a collective sighing and groaning from a certain portion of the room that included a lot of my ex-labour youth comrades. Anyways the general consensus was that Dan and Orla were willing to put student issues no matter how small and trivial (i.e better coffee machines in the su shops) before a politcal agenda. The general consensus I got from Enda Duffy was that Political issues ARE student issues etc etc and a collective roar went up from his minority of supporters. So that is why hopefully I think this year we will see a huge change for the better in the union. I also think Dave C will be instrumental to this change as with a year of experience behind him and only a tenious link with labouryouth he can concentrate all his efforts in to student campaigns and electing good class reps.

The_Minister

anonymous_joe wrote:

Where does the whole Coke boycott come from? Is it to do with their actions in South America or what? Never actually quite worked out why.?

Yeh. A few union activists working for Coke got shot in Columbia. Basically it was never proven if Coke knew or did not know about the killings. They took place at a subsidiary of Coke so Coke itself could have well not known. It was taken on faith that the workers were telling the truth and that was the source of the boycott.
EDIT: Super-condensed version.

anonymous_joe

Firespinner wrote:

Yeh. A few union activists working for Coke got shot in Columbia. Basically it was never proven if Coke knew or did not know about the killings. They took place at a subsidiary of Coke so Coke itself could have well not known. It was taken on faith that the workers were telling the truth and that was the source of the boycott.
EDIT: Super-condensed version.

Thought the boycott was from an incident before that...

I do remember that one, seemed more a problem with South America than with Coke, but people obviously felt not providing a different branch of a franchised company with their custom was appropriate.

AngelofFire

The rip-down campus campaign of one candidate's election team, as well as Duffy's legions in the Arts Block probably gave the high turnout. I talked to people who voted just to spite Duffy because his campaigners kept pestering them

Can you please Clarify those allegations. None of us ''pestered'' anyone, and contrary to the lies certain people have being filling your head with, our ''team '' not involve ourselves in the any ''rip down campus campaigns''

panda100

AngelofFire wrote:

. None of us ''pestered'' anyone,

I saw it with my own eyes in the terrace and Im sure many people saw it in the arts block and the rest of campus too

AngelofFire

I saw it with my own eyes in the terrace and Im sure many people saw it in the arts block and the rest of campus too

If so, can you give details rather than ill informed libelious statements.

humbert

panda100 wrote:

I saw it with my own eyes in the terrace and Im sure many people saw it in the arts block and the rest of campus too

I was pestered plenty, I actually started a thread over it, I was pestered by all the different sabbat peoples people, panda included.

hullaballoo

AngelofFire wrote:

If so, can you give details rather than ill informed libelious statements.

Please don't accuse people of making libellous statements. It's libellous to do so. If there is a problem with the legality of what is said in this forum, the moderators will deal with it, not you.

beanyb

AngelofFire, have a look at this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054897358&highlight=elections particularly Scraggs posts.

Obviously it wasnt only Enda Duffy's canvassers that pestered everyone, but his were particularly bad.

The_Minister

AngelofFire wrote:

Can you please Clarify those allegations. None of us ''pestered'' anyone,

There is nothing to clarify, I posted on this before. All campaigners will tag along behind people and pester then but many of Enda's took it too far. If I wasn't 6'4", if I was a 5'6" little guy I would have felt quite intimidated. One girl I know asked me to walk her past the voting booth area!

AngelofFire wrote:

contrary to the lies certain people have being filling your head with, our ''team '' not involve ourselves in the any ''rip down campus campaigns''

That was meant to say "election team member". I'll fix it now.
"Rip down Campus" was the humourous nickname given to the cheeky antics of one of your campaigners - you remember the little divil who was caught on CCTV, mincing around nicking posters?

hullaballoo

By the way, Happy Birthday AngelofFire!

Vainglory

Here we go again..I always have so much work to do when I don’t check Boards for a couple of days.

pigeonbutler wrote:

Want to tell them about "Coke for the Communists" Vainglory?
I'm not trying to be an asshole, but the question was raised.
Well maybe I'm being a little bit of an asshole

You are being a little bit of an asshole, yeah. Didn’t you just criticise Chris for bringing up a post that you made when you had only been in UCD a couple of weeks?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

They should be allowed propose motions that are relevant to student matters. .

Well, that’s not the case. We’re allowed propose motions on anything we like, and that right is enshrined in the constitution. I know you wouldn’t argue that we should go around breaking the constitution on a whim. There will, however, be a constitutional review and referendum taking place early in the new academic year that you could get involved in, or ask your rep to get involved in on your behalf.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Why can't motions be concentrated on non-political student matters?

Can we stop using this word “non-political”? Say, for example, the new constitution decreed that we couldn’t campaign on political issues (i.e. we could only campaign on non-political issues) as you would like. Then, we would technically be prevented from campaigning and lobbying on things like grants, fees etc. They are decided by policies of government, and are intrinsically linked to politics. Can you suggest a better wording?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Tell "Johnny" to go and join one of the many political societies on offer in UCD. Labour, Fine Gael, Fiann Fáil, World Aid Soc maybe even Amnesty International. Why does "Johnny" need to go to a student union to solve a political issue do you think?

Johnny has already paid his 11 euro to the Students’ Union with a legitimate expectation that they will represent him as he so wishes, and where there is conflict, their actions will be decided on by a vote. Why should he have to go off and pay another 2 euro to get another organisation to do it, if the structures in the Students’ Union already enable him to do it that way?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I'd like to see more of the 'End the Rip-off campus' stuff and less of the 'End the occupation of Iraq' stuff.

I’m really getting tired of this. The Union didn’t run any campaign on Iraq this year at all. We also didn’t do much on the Rip-Off Campus campaign either, that was a student initiative started by Labour Youth, of which Enda Duffy (one of these awful people who spend all their time on non-student issues, of course) is Chair.

panda100 wrote:

I think it is rude and insulting if they saunter of and run two coca cola referendums while there is still students living in poverty etc as Finbar Dwyer did when he was accomodation and employment officer and Dan finn as the Postgraduate and Evening Students Officer. .

They didn’t call “two coca cola referendums”. They called one.

panda100 wrote:

Anyways the general consensus was that Dan and Orla were willing to put student issues no matter how small and trivial (i.e better coffee machines in the su shops) before a politcal agenda. The general consensus I got from Enda Duffy was that Political issues ARE student issues etc etc and a collective roar went up from his minority of supporters. .

I don’t know if you were at a different hustings to me, but both Orla and Enda said that they thought that students didn’t live in a bubble and we’re going to be out in the big bad world one of these days, etc (I’m paraphrasing obviously but that was the general gist of it.) Orla confirmed that to me when I asked her to double check so I’m not just making that up. While Dan did say that he didn’t think we could have much of an influence on outside issues, I found that a little disingenuous considering how supportive he had been of both the Irish Ferries protest and the Coke campaign.

panda100 wrote:

So that is why hopefully I think this year we will see a huge change for the better in the union. I also think Dave C will be instrumental to this change as with a year of experience behind him and only a tenious link with labouryouth he can concentrate all his efforts in to student campaigns and electing good class reps.

I don’t think Dave would like you holding him up as some great example for your cause. Dave was the one who hired the bus for the Irish Ferries protest and I’ve no doubt would do so again, he is in favour of the Coke ban and would probably disagree with you that the Students’ Union should reduce its scope of what it can campaign on.

Also, on the issue of turnout..

We have a higher percentage turnout than colleges like NUI,Galway who literally aren't allowed to campaign on "non-student" issues according to their constitutions. So I don't think the two are directly related.

hullaballoo

Vainglory wrote:

You are being a little bit of an asshole, yeah.

Now, you know the rules. That's a week ban.

AngelofFire

hullaballoo wrote:

By the way, Happy Birthday AngelofFire!

Thank you

panda100

humbert wrote:

I was pestered plenty, I actually started a thread over it, I was pestered by all the different sabbat peoples people, panda included.

Ah thats not fair to say I pestered you,I made it sure I didnt pester anyone.I walked up to you cos I knew you and I was hardly talking about sabbat politics with you.Id stop and chat to you whenevr Id bump into ,you know that.Do you not remember that Nial Dolann came up to us and started going on about Enda Duffy and was really rude butting into our converstaation?Even though it was quite funny and you had a good laugh at it I think as I pretended there was a fly buzzing around us?

In the terrace Georiod Cashmann and Fergal Scully both held people arms as they walked up to the polling booth.It was just disgusting to see and if thats what angel of fire and whoever else wants to call 'democary' then so be it........i guess that suvey at the top of the page will never change and next year it will still be just prettymonster and some other dude turning up to modularisation meetings......

panda100

hullaballoo wrote:

By the way, Happy Birthday AngelofFire!

Oh yeah Happy Bday chris The big 21!!Dont go to mad now!:)