UCCSU Equality Officer Elections '10/'11

Hi all,

My name's Luke Field, and I'm running for SU Equality Officer in the elections on October 13th and 14th. I've already announced this in a number of other channels, including Forum UCC, but I decided to post it here as well because Forum UCC has a smaller user base and I wanted to give a wider audience the chance to read my manifesto and ask me questions.

The manifesto can be read here: http://bit.ly/eomanifesto

Thanks for your time, looking forward to the feedback!

Luke.

ReacherCreature

That's an interesting, well put together manifesto. I like your ideas. I'll give you a vote if I'm around to do so.

Cheers Reacher, thanks very much for the positive feedback! From the looks of things it's going to be an online election so you should be able to vote from the comfort of your own keyboard

ReacherCreature

All the better so! Good luck with it.

Argh, just got a call from the SU earlier to say that voting won't be online after all; it's going to be old-fashioned paper ballots… to say I'm disappointed is a bit of an understatement

We're still on for the 13th and 14th of October though.

Arts, Celtic Studies and Social Sciences will be voting in Boole Basement.
Business and Law will be voting in the ORB.
Science, Engineering and Food Science will be voting in the Kane.
Medicine and Health will be voting in Brookfield.

lilmissprincess

Great contender (from what I've heard) for Gender Equality Officer, Audrey Walsh. Second Year Arts Student who from the looks of things (her presence at Activist Academy and continued activism as class rep and in the SU) would do an awesome job. I've always found her very approachable and her manifesto looks great. Vote Audrey Walsh #1 for Gender Equality Officer

http://audreywalshforgenderequality.blogspot.com/

invinciblePRSTV

What's this Gender Equality lark about? something to do with there being unequal numbers of Females compared to Males in higher education?

Ah right just read your wans manifesto there. tbh i don't think it's a major issue over what genitalia student politicos have, and i am not a fan of funded campaigns trying to tell me what or what not to say.

Do the Drink Aware signs in the library stop me from boozing? no, no they do not.

deisedude

Are these new positions? i've never heard of an equality officer before

lilmissprincess

Equality SubOfficers Elected tonight
Gender Equality - Audrey Walsh
Disability - Antonia Virovska
Mature Student - Gary Mulcahy
LGBTRO - Laura Harmon
International student - Patrick Whyte

Congrats to all and best of luck to both contenders for Equality Officer.

Max001

If there are so many people falling over themselves to support an equality agenda at UCC, I wonder why the SU rejected the application of the Mind Matters group to set-up as an SU society? The tiny bit of respect I had for the SU evaporated at that point.

x43r0

Max001 wrote: »

If there are so many people falling over themselves to support an equality agenda at UCC, I wonder why the SU rejected the application of the Mind Matters group to set-up as an SU society? The tiny bit of respect I had for the SU evaporated at that point.

The SU didn't reject mind matters, the Societies Guild did.

Separate entities


Besides, mind matters would fall closer to a welfare remit than an equality one

lilmissprincess

Congratulations to Dave Carey, the new Equality Officer of UCCSU. Comiserations to Luke Field.

It was a very good election, run with no catfights or bitchiness which is always good to see.

Final Tally 858, with 1 spoiled vote.

Max001

x43r0 wrote: »

The SU didn't reject mind matters, the Societies Guild did.

Separate entities


Besides, mind matters would fall closer to a welfare remit than an equality one

Fair point and I stand corrected, however you can see how I might confuse the two as there appears to be the same level of 'competence'. Until discrimination in UCC towards those experiencing mental health 'issues' stops, its very much an equality issue!

Buceph

Max001 wrote: »

Fair point and I stand corrected, however you can see how I might confuse the two as there appears to be the same level of 'competence'. Until discrimination in UCC towards those experiencing mental health 'issues' stops, its very much an equality issue!

What discrimination?

deisedude

Buceph wrote: »

What discrimination?

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

Buceph

deisedude wrote: »

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

It's complete bull****. Their attitude seems to be that Students' Union is better than the students and need to educate all us boorish louts on how to behave. I don't know when it started, but the RAG week renaming was when I noticed how insulting their opinion of the average students became. And the student anti-fun brigade that'll call the police on you? What a joke? The behaviour during RAG Week and Fresher's Week must have become significantly worse since I was talking to the Guards who liaise with UCC or else a fast one has been pulled.


And this rubbish about a 100% increase in the registration fee coming from a front bencher in the government? (Although if you read the e-mail that the SU president sent out it isn't exactly what's said, just implied by a series of increasingly sensationalist sentences that all begin with a claim that the USI has been told something by a government front bencher that has let them figure out a devious plan by the Gubberment.) I'm sure if a front bencher was willing to tell anyone that kind of information the media would have picked up on it a long time ago. I think that strikes very much of partisanship on behalf of the personal beliefs of the SU and not of the realities of the situation.

And I certainly don't remember voting in favour of "mass mobilisation" of the UCC worker's proletariat (eh sorry) I mean the UCC Students Union. Although I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to see equally inflammatory pieces like this in the future. What we're seeing is a return to the amatuer student politics of shouting and yelling and "mass mobilisation" of the student army that was the bane of USI for a long time, which UCC strongly rallied aganst for a number of years. And of course they're basing this all on what happened two years ago, when the bust hadn't gotten into full swing. And no-one cares. Everyone is just happy to ignore them and let them waste our money. And the Express is happy to report the same crap from them over and over again, and it's only been Motley that has said anything even slightly against the official line.

Plautus

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

You're right, but jobs for the hacks is the M.O. of an S.U. where the president signs off every missive with 'Yours in Solidarity'. Seems that becoming president of your alma mater's union before making a stab at the USI presidency is the standard cursus honorum for future Labour Party TDs ...

As if we needed inflation of roles and competences within the (already quite ineffectual) apparatus at a time when cutbacks are set to diminish resources spent on students even further.

The only good thing that can be said for the SU is that it's better than no union at all.

Max001

Plautus wrote: »

The only good thing that can be said for the SU is that it's better than no union at all.

You got me thinking. If someone were to start an 'alternative' union, I'd actively support it I've never witnessed a worse run or more inneffectual union than UCC's. (I was previously at Manchester (Victoria) & QUB) That its based in a tiny building at the ass end of the UCC site says it all really.

x43r0

samf

Max001 wrote: »

You got me thinking. If someone were to start an 'alternative' union, I'd actively support it I've never witnessed a worse run or more inneffectual union than UCC's. (I was previously at Manchester (Victoria) & QUB) That its based in a tiny building at the ass end of the UCC site says it all really.

You got me thinking. If i'm not mistaken you posted the following at the end of last term:

I have taken on a project within UCC, that will benefit many students and is within my capabilities. It will be planned, executed and regularly reviewed, with lessons learned made public, because ultimately, while its starting small in the autumn, one aim is to become a model of best practice over the three years I'm going to commit to it.

its a bit sensitive until its launched, which is tentatively planned for the first week of next term. Theres a lot of planning to be done over the summer and at this point I'd not have any detail other than a project outline.

When you see a new 'body' launched within UCC during the first week of next term, its value and purpose will be obvious. Once launched, it'll be absolutely transparent.

Sorry I can't say more for the moment.

So Max001 - since this is now a month into the new term of UCC where is this carefully planned project?? Surely with your incredible experience and competence this project has been a huge success... yet funnily enough I must admit that I dont know of any new 'body' that has lunched this year?

I mean surely if you're in such a position to criticise UCC's Students Union this year then this new body that you've set up has been a roaring success?

Plautus

That hardly invalidates criticism of the union now does it. The fact is that it's frequently a resting ground for political hacks and luvvies who make wildly unrealistic promises during election time while neglecting to tell anyone that they have shag all bargaining power and at the end of the day it's what the Academic Council and Governing Body decide on as best practice that gets done. Whenever the SU scores a 'success' it's been due to externalities (Green pressure on government to put a moratorium on discussion of fees) or fait accompli with college authorities. Case in point being printing - when UCC wants it, it gets it because it is in ultimate control of disbursement of monies.

Don't get me wrong, organising student balls and distributing condoms is work that needs to be done but the luvvies aren't half sickening. Reducing the price of food in the college restaurants always means a reduction in quality yet it seems to have been latched onto as a 'vote getter.' Proposing (as one education officer did in previous years) that he would seek accreditation from the college for society work was pure bananas. Only in recent times has the education officer shown some cop-on with regard to the obvious limitations of the position. The student paper is a properly unreadable shambles and has been for some time. Various 'awareness' campaigns don't achieve much and have dubious value. The actual work of the welfare officer viz. 'case work' is always a sacred cow (the talking points seem to settle on it occupying 90% of the officer's time and being 'harrowing') but I've never seen it properly interrogated/analysed. Their lack of practical qualification means they're nothing more than a clearing house for referring complaints to competent professionals in the DSS and Student Health and Counselling.

As it should be, but they shouldn't then be claiming they're something they're not. And preferably not selling us bull**** about 'solidarity' and scaremongering about the Browne report in the UK to suit their own ends. There's a reason that a certain person's weekly e-mail is now being routed to my trash can.

Max001

Not that I owe you any explanations 'Samf', but since you ask....I threw my lot in with Mind Matters whose plans were more advanced than my own. Sadly, the Guild saw fit to reject Mind Matters application for Society status and now won't state publicly why. You'll forgive my cynicism in the face of silly secrecy by children. End of.

x43r0

Plautus wrote: »

Proposing (as one education officer did in previous years) that he would seek accreditation from the college for society work was pure bananas

That happened. Society involvement is accredited. It's a 5-credit module

Plautus

I can find no evidence of this in either the book of modules or on collegeroad.ie - link?

And certainly it wasn't in place in 2009/2010.

daithilinnane

Hey guys,

Daithi Linnane here, Deputy President of the Students' Union. Just wanted to clear up a few things.

Up until this year the issue of equality was dealt with by the Welfare Officer. Unfortunately, due to the workload of this officer, between sitting on 25 or so committees, dealing with casework...etc, equality has often been left slip to the side. A non-sabbatical Equality Officer, as well as a group of sub-officers was seen as the easiest, most cost-effective and most appropriate way of dealing with this. Now there is an officer, who is only concerned with this issue, and a tam of sub-officers who will have more time and energy to devote to it then the workload of the Welfare Officer allowed. As well as this, students who have issues in this area will have a much easier way of figuring out who to contact, and will have someone who can devote far more resources to their issues then in the past.

On the workload of the Welfare Officer. Casework is a major part, and yes, while the Officer does not have any formal qualifications, they recieve training and guidance from a vast array of organisations and professionals. While part of their job is to refer people to other departments, there is often a lot of work which can go into a specific case. For example, due to the change in the economy over the past few years, financial casework has increased massively. Depending on the case the officer may have to attend meetings, liase with County/City Councils, represent the student to any number of committees or organisations...etc. This can be and usually is a time consuming but worthwhile process. As well as this, there is a lot of planning which goes into campaigns and other initititives run by the University and the Students' Union.

As for the value of the SU itself. I think that it is a valuable organisation that is integral to the University, but then again, I'm hardly the most impartial person in this instance. I will however give you a run down on how some of what we do works, and let you make your mind up for yourself.

Yes, Governing Body and Academic Council make some of the most important decisions about the University. However, the SU has 3 seats on GB, and 16 on AC. We are part of the decision making. While we do not always get our way, the University consults the SU as much as possible for two reasons. Contrary to popular belief the University does care about student opinions, but much of their decisions are already made for them due to government sanctioned cutbacks. Secondly, they know what type of a headache they will get if they don't consult students, for example, the Conferring Fee debacle in April 2010. As well as these two committees, the SU is represented on almost every committee in the college, and we are working to get representation on the ones we currently don't attend.

As for mass mobilisation, there was a referendum held in 2009 on this matter. It was overwhelmingly passed and read as follows:

UCC Students' Union Referendum From 2009

Section E

UCC Students' Union Adopts the following policy:
1. To adopt an approach of mass campaigning and mobilisation to defeat the threat of third level fees.
2. To organise a one day (24 hour) shutdown of the college as a warning to the government in advance of the cabinent meeting which will decide which will decide on fees. This shutdown should consist of a mass student strike with protests and activities on campus against fees. The Union should strive to get the active support of the staff and their unions for this action. The Union should campaign within the USI for our shutdown to be artof a national co-ordinated one day shutdown
3. To create a working group of students, class representatives and Students' Union Officers, open to all students and staff in order to accomplish the above.

Thats what the students asked us to do, and that is what we are doing. Last week SU officers from around the country met with all 166 TDs in Dail Eireann, as well as the Senators, and it was quite clear that the cuts coming down the line will be put with an unfair weight on the 3rd level sector, and in order to cover those cuts, students will be made make a larger contribution. Unless we challenge it. Ever sector of society facing cuts will want to change this, and as the saying goes, 'those who shout the loudest get cut the least'. And thats what we intend to do. The USI and SUs around the country have adopted a strategy of mass mobilisation and targeted lobbying in order to achieve this. As you mentioned, it was the Green Party who took fees off the agenda, but this was driven by targeted lobbying from SUs, particularly TCDSU and UCDSU's former Presidents Conan O'Brion and Gary Remond, who are now the Deputy President and President of the USI respectively. What we are doing works, and we intend to continue it, because that is what students have asked us to do.

On a few other points.

As a previous poster said, the Mind Matters society proposal was rejected by the Societies Guild, not the SU.

The Express and Motley are editorially independent, we do not run them.

An extra-curricular accreditation module is currently being trialled by the University, contact education@uccsu.ie for more details.

RAG week was renamed after consultation with the University, the Gardai and local residents. This was not done to control students, but to remind them what this was about, raising money, not causing havoc. The Student Patrol has been an extremely successful programme, once I get to my officer computer on Monday morning I'll get the statistics on the differences between R&G 2010 and previous years. For the record, the Patrol was not set up to 'call the gaurds' on students, but to act as an intermediary so that students wouldn't have to have their issues brought to that high a level.

On a final note, our jobs do have limitations, but we try our best to do whats best for our students. I for one always appreciate feedback and constructive criticism, but it isn't something we get enough of. While I'm all for online boards, its much easier to get through to us with direct contact. If anybody here, or anywhere in the University has any issues they want to talk about or anything they would like to see changed or done better, contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie, 0863836795 or arrange a meeting and come to my office, i would be more than happy to discuss anything with you. Hope that cleared a few things up.

Thanks,

Daithi Linnane

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

You got me thinking. If i'm not mistaken you posted the following at the end of last term:

That post, and the one preceding it by x43r0, are indicative of the chronic level of discussion about the Students' Union within UCC. If you voice any concerns about the Students' Union you are put in the "SU Hater" file-drawer, which then, apparently, allows everyone to ignore you. Character assassination is also quite frequent. Here samf choose not to deal with the actual point, but instead delivered an ad hominem attack on Max001's person.

I have some very legitimate concerns about the Student's Union. I feel they do not represent me. I disagree with their political campaigns, and the way in which they conduct those campaigns. Yet even though I'm a fee-paying member of the Union, my views are apparently irrelevant. When I voice them I am labelled an "SU Hater". And then the same people will often turn around and ask "why do people hate the SU?". There's a lot to be said for self-reflection.

daithilinnane

I don't consider anybody who criticises or raises questions about the Union to be an SU Hater, but as Campaigns Manager for the SU I have yet to receive any formal complaints about what we do. Feel free to contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie or 0863836795 and we can discuss whatever concerns you may have, I'm sure they are important and I would be happy to talk to you about them.

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

That post, and the one preceding it by x43r0, are indicative of the chronic level of discussion about the Students' Union within UCC. If you voice any concerns about the Students' Union you are put in the "SU Hater" file-drawer, which then, apparently, allows everyone to ignore you. Character assassination is also quite frequent. Here samf choose not to deal with the actual point, but instead delivered an ad hominem attack on Max001's person.

I have some very legitimate concerns about the Student's Union. I feel they do not represent me. I disagree with their political campaigns, and the way in which they conduct those campaigns. Yet even though I'm a fee-paying member of the Union, my views are apparently irrelevant. When I voice them I am labelled an "SU Hater". And then the same people will often turn around and ask "why do people hate the SU?". There's a lot to be said for self-reflection.

Welcome to the conversation and congratulations on missing my point completely. The reason I bought that up is because if you'll remember last year Max001 bought this up in comparison to what an awful job I had done with the SU (funnily enough I dont remember you defending me back then):

Samf, unlike you, I have taken on a project within UCC, that will benefit many students and is within my capabilities. It will be planned, executed and regularly reviewed, with lessons learned made public, because ultimately, while its starting small in the autumn, one aim is to become a model of best practice over the three years I'm going to commit to it.

Sound like a familiar scenario Samf? No, I didn't think so.

I ask with good intentions what has since been done about this project and the answer is nothing. Will I post everyday about how incompetent he is for not doing it? will I patronise/lecture him like he did and like he did with his:

Try the 6 P's Samf. Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance!

No. Cos if he actually tried to do something good that he believes in and thinks might improve things then fair enough, we're all only human, and mere students at the end of the day.

The sooner people realise that arguing about things like this achieves nothing and going out and doing something is what gets results then you might all be happier in your time in UCC.

I've no connection with the SU this year but my argument remains the same, if you dont like them, their policies, what they do, or the way they do it, dont sit on your ass and complain - do something about it!

Goddamnit, lads and lassies, this thread has gone a million miles off-topic now! If you want to fill up a thread with abusive comments aimed at UCCSU, at least start your own thread for that purpose…

As an ON-TOPIC point, thank you to everyone who supported my unsuccessful campaign for Equality Officer, especially those boards.ie members who took the time to read about my ideas. Best of luck to Dave Carey in his new role, and also to his Committee.

Also, thanks to everyone from UCCSU who took the time to post on this thread and answer questions about the position, and to the incredibly unbiased and impartial ( ) lilmissprincess for posting some stats.

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

Welcome to the conversation and congratulations on missing my point completely.

Your point is irrelevant because you were merely using it as a way of undermining Max001 without addressing the actual content of his post. It was an unabashed ad hominem post. It had absolutely nothing to do with the content of Max001's post.

samf wrote: »

(funnily enough I dont remember you defending me back then)

Once again, the character assassination. You're trying to disprove my position by attacking my person. It's a terribly lame debating tactic, and one that most people can see through, I'm afraid.

Buceph

daithilinnane wrote: »

Hey guys,

Daithi Linnane here, Deputy President of the Students' Union. Just wanted to clear up a few things.

Up until this year the issue of equality was dealt with by the Welfare Officer. Unfortunately, due to the workload of this officer, between sitting on 25 or so committees, dealing with casework...etc, equality has often been left slip to the side. A non-sabbatical Equality Officer, as well as a group of sub-officers was seen as the easiest, most cost-effective and most appropriate way of dealing with this. Now there is an officer, who is only concerned with this issue, and a tam of sub-officers who will have more time and energy to devote to it then the workload of the Welfare Officer allowed. As well as this, students who have issues in this area will have a much easier way of figuring out who to contact, and will have someone who can devote far more resources to their issues then in the past.

People aren't questioning the workloads of officers, people are questioning the very need for an equality officer. Some claim it's more jobs for the boys, others claim it's following personal beliefs of union officers, but the base of it is that people don't see the need for any equality officers. It's playing to the few who vote in the elections and not the vast majority who feel the Union don't represent them.

On the workload of the Welfare Officer. Casework is a major part, and yes, while the Officer does not have any formal qualifications, they recieve training and guidance from a vast array of organisations and professionals. While part of their job is to refer people to other departments, there is often a lot of work which can go into a specific case. For example, due to the change in the economy over the past few years, financial casework has increased massively.

So spend your time getting UCC to appoint someone who is qualified to advise on that. Not a student who thinks they know better than their peers.

Depending on the case the officer may have to attend meetings, liase with County/City Councils, represent the student to any number of committees or organisations...etc. This can be and usually is a time consuming but worthwhile process. As well as this, there is a lot of planning which goes into campaigns and other initititives run by the University and the Students' Union.

Book a bouncey castle and get someone to make up a poster? Yeah, a huge amount of work. Although there is loving it up with the USI if they've organised a mental health speaker.

As for the value of the SU itself. I think that it is a valuable organisation that is integral to the University, but then again, I'm hardly the most impartial person in this instance. I will however give you a run down on how some of what we do works, and let you make your mind up for yourself.

Yes, Governing Body and Academic Council make some of the most important decisions about the University. However, the SU has 3 seats on GB, and 16 on AC. We are part of the decision making. While we do not always get our way, the University consults the SU as much as possible for two reasons. Contrary to popular belief the University does care about student opinions, but much of their decisions are already made for them due to government sanctioned cutbacks. Secondly, they know what type of a headache they will get if they don't consult students, for example, the Conferring Fee debacle in April 2010.

I knew about the conferring fees long before the Union sent out an e-mail, and I would put the crawlback on the Uni's behalf down to the huge amount of people on facebook who said they would refuse to turn up if there were fees. A genuine question here, was it the SU who set up that facebook group? Because that was one of the most effective things I've seen in years.

As for mass mobilisation, there was a referendum held in 2009 on this matter. It was overwhelmingly passed and read as follows:

UCC Students' Union Referendum From 2009

Section E

UCC Students' Union Adopts the following policy:
1. To adopt an approach of mass campaigning and mobilisation to defeat the threat of third level fees.
2. To organise a one day (24 hour) shutdown of the college as a warning to the government in advance of the cabinent meeting which will decide which will decide on fees. This shutdown should consist of a mass student strike with protests and activities on campus against fees. The Union should strive to get the active support of the staff and their unions for this action. The Union should campaign within the USI for our shutdown to be artof a national co-ordinated one day shutdown
3. To create a working group of students, class representatives and Students' Union Officers, open to all students and staff in order to accomplish the above.

Thats what the students asked us to do,

No. That's what a small percentage of the college who ticked a box un-caringly acqueiesced to. The Union does not have a mandate. And I remember that vote, the people on campus for that lied through their teeth on what it would mean. I brought up UCCs campaigning to have USI be a more political lobby group rather than an activist group and was told that that's what this vote meant.

and that is what we are doing. Last week SU officers from around the country met with all 166 TDs in Dail Eireann, as well as the Senators, and it was quite clear that the cuts coming down the line will be put with an unfair weight on the 3rd level sector, and in order to cover those cuts, students will be made make a larger contribution. Unless we challenge it. Ever sector of society facing cuts will want to change this, and as the saying goes, 'those who shout the loudest get cut the least'. And thats what we intend to do. The USI and SUs around the country have adopted a strategy of mass mobilisation and targeted lobbying in order to achieve this. As you mentioned, it was the Green Party who took fees off the agenda, but this was driven by targeted lobbying from SUs, particularly TCDSU and UCDSU's former Presidents Conan O'Brion and Gary Remond, who are now the Deputy President and President of the USI respectively. What we are doing works, and we intend to continue it, because that is what students have asked us to do.

Eh, again you speak of a non-existent mandate. As for the Greens... The Greens have been against third level fees for a lot longer than those two SU people were their respective university's presidents. And it was quite prescient of them to know the Greens would be in government after Trevor Sargent swore blind they wouldn't be doing that. I do hope it's not the greens who USI are lobbying now.

As a previous poster said, the Mind Matters society proposal was rejected by the Societies Guild, not the SU.

How did the SU representative on the Guild vote then?

The Express and Motley are editorially independent, we do not run them.

A huge amount of funding for them is allocated through the SU budget though. Has their ever been a push for the UCC student media to have true independence?

An extra-curricular accreditation module is currently being trialled by the University, contact education@uccsu.ie for more details.

Are you serious? Lets get this straight, because the question was about getting credits for being involved in Societies. Which was proposed by someone who was involved in every society under the sun and who wanted kudos for that. Now you're saying that people are actively taking that seriously? Or are you talking about something else and obfuscating in response to a genuine concern?

RAG week was renamed after consultation with the University, the Gardai and local residents. This was not done to control students, but to remind them what this was about, raising money, not causing havoc. The Student Patrol has been an extremely successful programme, once I get to my officer computer on Monday morning I'll get the statistics on the differences between R&G 2010 and previous years. For the record, the Patrol was not set up to 'call the gaurds' on students, but to act as an intermediary so that students wouldn't have to have their issues brought to that high a level.

I'm sorry, but unless Rag week changed dramatically between 2005 and 2009 there was no "havoc." The guards were happy with the level of misbehaviour. And the only person with a problem with it was Neil Prendeville, a true friend of the common student.

And if you genuinely think Rag week was simply about raising money then you are truly deluded.

On a final note, our jobs do have limitations, but we try our best to do whats best for our students. I for one always appreciate feedback and constructive criticism, but it isn't something we get enough of. While I'm all for online boards, its much easier to get through to us with direct contact. If anybody here, or anywhere in the University has any issues they want to talk about or anything they would like to see changed or done better, contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie, 0863836795 or arrange a meeting and come to my office, i would be more than happy to discuss anything with you. Hope that cleared a few things up.

Thanks,

Daithi Linnane

Fair play for answering here. But I'd prefer things to be answered here where they can be examined and there's a record of them.

maglite

So did the fella with the dancing panda?

Lollipops + dancing panda = votes? Its like baby brown envelopes

daithilinnane

People aren't questioning the workloads of officers, people are questioning the very need for an equality officer. Some claim it's more jobs for the boys, others claim it's following personal beliefs of union officers, but the base of it is that people don't see the need for any equality officers. It's playing to the few who vote in the elections and not the vast majority who feel the Union don't represent them.

How can this be jobs for the boys? The position is unpaid and it was decided by the public, not by 'the boys'. Everybody was free to vote in this, and 850 odd people chose to do so. I've met with Dave since he one the election, and he already has a huge to do list of problems which students had come to us with which we simply haven't had the time to resolve. The workload is there, there are students who need it, its cost effective and the method of choosing the person to take it on was democratic and transparent. I really don't see the problem here.


So spend your time getting UCC to appoint someone who is qualified to advise on that. Not a student who thinks they know better than their peers.

That is something coming down the pipeline, and something we have been working with the college on, however, due to the moratorium on recruitment in the public sector, its not possible at this time. The college is in favour of it, the SU is in favour of it, the money has been found to pay for it, but the government says no recruiting, so thats where it stands at the moment.


Book a bouncey castle and get someone to make up a poster? Yeah, a huge amount of work. Although there is loving it up with the USI if they've organised a mental health speaker.

If organising campaigns was as easy as booking bouncy castles and orderin posters I would be a very happy man. Unfortunately it isn't. There is far more that goes into it, strategy, liasing with interested parties, deciding on the key messages and goals of the campaign, compiling information and turning it into distributable material, gathering volunteers, I could go on.


I knew about the conferring fees long before the Union sent out an e-mail, and I would put the crawlback on the Uni's behalf down to the huge amount of people on facebook who said they would refuse to turn up if there were fees. A genuine question here, was it the SU who set up that facebook group? Because that was one of the most effective things I've seen in years.

As far as I recall that facebook page was set up by the Cork Student News, but I could be mistaken. It was incredibly successful, but it certainly wasn not the only reason for the crawlback. The Young Fine Gael Society on campus played a huge part, as did both the outgoing and incoming SU Executives. A media campaign was launched which was picked up across the country from major outlets like RTE to small local newspapers and radio stations across Munster. As well as that, the President and Deputy President at the time met with the relevent authorities within UCC and discussed it with them. Backed by a massive public campaign and with a clear list of criticisms of the figures given by the college, UCC were convinced to back down. It was not just a facebook page, it was a combination of efforts by a wide range of students.

No. That's what a small percentage of the college who ticked a box un-caringly acqueiesced to. The Union does not have a mandate. And I remember that vote, the people on campus for that lied through their teeth on what it would mean. I brought up UCCs campaigning to have USI be a more political lobby group rather than an activist group and was told that that's what this vote meant.

According to our constiution we have a mandate. That referendum was put forward by members of a group called F.E.E. with signatures from 500+ students. A campaign in favour of it was launched by said group, and was backed by a majority of those who showed up to vote. Thats how democracy works, while people might have opposed it, not enough of them made their voices heard. Approxiamately 3,000 people voted that year, I wish it was higher, but thats what we got. And bear in mind that we actually have one of the highest voter turnouts in the UK and Ireland for SUs. We have to play the cards we are dealt. Do you think the SU should have ignored that referendum? Every day I recieve emails from students who oppose fees and cutbacks. I have yet to recieve one from a student opposing them. 6,300 people follow us on Facebook, and none of them have expressed an opinion against fees. We can only work with what we are giving, and right now students are telling us overwhelmingly to oppose fees and cutbacks.

Eh, again you speak of a non-existent mandate. As for the Greens... The Greens have been against third level fees for a lot longer than those two SU people were their respective university's presidents. And it was quite prescient of them to know the Greens would be in government after Trevor Sargent swore blind they wouldn't be doing that. I do hope it's not the greens who USI are lobbying now.


Like I said, the mandate is there. Through ever democratic channel the students have been given they have expressed a clear voice against fees and cutbacks. This goes for the USI too. And yes, the USI are lobbying the Greens. They are also lobbying Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein and the independents too.

How did the SU representative on the Guild vote then?
The SU representative on the Guild is bound to vote with the Societies Guild President. I wasn't there, so I don't know how that person voted, but you can ask them. As well as this, since that decision was taken the Welfare Officer has been speaking with the person who put forward the proposal, and they have agreed to direct their efforts into the SU's mental health campaigns to make sure that what the planned to do if they achieved society status gets done anyway.

A huge amount of funding for them is allocated through the SU budget though. Has their ever been a push for the UCC student media to have true independence?

Funding for UCC's publications comes from a ringfenced fund paid for by a €2 charge in the capitations fee. It is administered by the head of the Media Executive, which is currently myself. As well as this, in that capacity I look after advertising for them. The media in UCC is free, but cannot be made completely independent due to legal reasons. Essentially, they are not a legal entity in themselves, and any legal issue which may arise would have to be handled by the University. However, the University or the Students' Union. Do not play a part in choosing writers or what they write, we do not proof read or pick at articles before they go to print. All that we do is ensure that they have the resources to actually produce the publications, and deal with any legal matters when they arise.

Lets get this straight, because the question was about getting credits for being involved in Societies. Which was proposed by someone who was involved in every society under the sun and who wanted kudos for that. Now you're saying that people are actively taking that seriously? Or are you talking about something else and obfuscating in response to a genuine concern?

The reason I directed you to the Education Officer is because I do not have all the details of this programme, and he would be able to answer your question a lot better then I would. I'm not obfuscating or trying to dodge a question, I simply don't know the facts in full and wanted to direct you to someone who did.


I'm sorry, but unless Rag week changed dramatically between 2005 and 2009 there was no "havoc." The guards were happy with the level of misbehaviour. And the only person with a problem with it was Neil Prendeville, a true friend of the common student.

And if you genuinely think Rag week was simply about raising money then you are truly deluded.

The Gardai were not happy with the level of misbehaviour. I meet with them on a regular basis and this is what they have told me. If you met with local residents you would realise that it is not just Neil Prendeville who has a problem with it. R&G week is used by students as a piss up, but that is not what it was started for. The only thing that is stopping the University and the Gardai from putting a stop to it completely is the fact that money is raised. UCC has consistently been one of the leaders in money raising across the country, and that is why such a massive effort is put behind it.



Fair play for answering here. But I'd prefer things to be answered here where they can be examined and there's a record of them.

My offer still stands to all students, come meet me in my office, call me or email me and I will do my best. However, if you want to talk about this online, then thats what we will do. So I have one question for you. What do you want me to do?

invinciblePRSTV

Hey Daithi i've a question, how much does it cost per year for UCC students to have their SU affiliated to the USI? and what, if any, benefits does this offer your average UCC student?.

daithilinnane

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Hey Daithi i've a question, how much does it cost per year for UCC students to have their SU affiliated to the USI? and what, if any, benefits does this offer your average UCC student?.

Every student pays €5 in their capitation fee for membership. This is put to a referendum ever few years and was last re-approved by students in March 2008. I would see many benefits to membership. The USI are taken as being the national student voice by both the media and the government. They meet regularly with the releven groups in Dublin and seat on the HEA. By being members of the organisation we get to dictate what they say and do when they meet with these people. As voting within the organisation is weighted according to the populations of the constituent organisations, UCC has a significant say. As well as that, it allows us to meet with and share information/ideas with officers from around the country. On top of this, when it comes to campaigning it can be a great helps as the USI orders materials in bulk, and as such costs are lowered. Some people might say that the USI doesn't do enough, but even if that was true, I don't think there are any identifiable downsides to membership. If you want more information contact Cathy Pembroke at southernarea@usi.ie and she will be able to answer some of your questions more in depth.

Eliot Rosewater

daithilinnane wrote: »

Every student pays €5 in their capitation fee for membership...

Plus, I believe, there is a certain lump sum the SU pays the USI, making the total contribution €13 per registration fee paying student. This was was posted by the SU on their Facebook, I think.

Here is an image outlining the breakdown of the reg fee. Each student pays about €140 for the student trio of the Union, Clubs Exec and Societies Guild.

Buceph

daithilinnane wrote: »

People aren't questioning the workloads of officers, people are questioning the very need for an equality officer. Some claim it's more jobs for the boys, others claim it's following personal beliefs of union officers, but the base of it is that people don't see the need for any equality officers. It's playing to the few who vote in the elections and not the vast majority who feel the Union don't represent them.

How can this be jobs for the boys? The position is unpaid and it was decided by the public, not by 'the boys'. Everybody was free to vote in this, and 850 odd people chose to do so. I've met with Dave since he one the election, and he already has a huge to do list of problems which students had come to us with which we simply haven't had the time to resolve. The workload is there, there are students who need it, its cost effective and the method of choosing the person to take it on was democratic and transparent. I really don't see the problem here.

You still haven't explained the need for an equality officer. UCC is one of the formost universities in Europe when it comes to disabilities and mental health. The DSS has been light-years ahead of every other University in Ireland. There are more women than there are men in third level, women are doing better than men in the leaving cert and at third level, even the entry routes for medicine at third level have had to be arranged to favour men in certain ways to encourage parity. The LGBT have long since stopped campaigning on internal UCC issues and now focus on national issues with very little relation to university life.

Again you have ignored the question, what is the point of the equality officer and all the sub-officers?

As for the job for the boys aspect, I meant that in saying that it's simply providing another position in the union for the people already involved, and is not actually a necessary addition to the executive.

So spend your time getting UCC to appoint someone who is qualified to advise on that. Not a student who thinks they know better than their peers.

That is something coming down the pipeline, and something we have been working with the college on, however, due to the moratorium on recruitment in the public sector, its not possible at this time. The college is in favour of it, the SU is in favour of it, the money has been found to pay for it, but the government says no recruiting, so thats where it stands at the moment.

Good work. Well done.

Book a bouncey castle and get someone to make up a poster? Yeah, a huge amount of work. Although there is loving it up with the USI if they've organised a mental health speaker.

If organising campaigns was as easy as booking bouncy castles and orderin posters I would be a very happy man. Unfortunately it isn't. There is far more that goes into it, strategy, liasing with interested parties, deciding on the key messages and goals of the campaign, compiling information and turning it into distributable material, gathering volunteers, I could go on.

Strategy? A meeting with the welfare steering group you mean. Liasing with interested parties? E-mailing any related group in UCC. Deciding on the key messages and goals of the campaign? Picking something off the Aware flier for mental health issues, and cribbing off the USI flier for every other issue. Etc... I'm sorry, but campaigns have been completely inneffective. And don't amount to more than a few posters/fliers, a bouncey castle, and the occasional guest speaker talking to ten or so people in Boole 4.

I knew about the conferring fees long before the Union sent out an e-mail, and I would put the crawlback on the Uni's behalf down to the huge amount of people on facebook who said they would refuse to turn up if there were fees. A genuine question here, was it the SU who set up that facebook group? Because that was one of the most effective things I've seen in years.

As far as I recall that facebook page was set up by the Cork Student News, but I could be mistaken. It was incredibly successful, but it certainly wasn not the only reason for the crawlback. The Young Fine Gael Society on campus played a huge part, as did both the outgoing and incoming SU Executives. A media campaign was launched which was picked up across the country from major outlets like RTE to small local newspapers and radio stations across Munster. As well as that, the President and Deputy President at the time met with the relevent authorities within UCC and discussed it with them. Backed by a massive public campaign and with a clear list of criticisms of the figures given by the college, UCC were convinced to back down. It was not just a facebook page, it was a combination of efforts by a wide range of students.

My slightly snide questioning on this was to point out that you're inference that it was the Students' Union who achieved this result was ignorant of the many, many people who had a part to play in it. This was one of the few examples where the students from across the university cared for something and it highlighted how ineffectual the SU is, and how little people care about it. It was the perfect example that the usual SU issue about "how to get students involoved" and how "students are apathetic" is rubbish. When students care about something, they will make themselves heard. And they don't need a patronising Union who claim a "mandate" of at most 3,000 to tell them what to do.

No. That's what a small percentage of the college who ticked a box un-caringly acqueiesced to. The Union does not have a mandate. And I remember that vote, the people on campus for that lied through their teeth on what it would mean. I brought up UCCs campaigning to have USI be a more political lobby group rather than an activist group and was told that that's what this vote meant.

According to our constiution we have a mandate. That referendum was put forward by members of a group called F.E.E. with signatures from 500+ students. A campaign in favour of it was launched by said group, and was backed by a majority of those who showed up to vote. Thats how democracy works, while people might have opposed it, not enough of them made their voices heard. Approxiamately 3,000 people voted that year, I wish it was higher, but thats what we got. And bear in mind that we actually have one of the highest voter turnouts in the UK and Ireland for SUs. We have to play the cards we are dealt. Do you think the SU should have ignored that referendum? Every day I recieve emails from students who oppose fees and cutbacks. I have yet to recieve one from a student opposing them. 6,300 people follow us on Facebook, and none of them have expressed an opinion against fees. We can only work with what we are giving, and right now students are telling us overwhelmingly to oppose fees and cutbacks.

Yes. You should do what those three thousand people told you to do. But you shouldn't claim that you represent the 15,000 students in UCC. The vast majority of UCC doesn't care what you do. This isn't really your fault. It's been happening for years and years. But this is the perfect example of why poeple don't care. People here are making their concerns known, and instead of taking it on board you're trying to imply that we're all wrong with what we have to say.

Eh, again you speak of a non-existent mandate. As for the Greens... The Greens have been against third level fees for a lot longer than those two SU people were their respective university's presidents. And it was quite prescient of them to know the Greens would be in government after Trevor Sargent swore blind they wouldn't be doing that. I do hope it's not the greens who USI are lobbying now.


Like I said, the mandate is there. Through ever democratic channel the students have been given they have expressed a clear voice against fees and cutbacks. This goes for the USI too. And yes, the USI are lobbying the Greens. They are also lobbying Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein and the independents too.

The idea that the USI would be a lobby group stretches back a long time. When you have groups like UCD demanding "activism" UCC has traditionally gone the other way and said that USI should be a lobby group. It's about two ideals of how USI should behave.

How did the SU representative on the Guild vote then?
The SU representative on the Guild is bound to vote with the Societies Guild President. I wasn't there, so I don't know how that person voted, but you can ask them. As well as this, since that decision was taken the Welfare Officer has been speaking with the person who put forward the proposal, and they have agreed to direct their efforts into the SU's mental health campaigns to make sure that what the planned to do if they achieved society status gets done anyway.

Either you're mistaken on the rules of the guild, or it's a new policy, because I remember the SU seat on the guild voting contrary to the Guild President plenty of times. And if the rules were changed it would strike me as a power grab by the Guild President, and not in any way democratic.

A huge amount of funding for them is allocated through the SU budget though. Has their ever been a push for the UCC student media to have true independence?

Funding for UCC's publications comes from a ringfenced fund paid for by a €2 charge in the capitations fee. It is administered by the head of the Media Executive, which is currently myself. As well as this, in that capacity I look after advertising for them. The media in UCC is free, but cannot be made completely independent due to legal reasons. Essentially, they are not a legal entity in themselves, and any legal issue which may arise would have to be handled by the University. However, the University or the Students' Union. Do not play a part in choosing writers or what they write, we do not proof read or pick at articles before they go to print. All that we do is ensure that they have the resources to actually produce the publications, and deal with any legal matters when they arise.

Does the Communications Officer still appoint the editor?

Lets get this straight, because the question was about getting credits for being involved in Societies. Which was proposed by someone who was involved in every society under the sun and who wanted kudos for that. Now you're saying that people are actively taking that seriously? Or are you talking about something else and obfuscating in response to a genuine concern?

The reason I directed you to the Education Officer is because I do not have all the details of this programme, and he would be able to answer your question a lot better then I would. I'm not obfuscating or trying to dodge a question, I simply don't know the facts in full and wanted to direct you to someone who did.

Roger.

I'm sorry, but unless Rag week changed dramatically between 2005 and 2009 there was no "havoc." The guards were happy with the level of misbehaviour. And the only person with a problem with it was Neil Prendeville, a true friend of the common student.

And if you genuinely think Rag week was simply about raising money then you are truly deluded.

The Gardai were not happy with the level of misbehaviour. I meet with them on a regular basis and this is what they have told me. If you met with local residents you would realise that it is not just Neil Prendeville who has a problem with it. R&G week is used by students as a piss up, but that is not what it was started for. The only thing that is stopping the University and the Gardai from putting a stop to it completely is the fact that money is raised. UCC has consistently been one of the leaders in money raising across the country, and that is why such a massive effort is put behind it.

The opinion of the guards has changed then. And the guards and UCC weren't simply in favour of it because it raised money for charity. Both the guards and UCC saw it as an acceptable celebration of student life that also raised money. The violence and mayhem during RAG week must have increased considerably in the past few years then.

Fair play for answering here. But I'd prefer things to be answered here where they can be examined and there's a record of them.

My offer still stands to all students, come meet me in my office, call me or email me and I will do my best. However, if you want to talk about this online, then thats what we will do. So I have one question for you. What do you want me to do?

Keep talking to people here. This Boards forum is one of the most active public places for discussion concerning UCC. And possibly the only place that doesn't fall under the auspices of the SU. (Although I hope Cork Student News becomes as established as here.)

daithilinnane

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Plus, I believe, there is a certain lump sum the SU pays the USI, making the total contribution €13 per registration fee paying student. This was was posted by the SU on their Facebook, I think.

Here is an image outlining the breakdown of the reg fee. Each student pays about €140 for the student trio of the Union, Clubs Exec and Societies Guild.

I'll get a breakdown of the exact figure that goes to the USI for you guys from our administrator tomorrow morning. I think its somewhere in the region of €80,000.

Plautus

Deleted User wrote: »

Goddamnit, lads and lassies, this thread has gone a million miles off-topic now! If you want to fill up a thread with abusive comments aimed at UCCSU, at least start your own thread for that purpose…

As an ON-TOPIC point, thank you to everyone who supported my unsuccessful campaign for Equality Officer, especially those boards.ie members who took the time to read about my ideas. Best of luck to Dave Carey in his new role, and also to his Committee.

Also, thanks to everyone from UCCSU who took the time to post on this thread and answer questions about the position, and to the incredibly unbiased and impartial ( ) lilmissprincess for posting some stats.

This isn't the UCC forums where robust and frank discussion about the SU would be locked as 'abusive' or for simply straying off-topic (and that's arguable, because it's the merit of the position you were running for that's being debated, inter alia.) So don't invoke the usual rubbish used to stifle debate over there. And you don't own the thread either, even if you started it.

Edit: Furthermore;

I've no connection with the SU this year but my argument remains the same, if you dont like them, their policies, what they do, or the way they do it, dont sit on your ass and complain - do something about it!

The fallacy of 'you couldn't do it better so don't complain' is obviously very appealing to you but then it doesn't fly for film criticism and neither does it do the work you want it to do for you here.

I vote every year. That gives me every right to say what I like about it. No, the SU doesn't 'worsen' my college experience - but it doesn't seem to do much either for the amount of money spent on it and certainly I object to the highly politicised culture that some (but not all) members of the SU are steeped in.

What can be done about it? I don't vote for the individuals in question, for one. If you want to get part of the way to understanding the gulf that exists between the elected officials and the students they represent, it's in insinuations like yours that I 'sit on my ass'.

daithilinnane

You still haven't explained the need for an equality officer. UCC is one of the formost universities in Europe when it comes to disabilities and mental health. The DSS has been light-years ahead of every other University in Ireland. There are more women than there are men in third level, women are doing better than men in the leaving cert and at third level, even the entry routes for medicine at third level have had to be arranged to favour men in certain ways to encourage parity. The LGBT have long since stopped campaigning on internal UCC issues and now focus on national issues with very little relation to university life.

Again you have ignored the question, what is the point of the equality officer and all the sub-officers?

As for the job for the boys aspect, I meant that in saying that it's simply providing another position in the union for the people already involved, and is not actually a necessary addition to the executive.

If you want to find out the point of the Equality Officer then ask the countless number of students who are facing equality issues and come to us with their problems. We need to make sure we have the resources to deal with them. hence a dedicated team of volunteers. Yes, UCC has some fantastic facilities, but we need to make sure they stay that way and feel in the gaps where they don't cover, for example LGBT issues.


Strategy? A meeting with the welfare steering group you mean. Liasing with interested parties? E-mailing any related group in UCC. Deciding on the key messages and goals of the campaign? Picking something off the Aware flier for mental health issues, and cribbing off the USI flier for every other issue. Etc... I'm sorry, but campaigns have been completely inneffective. And don't amount to more than a few posters/fliers, a bouncey castle, and the occasional guest speaker talking to ten or so people in Boole 4.

You have just highlighted the same issues I saw when i first took this job. i agree, a lot of campaigns have been ineffective in the past, I want to change that, by not doing what you highlighted there. I think we are in agreement here.


Yes. You should do what those three thousand people told you to do. But you shouldn't claim that you represent the 15,000 students in UCC. The vast majority of UCC doesn't care what you do. This isn't really your fault. It's been happening for years and years. But this is the perfect example of why poeple don't care. People here are making their concerns known, and instead of taking it on board you're trying to imply that we're all wrong with what we have to say.

I'm not implying that anybody is wrong. I'm just talking about numbers. If 3 people tell me on a forum that they don't want me to campaign against fees, and 70 people email me telling me they want me to, its clear what I should be doing. But by all means, gather a group of students that oppose what we are doing and put them in touch with me, if the majority change, so does the union.

The idea that the USI would be a lobby group stretches back a long time. When you have groups like UCD demanding "activism" UCC has traditionally gone the other way and said that USI should be a lobby group. It's about two ideals of how USI should behave.

I don't want to get caught up in wordplay between lobbying and activism. i want an effective USI that gets things done, whether its by lobbying, marching, protesting or meetings.

Either you're mistaken on the rules of the guild, or it's a new policy, because I remember the SU seat on the guild voting contrary to the Guild President plenty of times. And if the rules were changed it would strike me as a power grab by the Guild President, and not in any way democratic.

I'm not on the Guild, but this is how I have been told it operates. Again, the Mind Matters issue is one for the Guild, not the SU. We have however tried to accomodate the people behind the proposal to push their ideas forward.


Does the Communications Officer still appoint the editor?
The Editor is currently appointed by the Media Executive, but there are no rules. Usually the interview panel is made up of some composition of the outgoing and incoming deputy Presidents and the outoging Editor and Deputy Editor. This year its was decided by myself (outgoing Editor, incoming Deputy President) and the outgoing Deputy President. I'm already discussing how to make this fairer and more independent for next year with the current Editor, so it is likely that the Express itself will have a majority on the interviewing panel. Same for Motley.

KnifeWRENCH

Max001 wrote: »

Fair point and I stand corrected, however you can see how I might confuse the two as there appears to be the same level of 'competence'. Until discrimination in UCC towards those experiencing mental health 'issues' stops, its very much an equality issue!

Firstly, I just want to say that I supported the Mind Matters society. As someone who's had mental health problems in the past, I thought it was a great idea. But while I disagree with the Guild's decision to reject it's application, I don't think it's a measure of incompetence. Just indicates that they have different opinions.

Deleted User wrote: »

Goddamnit, lads and lassies, this thread has gone a million miles off-topic now! If you want to fill up a thread with abusive comments aimed at UCCSU, at least start your own thread for that purpose…

If you have a problem with posts going off-topic, please report the posts and let a Mod deal with it. Don't lecture people about it - that's my job! :pac:

As it stands, this conversation is one that's worth having, given the amount of interest in it and the number of different posters who have responded to it. But I have no problem moving the posts to another thread if you want.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Once again, the character assassination. You're trying to disprove my position by attacking my person. It's a terribly lame debating tactic, and one that most people can see through, I'm afraid.

In fairness, I think samf had to deal with a lot of similar "character assassination" on his own character himself last year. Not saying that makes it right, but his frustration is understandable.

I'd take this moment to ask everyone to please argue/debate like adults, and not resort to ad hominem attacks or personal abuse.

Plautus wrote: »

This isn't the UCC forums where robust and frank discussion about the SU would be locked as 'abusive' or for simply straying off-topic (and that's arguable, because it's the merit of the position you were running for that's being debated, inter alia.) So don't invoke the usual rubbish used to stifle debate over there. And you don't own the thread either, even if you started it.

Again, I'll say to you what I said to LPField; back seat modding not welcome here so please don't do it again. I have no intention of "stifling debate" but I also don't object to moving it to another thread, if LPField would prefer.

Also, I've seen SU debates on the UCC Forums (I assume you're talking about forum.ucc.ie here?) and it's gone on ok. The mods there are very fair in my experience, and don't lock threads unless they get totally out of hand.

Buceph

Edit: I was being a bit inflammatory here, so I'll replace it with this...

Every year students run for the Union and claim they're going to revolutionise it, and make it relevant to the entire student body. Every year people like you say in there campaign manifestos that "a lot of campaigns have been ineffective in the past, I want to change that." I'm sorry, but you're not a genius, and there hasn't been a genius on the SU in the entire time I've been in UCC. A lot of students hear the same claims over and over and don't believe a word you say. And a huge amount of students see the University steamroll through printing fees, paid parking at night on campus, and eventually we'll probably have graduation ceremony fees.

There's also a lot of people who really don't give a **** about anything the Student Union says.

And there are people who could go to the welfare officer about their issues, but don't want to tell a busybody student what their issues are and would rather deal with the professionals in the medical centre, the counselling service, the fees office, their lecturers, the DSS, etc..

To most people, the Students Union is irrelevant. People running for offices in the Union have been trying to change that for donkeys years, either by promising more piss-ups or more politics. But people don't care.

And when they Students Union makes a song and dance about anything, the few who have a passing interest but who aren't part of the few involved with the SU go on the attack. Because it's incredibly easy. Because every year students make promises about how they're different and how they're going to change the union.


Edit again: What I'm basically trying to say is that the SU is a thankless job, don't get too worried about trying to please everyone. You'll find that the majority of what you do isn't relevant to the majority of people. Take your year and enjoy it, just don't expect anyone bar the few involved to care.

daithilinnane

I haven't highlighted anything at all. This is what most students already know. You're the odd one out who didn't see it until you got onto the SU. You're the odd one out who hasn't seen what the vast majority of students have seen, that the SU is an ineffectual waste of time filled with deluded wannabes who think they're better than the people they've replaced, are better than the students who didn't vote them in and are better than the thousands of people who have better things to be doing than spending their time telling the Students' Union why most people ignore them.

Insulting me is not the way to get answers.

Students care about free printing, students care about the chicken rolls being crappy in the main, students care about the student's centre being a rip off, students care about parking. But just as the student centre was given away, just as Campbells were replaced by an equally crap caterer, just like free printing was steamrolled in and just like how people have to pay to park on campus in the evening, the SU hasn't had a real effect on the things most students care about.

I wasn't here when Cambells were, but from what I'm told the food has gotten a lot better and cheaper. Prices have gone down in the Student Centre this year and we are working with them to make that building as good value as possible. Free printing is something the union couldn't save, but we know provide incredibly cheap printing ourselves in the SU Box Office

I've asked you why an equality officer is needed. First you ignored the question. Then you said there are loads of students with equality issues who need to be represented without giving a single example of an equality issue in UCC. The SU (as a member of the Societies Guild Executive) was complicit in stopping a society dedicated to mental health being formed (I will apologise if the SU representative voted in favour of the society, but that doesn't seem to be the case.) Mental health being one of the issues you say the Students Union didn't have time to deal with. So doesn't it makes perfect sense to stop the organic growth of a body dedicated to deal with it? The LGBT have been campaigning on national issues for the past few years, and I don't remember a single issue of discrimination being reported in the Express or being campaigned against by the SU even when ex-members of the LGBT committee were on the SU Executive. For years students with mobility issues couldn't even get into the welfare officer's office (is this the case in the new building?) Women are more represented as students than men. So I guess you're campaigning for access routes for more disaffected boys to UCC and therefore have a "Male Rights Officer."

Mind Matters is an issue for the Societies Guild. Plenty of societies get rejected. As I've said, we are working with the group who proposed it to push there agenda forward regardless.

So just because issues aren't written about in the Express that means that they don't exist? A lot of the equality issues that students face are kept private because thats how they want them to be kept, and we respect that.

So, I'll ask again, and maybe you'll give an explicit answer that your constituency deserve. What are the equality issues that demand another X number of Student Union officers?

I'm not going to reveal confidential casework, but there are plenty of examples. Evening students certainly don't have equality to the average student, student parents face a number of problems, LGBT students often need support in coming out, as well as facing different laws then others (marriage, adoption). There are a number of areas on campus which are not disabled access. Students with leaning difficulties are facing problems due to cuts backs in the DSS Office. Gender issues affect both men and women. There is bullying within certain courses and classes as they are traditionally deemed to be 'male' or 'female' orientated careers. International students face problems due to cultural differences and a language barrier, itegeration is often difficult for them, as is adapting to this country. Those are just a few if you want more information I suggest you contact welfare@uccsu.ie, equality@uccsu.ie or go and talk to any of the offices in UCC that deal with them.

Buceph

I edited my post. I was being unfair on you. I apologise.


The Union isn't relevant to the day to day concerns of most people, just as much as most governance isn't interested into the nitty gritty of how things are run. Until the SU can start talking about the effect it has had on broad policy or how it corrected specific negligences, I will be happy to let you play away in the background. Start talking in specific, about issues that concern me and my education and I'll be happy to engage. I don't care if Rag week is cancelled, I know how to have fun on my own and I don't care if someone in my class thinks that depression is a made up condition for sourpusses.

I know you represent students on committees throughout the college. Talk about that if you can. Just don't preach to students, we're smarter than that and it really pisses us off.

Edit again: I'm genuinely not trying to be bitchy. I think I'm just having a bad day.

Most of what the Union does goes on in the background, on committees within UCC. Unless you can explain the effect that student representation has on those bodies, i.e. the chipping away at large issues, and the impact of being heard across the university's institutions, then you will remain seemingly irrelevant to a lot of students. I don't think it's possible to represent that idea on a broad scale. That students sit in meeting with the administration isn't sexy, so I think the Union will remain a fairly thankless job on that front and it won't inspire most people to vote in the elections.

Eliot Rosewater

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

In fairness, I think samf had to deal with a lot of similar "character assassination" on his own character himself last year. Not saying that makes it right, but his frustration is understandable.

That's a fair point. There are two groups, on the one side the "haters", the other side the "hacks", and in the end SU discourse seems to come down to those two slurs.

It's just a pity when people who try to genuinely criticise the Students' Union get shouted down as "haters". And, in fairness, those in support of the SU won't be ignored by policy makers, unlike those who criticise, whose comments are often dismissed (or even deleted on Facebook).

Byron85

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

That's a fair point. There are two groups, on the one side the "haters", the other side the "hacks", and in the end SU discourse seems to come down to those two slurs.

It's just a pity when people who try to genuinely criticise the Students' Union get shouted down as "haters". And, in fairness, those in support of the SU won't be ignored by policy makers, unlike those who criticise, whose comments are often dismissed (or even deleted on Facebook).

Ok, i'm one of these haters/hacks. The SU doesn't represent me, at least that's how I feel. One of the main reasons being that i'm probably older than every person involved in the SU although i'm happy to be mistaken.

I'm 25 and i've been around the block at this stage. UCC is my fourth college and i'm now renting my seventh place in as many years. I don't appreciate a 20 year old middle class kid telling me that he represents me when the only person that represents me, is myself. That might seem rather conceited but there is a huge difference in maturity and outlook on life between someone who is 20 and someone in their mid twenties.

Whether the Union wants to admit it or not, there is a clique within its ranks that intersects other groups on campus.

My old housemate, a UCC graduate, summed up the whole SU and Societies thing rather nicely when he said "It's jobs for the boys" i.e, a clique and this is a guy who graduated in 2006.

lilmissprincess

Ok guys, to those who are bringing up the Mind Matters society:

My name is Lisa Ryan, I'm the girl who was trying to get the society set up. While I am glad to see so much support for the idea of the society, its involvement in this argument of the validity of the SU Equality Officer isn't something I'm liking to see. Though the society has been rejected for this year by the Guild, I have been working with the Welfare Officer in order to organise Mental Health campaigns through this year, so that a lot of the work I had envisioned the society to do will still get done. The introduction of the Equality officer in my mind can only increase the amount of progress we can make on issues such as mental health.

Thats my two cents anyway.

daniel.ocarroll

Yes, the Abolish the Fee Facebook campaign was started by Cork Student News, not the Students Union. It's still running at www.facebook.com/abolishthefee, because as I understand it, it's still an issue on the agenda.