Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UCD SU Wants YOUR input!!!

Options
«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    pljudge321
    Registered Users Posts: 1,129 ✭✭✭pljudge321


    How about an opt-out clause?


  • Options
    #3
    L
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭L


    How about not mandating the SU officers oppose the return of fees every year and instead representing the split in student body opinions?* -_-

    *note, this is something I've heard second hand. Might not be 100% correct.


  • Options
    #4
    Brendan Lacey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭Brendan Lacey


    The opt out thing is not allowed by the Universities act, if your in third level education you have to be represented by a Students' Union in order to protect your rights in college


  • Options
    #5
    jan shyr
    Registered Users Posts: 67 ✭✭jan shyr


    The opt out thing is not allowed by the Universities act, if your in third level education you have to be represented by a Students' Union in order to protect your rights in college

    Are you for real?

    Thank you for three markers, two bananas, one trip to exam centre on an overcrowded bus, and super-diluted drink during exam time. I think I haven't left anything out.


  • Options
    #6
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Brendan Lacey wrote: »
    The opt out thing is not allowed by the Universities act, if your in third level education you have to be represented by a Students' Union in order to protect your rights in college

    Im pretty sure thats unconstitutional. Not unconstitutional by the SU constitution but the real one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    beardedmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 614 ✭✭✭beardedmaster


    Brendan Lacey loves speeches. He's good at them.. but you can tell he loves 'em.


  • Options
    #8
    L
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭L


    Riamfada wrote: »
    Im pretty sure thats unconstitutional. Not unconstitutional by the SU constitution but the real one.

    I think as a technicality the student union is not a 'union' in order to avoid that...

    I think that tells you most of what you need to know.


  • Options
    #9
    pljudge321
    Registered Users Posts: 1,129 ✭✭✭pljudge321


    Brendan Lacey wrote: »
    The opt out thing is not allowed by the Universities act, if your in third level education you have to be represented by a Students' Union in order to protect your rights in college

    [CITATION NEEDED]

    I couldn't find anything indicating this in the Universities Act, could you perhaps give me the relevant section number?


  • Options
    #10
    Riamfada
    Registered Users Posts: 10,246 ✭✭✭✭Riamfada


    Brendan, this is why previous UCD Unions have either been banned from or have completely avoided boards.ie.


  • Options
    #11
    WeeBushy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭WeeBushy


    Brendan Lacey wrote: »
    The opt out thing is not allowed by the Universities act, if your in third level education you have to be represented by a Students' Union in order to protect your rights in college

    Are you sure of that? I have been looking through the Universities Act and can't find any specific mention to a Student's Union being mandatory. There are many references to a Students Union or a student representative body being represented on boards etc., but no mention, that I can find anyway, of students having to be in one. I ain't no law student, however, and am open to correction.

    Edit: Didn't read pljudge321's post... Well that makes two of us who couldn't find that anyway :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    pljudge321
    Registered Users Posts: 1,129 ✭✭✭pljudge321


    WeeBushy wrote: »
    Are you sure of that? I have been looking through the Universities Act and can't find any specific mention to a Student's Union being mandatory. There are many references to a Students Union or a student representative body being represented on boards etc., but no mention, that I can find anyway, of students having to be in one. I ain't no law student, however, and am open to correction.

    Edit: Didn't read pljudge321's post... Well that makes two of us who couldn't find that anyway :)

    I'm guessing the delay in getting back to us means he can't either.


  • Options
    #13
    MrMatisse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,743 ✭✭✭MrMatisse


    Drag Redmond out of UCD, 40 years is enough!

    A ban on tossers standing for office.


  • Options
    #14
    parker kent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,289 ✭✭✭parker kent


    The problem with the SU is that it pretty often does not attract the best people. Whilst academic brilliance should obviously not be essential, I have heard of and have known people involved in the SU with really poor grades. I'd feel a bit happier known that the people representing me have not got a list of repeats and resits as long as the Shannon.

    I also find that a lot of what the SU does seems childish and amateurish. "You're here for a good time, not a long time" springs to mind.

    The biggest problem with the SU is that the vast majority simply don't care or actively dislike the SU. The easy answer is to say "well get involved and change it", but will a dissenter receive the necessary support to actually change things?

    Then I have another theory on why the SU never really works. It is a bunch of undergrads with limited experience of actually doing anything. It is amateurish because it is ran by amateurs. That's not really their fault, but it does play a part in the many things that annoy people about the SU.

    At the ground level (class reps and programme officers), the SU can work well. They do a really good job in most instances as they are extremely accessible and relate to the people they represent. Whereas the Sabbats, well it takes a certain type of personality to become one of those and they are largely removed from the majority of the student body.


  • Options
    #15
    spudington16
    Registered Users Posts: 786 ✭✭✭spudington16


    It's impossible to find the info you want on the SU website when you need it.

    Can you tell me when the Union Council meets next in the coming month or so?


  • Options
    #16
    beardedmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 614 ✭✭✭beardedmaster


    The next Council meeting is tomorrow, at 6.15pm. I think it's every 2nd Thursday. I'm presuming it's on in the same place as last time - Theatre R in Newman.


  • Options
    #17
    beardedmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 614 ✭✭✭beardedmaster


    parker kent wrote: »
    The biggest problem with the SU is that the vast majority simply don't care or actively dislike the SU. The easy answer is to say "well get involved and change it", but will a dissenter receive the necessary support to actually change things?
    I think Lannoye answered that last year.


  • Options
    #18
    WeeBushy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭WeeBushy


    parker kent - excellent post.


  • Options
    #19
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    MrMatisse wrote: »
    A ban on tossers standing for office.

    Great Idea. . .you moron. . .


  • Options
    #20
    pljudge321
    Registered Users Posts: 1,129 ✭✭✭pljudge321


    electrictrad wrote: »
    Great Idea. . .you moron. . .

    Good contribution.

    Glad to see Brendan Lacey never got back on any of our queries. Having read the latest observer I've been wondering what legal implications the transformation of the SU into SU Ltd will have on the whole mandatory membership thing.


  • Options
    #21
    Raphael
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,880 ✭✭✭Raphael


    electrictrad wrote: »
    Great Idea. . .you moron. . .
    Infracted. Abuse is against the Charter, as you'd know if you'd read it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    RandolphEsq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,296 ✭✭✭RandolphEsq


    I don't understand why you need to pay the SU reps, surely if you get a few more people to run each position they can all do it whilst still studying. But why upset the cosy arrangement FF lite have got going for themselves?


  • Options
    #23
    Conor108
    Registered Users Posts: 3,871 ✭✭✭Conor108


    RandolphEsq wrote: »
    I don't understand why you need to pay the SU reps, surely if you get a few more people to run each position they can all do it whilst still studying. But why upset the cosy arrangement FF lite have got going for themselves?

    Genius :D


  • Options
    #24
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    pljudge321 wrote: »
    Good contribution.

    Sorry. . .but "a ban on tossers running for office" is one of the most unhelpful, stupidest comments I have ever read on this site. . .people who come out with comments like that don't deserve student union representation. . .

    People may not like everything the SU does. They may think some of the things it does are corny, or out of touch, and in some cases it may be right. But a strong SU serves a very important purpose, namely being a student voice for students, some of whom are in financial and social difficulties. . . And it angers me to see students who wouldn't open the the door for ya throwing sideway digs at people who volunteer their free time to help their fellow students with their problems. . .


  • Options
    #25
    stop
    Registered Users Posts: 889 ✭✭✭stop


    electrictrad wrote: »
    Sorry. . .but "a ban on tossers running for office" is one of the most unhelpful, stupidest comments I have ever read on this site. . .people who come out with comments like that don't deserve student union representation. . .

    People may not like everything the SU does. They may think some of the things it does are corny, or out of touch, and in some cases it may be right. But a strong SU serves a very important purpose, namely being a student voice for students, some of whom are in financial and social difficulties. . . And it angers me to see students who wouldn't open the the door for ya throwing sideway digs at people who volunteer their free time to help their fellow students with their problems. . .

    Sabats don't exactly volunteer their free time, they are doing a job that they are paid for.


  • Options
    #26
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    stop wrote: »
    Sabats don't exactly volunteer their free time, they are doing a job that they are paid for.

    Ah, come on now, they're probably getting pittance compared to the work they put in. . .

    And what the hells a "Sabat"?


  • Options
    #27
    L
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭L


    electrictrad wrote: »
    . . .people who come out with comments like that don't deserve student union representation. . .

    Not to be flippant, but most people who come out with comments like that don't want student union representation.

    I'm in college 8 years now (Undergrad, Masters and now Phd). In all that time, I genuinely can't think of a single occasion where the SU was useful. I can however think of a few occasions where it did/was responsible for something that made me sigh.


  • Options
    #28
    L
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭L


    electrictrad wrote: »
    Ah, come on now, they're probably getting pittance compared to the work they put in. . .

    And what the hells a "Sabat"?

    You realise they get €20k a year right? Even if they're working a 40hr week (which I doubt), they're earning a fair bit more than minimum wage.

    Sabat= shorthand for Sabbatical officer


  • Options
    #29
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    L wrote: »
    I'm in college 8 years now (Undergrad, Masters and now Phd). In all that time, I genuinely can't think of a single occasion where the SU was useful.

    It is true that some don't need the SU. . .

    But say you were in a dispute with the college, or needed some kinda assistance the college weren't providing, the SU would be needed to try and sort things out with your interests in mind.. .

    And I am glad, as a 1st year student from down the country, with at least 5 years left here, that they are there to fight the reintroduction of 3rd level fees, because thats something I and a lot of others in the college are gonna find very difficult to afford. . .


  • Options
    #30
    electrictrad
    Registered Users Posts: 367 ✭✭electrictrad


    L wrote: »
    You realise they get €20k a year right? Even if they're working a 40hr week (which I doubt), they're earning a fair bit more than minimum wage.

    Yes, but the reps don't get hardly anything, and they put in a lot of time for nothing - to help their peers. Most of these guys have done stints as reps (I presume), and are now taking a full year of their own education off in most cases. . . somehow I doubt they're in it for the cash when on graduation, most of them will take jobs, here or abroad, that will pay much higher per year. . .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    L
    Registered Users Posts: 655 ✭✭✭L


    electrictrad wrote: »
    But say you were in a dispute with the college, or needed some kinda assistance the college weren't providing, the SU would be needed to try and sort things out with your interests in mind.. .

    Been there as it happens. The SU were no help. A professional student welfare officer probably would have been.
    electrictrad wrote: »
    And I am glad, as a 1st year student from down the country, with at least 5 years left here, that they are there to fight the reintroduction of 3rd level fees, because thats something I and a lot of others in the college are gonna find very difficult to afford. . .

    Universal free fees favour those who are well off, not those who would have trouble affording college if fees were reintroduced. I really wish this was explained to people more often.

    Proper grant schemes are the correct way to deal with ensuring everyone gets a crack at college because they mean money goes where it's needed rather than being 'equally' distributed to those who need it and those who do not.

    Seriously, people seem to think the government magically gets the money for the cost of 'free fees' out of thin air.
    electrictrad wrote: »
    Yes, but the reps don't get hardly anything, and they put in a lot of time for nothing - to help their peers. Most of these guys have done stints as reps (I presume), and are now taking a full year of their own education off in most cases. . . somehow I doubt they're in it for the cash when on graduation, most of them will take jobs, here or abroad, that will pay much higher per year. . .

    Reps (poor sods) are a completely different kettle of fish to the Sabbatical officers. If the SU was just the reps, I'd have a lot less issue with it.

    And, yeah, I doubt they're in it for the money...they're probably in it for the year hanging around college without exams. -_-


Advertisement