The USI or the Library - you choose!!

raah!

Regardless of whether or not there is a library/USI dichotomy, I do not feel I am represented by them and would rather the money be spent somewhere which actually has something to do with education and not with a bunch of people making lolz signs for various ill conceived protests.

Alternatively, we could keep the money.

Patriciamc93

Its not a fair question....... of course everybody wants extended hours. But it fees go up next year then well people will probably have to try and get a part time job and won't be able to use the library! The USI is fighting on behalf of students.

invinciblePRSTV

Awful poll design, totally biased towards one outcome and as such should be completely disregarded like a Sindo poll. May as well have been which would you rather: cute puppies or the evil USI ffs.

Byron85

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Awful poll design, totally biased towards one outcome and as such should be completely disregarded like a Sindo poll. May as well have been which would you rather: cute puppies or the evil USI ffs.

How would you have posed the questions? I'm curious as personally I would like a proper survey to be done.

Eliot Rosewater

Byron85 wrote: »

How would you have posed the questions? I'm curious as personally I would like a proper survey to be done.

His problem with the poll design is that I made it.

It's the third time the poll has been described as "misinformed" or otherwise unfair. It's a pretty basic question, with no room for misinformation. If I had to guess, I'd say people are annoyed that the USI is being compared in such a direct quantifiable fashion which doesn't leave any space for poor defences.

Cuddlytroll

Try 'is USI membership worth a €5 levy paid by about 60% of students'. If you really wanted 'should we add an extra €5 levy on all students to add to library funding'. It should be seen as standalone you phrased it to appear that the levy was an obstacle to library funding.

It's also biased in that everyone can quantify what additional library funding could amount to but there is less knowledge about the hard work done by USI. The poll should give a comprehensive breakdown of the benefits of USI membership to appear non biased. Also it's being orchestrated by people who have a tendency to try to make grand sweeping statements about the expenditure of a student organisation without fully engaging with the details.

pow wow

Cuddlytroll wrote: »

Yawn. Populist, poorly informed polls like this will never give a proper representation.

Was the poll intended to be properly representative or the results binding? Populism aside it's based on a specific set of circumstances which no-one said were actually true (i.e. scrap the USI subs and the library will get all the money). It's an 'if' question in context of the OP's post.

Out of interest is there much publicity or campaigning as such by whoever may be for/against when the vote comes around?

invinciblePRSTV

Byron85 wrote: »

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Awful poll design, totally biased towards one outcome and as such should be completely disregarded like a Sindo poll. May as well have been which would you rather: cute puppies or the evil USI ffs.

How would you have posed the questions? I'm curious as personally I would like a proper survey to be done.

I would not have presented such loaded options as choices. it is nonsense to lump 2 issues - USI Fees and Lib opening hours - together when they don't have any direct relevance to each other unless you're engaging in episodes of whatiffery and whataboutery.

In addition it's quite clear the design and language of the questions is done in such a way as to produce a one sided result. In turn its easy to tell from the Qs where the author's sympathies lie thus completely ruining any impartiality or credibility the poll may have.

invinciblePRSTV

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Byron85 wrote: »

How would you have posed the questions? I'm curious as personally I would like a proper survey to be done.

His problem with the poll design is that I made it.

believe it or not its not always about you Rosewater *on phone so you'll have to imagine the rolleyes smiley here*

Byron85

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I would not have presented such loaded options as choices. it is nonsense to lump 2 issues - USI Fees and Lib opening hours - together when they don't have any direct relevance to each other unless you're engaging in episodes of whatiffery and whataboutery.

In addition it's quite clear the design and language of the questions is done in such a way as to produce a one sided result. In turn its easy to tell from the Qs where the author's sympathies lie thus completely ruining any impartiality or credibility the poll may have.

Well another poll can be started then instead.

Do you support the payment of €150,000 per annum to the USI?

Yes or no.

Problem solved.

samf

Byron85 wrote: »

Well another poll can be started then instead.

Do you support the payment of €150,000 per annum to the USI?

Yes or no.

Problem solved.

Not a student anymore so dont particularly care either way, but just wondering where you're getting the figure of 150K from, is ~20k students * €5 not equal to 100K?

Where's the extra 50K coming from?

Byron85

samf wrote: »

Not a student anymore so dont particularly care either way, but just wondering where you're getting the figure of 150K from, is ~20k students * €5 not equal to 100K?

Where's the extra 50K coming from?

As Eliot posted at the start:

USI membership costs UCC about €150,000 a year, if I recall correctly. There's a €100,000 lump sum payment and then all students who pay the registration fee pay €5.

Although, I actually think the figures above are slightly off. The €5 contribution comes from the capitation fee which everyone pays. UCC has roughly 20,000 students so that's exactly €100,000. I don't know where the other €50,000 comes from. Maybe that's the lump sum?

samf

But as Smurphette also posted on page one:

I'm not going to debate this as I'm not a student anymore but the affiliation fee for USI is €5 per student which for UCC works out about €80k, not €150k.

So if you're throwing figures around, €80k is most likely the more accurate one.

Byron85

samf wrote: »

But as Smurphette also posted on page one:

So if you're throwing figures around, €80k is most likely the more accurate one.

Actually, just found some figures. For the 2010/2011 academic year, the student population was 18,820. That means the contribution the USI got was €94,100.

The student population has increased though afaik?

samf

That assumes all students pay it though, not sure if postgrad/int students do - either way its still 55K+ off the original figure which is the only point I wanted to make. As for the benefits of USI - anyone tried emailing them and asking them?

Byron85

samf wrote: »

That assumes all students pay it though, not sure if postgrad/int students do - either way its still 55K+ off the original figure which is the only point I wanted to make. As for the benefits of USI - anyone tried emailing them and asking them?

The €5 comes from the capitation fee and everyone pays that as far as I know. I also don't know where the other €50,000 comes from but i'll look into it.

Eliot Rosewater

The figures could be totally off. I was trying to remember off-hand. I thought the USI got €5 from each reg. paying student and a lump sum from the university. If it's just the €5 then the figure is drastically smaller. samf is correct to point out that not all students pay the reg. fee; lots of people on grants and other supports are exempted from it.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I would not have presented such loaded options as choices. it is nonsense to lump 2 issues - USI Fees and Lib opening hours - together when they don't have any direct relevance to each other unless you're engaging in episodes of whatiffery and whataboutery.

We have a certain amount of money to spend. We could spend it on the USI or we could spend it on the library. There's a whole branch of social science - it's called "economics" - that is concerned with these kinds of optimisation questions. Perhaps you should email a few Nobel laureates and tell them their field is all about irrelevant quantities.

Byron85

People are getting confused between the registration fee and the capitation fee. Now, not everyone pays the registration fee, as dictated by their income/grant status; people like me for instance who receives a grant and has his registration fee paid for him.

However, everyone pays the capitation fee regardless of whether or not they have their fees paid for them by the government. I pay the capitation fee for example.

The €5 for the USI is taken from the capitation fee, not the registration fee, therefore, everyone pays the USI fee.

Cuddlytroll

Byron85 wrote: »

People are getting confused between the registration fee and the capitation fee. Now, not everyone pays the registration fee, as dictated by their income/grant status; people like me for instance who receives a grant and has his registration fee paid for him.

However, everyone pays the capitation fee regardless of whether or not they have their fees paid for them by the government. I pay the capitation fee for example.

The €5 for the USI is taken from the capitation fee, not the registration fee, therefore, everyone pays the USI fee.

Not everyone pays the capitation fee either. I remember in 09/10 I heard the figure was 11500 paying so allowing for increases in student numbers I'd say you're talking about 80k-90k. The idea of a lump sum paid by the university is nonsense.

It's also important to remember that it's paid by levy. If you remove it there's no way in hell you'd reinstate it to go to the library, if you did UCC would just cut their own finding to the library by the same amount. The whole argument is a little immaterial tbh.

IHeartChemistry

Cuddlytroll wrote: »

Not everyone pays the capitation fee either. I remember in 09/10 I heard the figure was 11500 paying so allowing for increases in student numbers I'd say you're talking about 80k-90k. The idea of a lump sum paid by the university is nonsense.

It's also important to remember that it's paid by levy. If you remove it there's no way in hell you'd reinstate it to go to the library, if you did UCC would just cut their own finding to the library by the same amount. The whole argument is a little immaterial tbh.

Can I ask where you got those figures from? The capitation fee figures!

Cuddlytroll

I asked one of the officers about it. A lot of this speculation can be sorted out by asking.

IHeartChemistry

Cuddlytroll wrote: »

I asked one of the officers about it. A lot of this speculation can be sorted out by asking.

But you have no solid proof about those numbers?

Cuddlytroll

He had a breakdown of reg fee and capitation from 09/10. He said student numbers had probably changed since then. I hope it wasn't confidential actually come to think of it :-/

Keith_OB

Sigh.

t might have had something to do with the dismissive attitude shown towards us with our former S.U president saying that "Some people just like to cause hassle and/or say no". That was the general attitude we received.

I never said that, if anything I said directly to you that I respected your opinion even If I disagreed entirely with you. However, considering the numerous times people besides me seem to have to correct you on the wide and often wild statements that are made on the SU, or its finances, or workings (whether they are intentionally wrong or not), you'll forgive the people (whom included former sabbats) that did say you were just out to cause hassle.

I've no interest in fighting with you, cause there is nothing I could say to change/soften your very determined mindset. Ultimately, it is a waste of time- if that attitude of honesty is what you are referencing then I apologise for being an honest person. I wish you could present things as fairly.

Anyway, here, once again (I'm sure I posted all this last year for you) are some facts:

USI Contribution:
- Not all students pay the capitation fee OR the Reg Fee, and not all students identifiably pay the Cap Fee to UCC. I.e. all PhD and Masters students pay a tuition fee, Adult Ed and evening students do not pay it; which means it is usually 'bundled into the overall cost. But the SU can't see that in a breakdown.

What UCC does is create a weighting system called the 'Full-Time Equivalent (FTE)' for the REG Fee. 63% of UCC's students are Full-Time Equivalents, and that is how many students pay the Reg Fee. Its an imperfect system and I reckon students and the SU are losing out because of it. I tried to challenge and change it last year to be 'charge per member' as it'd bring in about €100,000, but its near impossible.

Regardless. The annual USI contribution totals €92,000, which is included in the SU Budget purely as an in/out figure. The annual cost of extra USI expenses (which I slashed largely in my year) should be available upon request from the SU. The extra costs include; a National Council every 6 weeks for 1-2 Sabbats (depends on PResidnet, could be all 4/5), a 5-day 22 person delegation to USI's Annual Congress and a weekend of UOS training (which was negotiated to Cork before I left to save on costs) should be €6-8,000 over a year.

The benefits of USI are for everyone else to debate, I can't speak on the current ones as I'm not involved, only to their general, historical, and conceptual benefit.

If you run a motion to disaffiliate from USI, the CAP Fee would be €145. Similarly, you cannot spend that current €5 on anything other than its legally intended purpose as it has been decided by legal referendum. You could run 2 motions, 1 to repeal it and 1 to add a €5 levy to pay for the library. Your fear should be that UCC will expect you to up the levy when they reduce library funding from there Core Budget. You could be looking at a Cap Fee of €200 within a few years when UCC (like they did in 2010) try to declare libraries weren't a core function of a University, and get it paid for out of the Reg Fee, i.e. by the student not government.

I'm sure you can all see what'll happen there.

Finally; the 'No' vote to the Commercial Officer was less than 40% (I can;t find the figure); and 'No' votes are quite successful historically in UCC (possibly the Law block causing it), and a list of referenda passed was made up last year and should be available from the SU.

Hope this clarifies things. Salutations from London.

Keith_OB

Just on a different note: Library and Security Staff won't work Saturdays/Sundays. If they did they'd require overtime / Sunday pay. Which is hefty. And no, students can't do library staff work because students are no longer members of SIPTU (or indeed, any trade union) which means we've no formal negotiating rights in the workplace.

Short-term vision, long-term problems. *long sigh*

Triangla

Can students not use the library in university college hospital in Cork anymore? It was open 24/7 when I was in UCC.

Not many students outside of med were aware of it. I was not doing med but used it loads before exams.

I went to UL also and that was excellent, computer and study space available 24/7 . Great facility to have, I did think UL was a lot more student friendly that way.

Byron85

Keith_OB wrote: »

Sigh.



I never said that, if anything I said directly to you that I respected your opinion even If I disagreed entirely with you. However, considering the numerous times people besides me seem to have to correct you on the wide and often wild statements that are made on the SU, or its finances, or workings (whether they are intentionally wrong or not), you'll forgive the people (whom included former sabbats) that did say you were just out to cause hassle.

Didn't say it directly to me, but it was said, verbatim.

As for the correction on the figures, i've corrected myself a number of times on the thread along with other people correcting me as i've gotten the figures. I wasn't entirely sure of some of the figures myself so I went looking.


As for the No vote last year, it was myself and Eliot running that; 2 people against the entire S.U. I think we did pretty well, historically speaking or not. We weren't the Law block.


Edit: Not that the discussion of our "No Campaign" is relevant, here are the figures from the vote. 2320 for and 1312 against.

As for the €92,000 as an in/out figure, I presume that means that it couldn't simply be moved around to service another function? If it can't, so what.

Keith_OB wrote: »

Sigh.

I've no interest in fighting with you, cause there is nothing I could say to change/soften your very determined mindset. Ultimately, it is a waste of time- if that attitude of honesty is what you are referencing then I apologise for being an honest person. I wish you could present things as fairly.

As for the honesty bit, well played sir. Declare yourself to be honest whilst intimating that I am not. I don't play the politician's game but I am blunt. I like the S.U and what they do, believe it or not. I just despise the politics of the entire thing along with the outrageous amount of money that's played around with. In this case, it's the USI. Do they do some good work? Sure. Do they deserve the amount of money they get? In my opinion, no. It's as simple as that.

Keith_OB

Like I said, no interest in fighting so if you say I said something then fair enough, I don't believe I said it as stated. It'll just remain a point of disagreement. A really insignificant one. My feelings are and were clear; I viewed it as a waste of time arguing as I don't believe any figure/fact/argument I could state would change your mindset. A quick cost/benefit decision was made between talking to other students that were receptive, or 2 students that were 99% unlikely to change opinion. That is just reality of canvassing- one I'm sure you made if strong pro-people kept you too long!

My comment about wishing 'you presented things as fairly' was an appeal for facts and not conjecture. The thread here is 4 pages long, with about 50 votes, and its only on page 4 people mentioned that ye might want to obtain the correct figures despite on page 1 them being stated as questionable (by you?). Misinformation (intentional or otherwise) that can be avoided is always more conducive to debate and proper decision-making. I really don't use the boards, so I can't comment if you are an honest person or not, I presume you are really.

Re: the No campaign, fair bobs, I'd no figures to hand. Though I was the pusher for the 5th officer (which seems to be paying off), as I was re-running I'd no part in the 'Yes' vote campaign for it. And I wasn't taking away from your achievement, rather I was talking about No campaigns historically; ranging from abortion to constitutions.

Re: the €92,000; of my entire post I thought I cleared this up? Its a legally bound payment via referendum. We'd be violating law to withhold it from USI without due reason (we usually hold off paying till March specifically to freak them out a little), and if it was diverted for another purpose it would be illegal as it wasn't for its intended purpose. It may even be misappropriation of funds (<- not a lawyer).

The politics of the SU can be divided up into 3 neat 'intra-SU' politics areas; human politics, party politics, intra-group politics. Party politics in the SU is an interesting if new phenomenon (4 years) as UCC is unlike Dublin in that it didn't have a critical mass of different party-political aware people to be noticable. (I won't take up your time writing about it, but feel free to ask!). Human politics is the most obvious; people are motivated by altruism/ambition/no-idea-what-to-do. The SU also is influenced by student opinion, personal opinion, judgements on 'whats best for students' by individual/group decision making, etc. The intra-group politics is great fun; as the SU is the 'parental' democratic & decision-making group, its got fun dynamics with the Socs and Clubs depending on whats happening in a given year, relative aims and strengths of the 2 groups etc. Also what people in clubs & socs want to run for the SU (based on their motivations) and every 8-10 years you get a clubs/societies 'over-throw' of the SU. The Law and Phil really haven't managed to 'take-back' the SU since 2004/05 with McAuliffe (but he was a Socs Guild member and a UCC Football head anyway). Where as you saw Ben this year pulling out the Clubs vote largely.

If you meant the inter-politics of interacting with the UCC administration, USI, local government, residence groups, national government, NGOs, charities etc., that is a world of its own to enjoy navigating.

Anyway, I ramble.

The money; there isn't a lot of 'playing around' with the money. Its very serious business. You should genuinely read the budgets from last year (and previous years) and why decisions were justified. Or have come to the Budget presentation I did in March(?). You'd learn that massive strides were made in Eoin's and my year to improve accounting/auditing/reporting to students etc. I was a bit tighter with cash a lá Cal Diolún (2008/09).

Of the €609,000 we budgeted for, about €200,000 instantly goes on yearly wages for all the FT (contracted and sabbatical staff) and PT staff and students we employ over a year. This I believe is seperate to the student patrol. Another €100,000 on USI etc. Then you've budget allocations for Welfare/Education/Communications which includes all literature, website, development, campaigns, training for reps (i.e. Council Training)... Then you've got the Entertainments Budget which frankly is about breaking even now. Then you have the Common Room Budget which is ringfenced etc.There are more expenses, but you are left with v.v. little to 'play with' after all the basics are covered.

I'm sure we may disagree on what 'basics' are needed, but I assure you no, or v little, frivolity exists. Any extra cash is made on profit (usually from charging companies for access to the student market, and hopefully soon from the Stud. Centre) or via savings (entertainment base costs, cutting travel costs, weekend overnight expenses).

I hope this is of use, I'm sorry if it isn't. I'm only commenting here in the hopes I can be of aid in providing information. I'm out of that SU stuff now

Byron85

Keith_OB wrote: »

Re: the €92,000; of my entire post I thought I cleared this up? Its a legally bound payment via referendum. We'd be violating law to withhold it from USI without due reason (we usually hold off paying till March specifically to freak them out a little), and if it was diverted for another purpose it would be illegal as it wasn't for its intended purpose. It may even be misappropriation of funds (<- not a lawyer).

I realise that. Sorry if I wasn't clear? It's not as if i'd be for stopping the payment completely without notice or without going through the proper channels etc.

One thing i'm unclear about though is this whole thing of ringfencing or the money going into a "blackhole". If the money isn't spent on the USI, does that mean it can't be redirected at all without a bunch of legal nonsense? I've never really understood that, well, at least how it works logically speaking.

As for the rest of your post, indeed it was a ramble, but an informative one nonetheless! Cheers for the info!

Cuddlytroll

Just in answer to the above, unfortunately no. It is a levy added to capitation for that specific purpose, if it was to be done away with it would just mean that students would pay €5 less.